Support NeoGAF

[Lunar15]

That penny arcade strip is unfathomably bad. Not only is it a really bad analogy, it's also just a block of poorly written text.

As for my feelings and general lack of sympathy for Kotaku in most situations, I've just never been really fond of Gawker's conflating of investagative journalism and tabloid pieces. They often carry an air of being muckrakers (which they occasionally are), but most of the time they're no different than any other enthusiast site. Whether or not you like the site and what it produces, you can see why that's going to make them the ire of people who are fans of other sites.

I don't think that de-legitimizes their point on the strong arm tactic of publisher blacklisting, though. It just means I get a slight chuckle whenever Totillo fires up his more flowery rhetoric.

 

[sol740]

I wouldn't worry too much about it. the people defending Bethesda are probably 14 year olds behind the screen. I'm not the most favorable of Kotaku, especially towards the end of Crecente's reign but Tortillo seems like he genuinely wants to put out good stuff besides the click bait crap that they have to do.

Yup, the folks that recognize that relationships are voluntary are "14 year olds".

 

[Adam Tyner]

Think you are misunderstanding my point. It's fine to accept these gifts.

One, they're not gifts. Two, by your standards, outlets like The New York Times are not reputable sources of journalism either.

 

[90sRobots]

KiA on Reddit is a LAFF RIOT with the Penny Arcade stuff. They applaud Tycho bravely defending their precious AAA devs!

 

[Freezing]

They decided to open up about it now because people were asking about the late Fallout 4 Review and why Totilo (a massive AssCreed fan) wasn't reviewing Syndicate.

Like two people or thousands of people? Was this a well-known inquiry before the blacklist reveal?

 

[MidBoss]

Having official channels not commenting does nothing to stop the "leaks", since they did not come from, official channels. It is petty.

Sure it doesn't. It just doesn't seem all that surprising to me that you get blacklisted for leaking. Kotaku got ahold of confidential info. They were under no obligation to keep it that way but they obviously knew that it was meant to be. They shared the info anyway and that's ok. But you can't expect the pubs to just say "Dang, they got us!". It's a shame, but it sounds like a normal business reaction to me.

 

[v0yce]

I wouldn't worry too much about it. the people defending Bethesda are probably 14 year olds behind the screen. I'm not the most favorable of Kotaku, especially towards the end of Crecente's reign but Tortillo seems like he genuinely wants to put out good stuff besides the click bait crap that they have to do.

With your wisdom gained through old age, can you explain to me why Bethesda should feed Kotaku info and review copies when their game is doing great and Kotaku has higher than normal traffic on their pieces?

It appears both entities are getting along fine without direct lines to each other. How exactly would we 14 year olds benefit from opening those channels again?

 

[kavanf1]

Well, it looks like they're trying to do just that.

Maybe they think they are, but blacklisting a select few media outlets is absolutely the wrong way to do it. That's not addressing the root cause, it's unfairly singling out one of the many symptoms.

The companies need to sort themselves out from within - lock down their networks, their desktops, their personal devices, install monitoring software, put preventative access controls in place to minimise the number of people who can access confidential info (as well as logging anyone who does), and so on. Employees won't like it if they've been used to a degree of freedom, but it's the only way for them to get more control over what gets shared with the public.

 

[Jotaka]

Jason,

Did Kotaku got blacklisted from The Game Awards too?

 

[Gipsy Danger]

Why do people shit on Kotaku so much? It's not that bad here on Gaf but on Reddit it's ridiculous... literally every post that even vaguely involves Kotaku, the first comment will be something to the effect of "fuck Kotaku clickbait bullshit" etc. Even now people characterize Kotaku as "whining"

There's some great content there but a lot of it is dumb click baity stuff or "gamer culture" stuff that tends to be kind of garbage. No better or worse than most outlets though tbh.

 

[MrJoobJoob]

"Getting blacklisted by Kotaku is one of the remaining items on my bucket list...... I'm neutral on most things, but not on Kotaku. They're the Fox News of gaming." ~ https://archive.is/ER14n

Turns out Notch isn't much of a fan either. Im not really sure what they did to get on quite a few publishers, developers and readers in generals shit list.

Yeah... that's exactly what I'm talking about. It's like it's a given for a lot of people that Kotaku is just pure evil or something. Maybe it's just because I only started visiting Kotaku regularly once they covered Destiny (so ~1.5 years) but I just don't see it. People love to hate a boogeyman I guess...

 

[TheOohChild]

This is all a wash for me. I don't think media outlets should sit on secretive information to preserve industry relationships, and I don't think publishers have any responsibility to keep lines of communication open with outlets who expose secretive information about their projects. I find logic in what both Kotaku and Bethesda are doing.

 

[Imbarkus]

Following an opinionated E3 preview of Too Human listed as "Terrible" in Electronic Gaming Monthly, Denis Dyack went onto EGM Live to talk directly with the author of the preview Mark MacDonald and the audience about opinionated previews and why they are a problem.

Ubisoft also responded to EGM's negative preview and review coverage of the first Assassin's Creed. They responded by blacklisting the publication, as one can confirm via 1up posts by Dan Hsu at the time.

Seven years later Denis Dyack has been treated like a walking punchline by games press and editorial and this board, Kotaku has ruined his reputation with an anonymous-source article, and his crowdfunding effort was shouted down.

Seven years later Ubisoft has released the seventh game in the main Assassin's Creed series, has Kotaku writing this article complaining about how they are hurt by Ubisoft because of Ubisoft's response to their preview coverage, and last year managed to get many gaming sites to sign an embargo for twelve hours AFTER release for a hugely glitchy broken Assassin's Creed release which they just followed up.

Just taking a very hypothetical argument using these two extreme examples, if I were a developer or publisher I would estimate that an anonymous, secret, and vengeful response to press you don't like is the most effective response.

 

[jschreier]

Jason,

Did Kotaku got blacklisted from The Game Awards too?

No. We decided not to participate. I don't think we participated last year either? I don't know the official reason--you'll have to ask Stephen about that one--but personally I don't see much value in voting on which heavily marketed AAA game is the best heavily marketed AAA game. We've switched from doing "Kotaku's Game of the Year" to doing a list of our favorite games of the year, and that feels so much more honest and valuable than trying to pick one.

 

[Lunar15]

No. We decided not to participate. I don't think we participated last year either? I don't know the official reason--you'll have to ask Stephen about that one--but personally I don't see much value in voting on which heavily marketed AAA game is the best heavily marketed AAA game. We've switched from doing "Kotaku's Game of the Year" to doing a list of our favorite games of the year, and that feels so much more honest and valuable than trying to pick one.

Now, this kind of thinking is right up my alley.

 

[nrvalleytime]

Of course not. Every report cited in Stephen's article is a report based on information from sources who knew they were giving me news to make public.

I love that a GAF user feels the need to ask this.

As if the blacklisting, in any way, could be justified for your particular outlet.

 

[ElNarez]

Think you are misunderstanding my point. It's fine to accept these gifts. However, it seems to me like Kotaku wants to be a legit video game journalistic website that covers real issues instead of being a PR website. If that is what they want they should stop accepting all free gifts from every developer/publisher. It is fine to accept the gifts if you wish to be a PR/review website ex.IGN and others in that nature.

Here's the thing: the only thing not getting free games for review would do is limit Kotaku's capacity to do timely coverage on them. It would not make them better, more ethical, or more legit. It would just make them worse at their jobs. Because it's all it is. A job. The free stuff is incidental.

 

[v0yce]

Maybe they think they are, but blacklisting a select few media outlets is absolutely the wrong way to do it. That's not addressing the root cause, it's unfairly singling out one of the many symptoms.

The companies need to sort themselves out from within - lock down their networks, their desktops, their personal devices, install monitoring software, put preventative access controls in place to minimise the number of people who can access confidential info (as well as logging anyone who does), and so on. Employees won't like it if they've been used to a degree of freedom, but it's the only way for them to get more control over what gets shared with the public.

You're thinking way too hard about this.

I'm sure they're trying to do all that stuff but a really easy first step is to just say "no contact with Kotaku." That way there's no confusion if someone was speaking with approval or leaking info or whatever.

Publishers don't need Kotaku anymore than they need Joe Blow youtuber. If they don't think Kotaku is worth the hassle then that's that. I doubt they have dart boards with Jason's face on it or something. They're simply not important enough to concern themselves with so they cut ties.

And Kotaku is trying to make enough noise about it to show they are important enough for Bethesda or whoever to care.

This is all a wash for me. I don't think media outlets should sit on secretive information to preserve industry relationships, and I don't think publishers have any responsibility to keep lines of communication open with outlets who expose secretive information about their projects. I find logic in what both Kotaku and Bethesda are doing.

Agreed.

 

[DeepEnigma]

I wouldn't worry too much about it. the people defending Bethesda are probably 14 year olds behind the screen. I'm not the most favorable of Kotaku, especially towards the end of Crecente's reign but Tortillo seems like he genuinely wants to put out good stuff besides the click bait crap that they have to do.

Same here. I left Kotaku shortly after they opened the floodgates from being invite only. Which I think Bashcraft invited me at the time in '05-'06. All hell broke lose then. I was close second in running in the bannhammer wielding voting election contest when a buddy of mine Witz got it I believe, lol.

I like Jason and his articles. His piece on Destiny was sorely needed. And I think in which a lot other journalists would have been afraid to publish from those corporate pandered sites.

 

[90sRobots]

Following an opinionated E3 preview of Too Human listed as "Terrible" in Electronic Gaming Monthly, Denis Dyack went onto EGM Live to talk directly with the author of the preview Mark MacDonald and the audience about opinionated previews and why they are a problem.

Ubisoft also responded to EGM's negative preview and review coverage of the first Assassin's Creed. They responded by blacklisting the publication, as one can confirm via 1up posts by Dan Hsu at the time.

Seven years later Denis Dyack has been treated like a walking punchline by games press and editorial and this board, Kotaku has ruined his reputation with an anonymous-source article, and his crowdfunding effort was shouted down.

Seven years later Ubisoft has released the seventh game in the main Assassin's Creed series, has Kotaku writing this article complaining about how they are hurt by Ubisoft because of Ubisoft's response to their preview coverage, and last year managed to get many gaming sites to sign an embargo for twelve hours AFTER release for a hugely glitchy broken Assassin's Creed release which they just followed up.

Just taking a very hypothetical argument using these two extreme examples, if I were a developer or publisher I would estimate that an anonymous, secret, and vengeful response to press you don't like is the most effective response.

You're severely undercutting GAF's role in Dyack-gate. As convenient as you want it to be, it's not like GAF published that podcast with all of the nonsense Dyack spouted.

 

[cartographer]

Okay, I seriously don't get the assertion that this isn't relevant news.

This thread has 1600 posts and 151,651 views.

The Kotaku article has 1291 comments and 245,138 views.

They really do post about other blacklistings too. See this 2012 story on a purported Activision blacklist of a French site followed by comments directly from Activision: http://kotaku.com/5886237/reporter-...e-i-refused-to-pull-call-of-duty-sequel-story

In general I get the sense there are a ton of people who just don't understand what is newsworthy, or are at least pretending to not understand because Kotaku and / or their favorite publisher is involved.

 

[jschreier]

More thoughts: https://twitter.com/jasonschreier/status/667731260345831425

 

[Imbarkus]

You're severely undercutting GAF's role in Dyack-gate. As convenient as you want it to be, it's not like GAF published that podcast with all of the nonsense Dyack spouted.

So now we get Dave Lang on the Bombcast getting off easy with "WB is handling all communication for Batman." Are we better off?

 

[Dicktatorship]

"Getting blacklisted by Kotaku is one of the remaining items on my bucket list...... I'm neutral on most things, but not on Kotaku. They're the Fox News of gaming." ~ https://archive.is/ER14n

Turns out Notch isn't much of a fan either. Im not really sure what they did to get on quite a few publishers, developers and readers in generals shit list.

I used to visit the site a lot back in the day. I remember following all of Soul Calibur IVs character announcements on the site. I drifted away when the front page started getting spammed with weird Anime and Japanese content. After a while that content moved over to Japanator but the damage was done. But yeah, whether it be on reddit or most forums in general Kotaku gets a lot of heat.

Who the hell would blacklist Based Boogie? Wow. Sorry Jason, your house deserves to fall.

 

[90sRobots]

So now we get Dave Lang on the Bombcast getting off easy with "WB is handling all communication for Batman." Are we better off?

Too Human was very much Dyack's baby. EL OH FUCKING EL if you think the situation is remotely similar for Dave Lang. These situations don't correlate.

 

[Toli08]

Here's the thing: the only thing not getting free games for review would do is limit Kotaku's capacity to do timely coverage on them. It would not make them better, more ethical, or more legit. It would just make them worse at their jobs. Because it's all it is. A job. The free stuff is incidental.

What I am saying is seperate the review portion of the site from the real news site. If they want to be a real newsworthy site that tackles informational topics in the video game industry why do they also have to review games?

I feel overall thats what the video game industry needs the most at the moment is websites that actually tackle the topics that the PR websites don't wish to touch on.

Also once you go away from reviewing these games for the devs/pubs you will have free reign to say whatever you wish without second guessing yourself. will they take away our early copies of the newest biggest games.

 

[ScatheZombie]

Maybe they think they are, but blacklisting a select few media outlets is absolutely the wrong way to do it. That's not addressing the root cause, it's unfairly singling out one of the many symptoms.

The companies need to sort themselves out from within - lock down their networks, their desktops, their personal devices, install monitoring software, put preventative access controls in place to minimise the number of people who can access confidential info (as well as logging anyone who does), and so on. Employees won't like it if they've been used to a degree of freedom, but it's the only way for them to get more control over what gets shared with the public.

I don't understand the assumption that this isn't already the case at every major publisher or studio, or that stricter controls aren't implemented after a major leak happens, or that tightening internal security is mutually exclusive with blacklisting the offending publication.

Every major publisher/studio already has controls in place to minimize leaks.
Every major publisher/studio tightens security and imposes new access restrictions after a major leak.

 

[90sRobots]

More thoughts: https://twitter.com/jasonschreier/status/667731260345831425

Woof. Yeah, George Lucas handled the breakup analogy a lot better.

 

[jschreier]

Who the hell would blacklist Based Boogie? Wow. Sorry Jason, your house deserves to fall.

Even if this were true -- it isn't -- how would it even work? How would a news outlet blacklist a YouTuber? The concept doesn't even make sense.

 

[DeepEnigma]

More thoughts: https://twitter.com/jasonschreier/status/667731260345831425

Great right up, and sad but true when many think there is or should be a relationship.

The minute you form a relationship outside of objective reporting, is the minute your integrity has been compromised.

Who the hell would blacklist Based Boogie? Wow. Sorry Jason, your house deserves to fall.

Based Boogie? Now I read everything. I needed that laugh.

Oh and I just noticed this after all this time..

jschreier
Press Sneak Fuck
(Today, 11:44 AM)

Hahaha, love it.

 

[mbmonk]

If they have a relationship with a publisher that depends on following the pub's directions and not serving their customers, then they really didn't have much of a relationship to begin with.

 

[Adam Tyner]

If they want to be a real newsworthy site that tackles informational topics in the video game industry why do they also have to review games?

Why does it have to be one or the other? Readers want news. Readers want reviews. Give 'em both.

I feel overall thats what the video game industry needs the most at the moment is websites that actually tackle the topics that the PR websites don't wish to touch on.

...which is something Kotaku routinely does.

 

[v0yce]

More thoughts: https://twitter.com/jasonschreier/status/667731260345831425

I don't know.

But we’re not on the same team. And we’re certainly not in a relationship.

We have tried many, many times in many, many different ways to talk to them and resolve things. It didn't work.

Still seems like you want your old flame back.

 

[ElNarez]

Who the hell would blacklist Based Boogie? Wow. Sorry Jason, your house deserves to fall.

so how's operation volcano doing?

 

[soultron]

The Penny Arcade comic feels like a really weak, narrow-minded view on the whole thing. As a developer, it really pains me to read something like that, and to see it be celebrated by developers and non-developers alike.

If we're going to paint both sides of their cute parable as representative of all developers and all journalists, it really reduces developers and press to the following two things:
1) developers who unthinkingly break their NDAs
2) press who basically exist only to ask developers into breaking their NDAs

I'm not a big name in the industry. I have a few journalists I follow (some following me) on twitter and I genuinely like the discussions we have there. Not once have I ever had a journalist/member of the games media saunter into my DMs and asking something like, "Hey, want to tell me about all of the cool secret stuff you're working on? I totally won't write about it on my site." This has never happened to me. I doubt it happens to high profile people (who would be worth asking) either.

The PA comic also really discounts a lot of fringe games writing (that doesn't play into the marketing hype cycles of mega releases, but that's beside the point) done by sites like Kill Screen, Offworld, Unwinnable, Critical Distance, No Don't Die, and so on. It also discounts the really great longform writing on Kotaku itself. Recently, a piece that Klepek did about Binding of Isaac's crazy ARG that spun out of control come to mind.

If you reduce the journalist to someone who only wants to get sweet scoops you don't leave room for the above.

I don't really care that Kotaku got blacklisted by X Y Z, but it's good of them to say as much to their readership. It hurts them if they don't get review copies ahead of time, but if they're trying to remove themselves from the hype cycle, they, as an insititution, need to be OK with delivering some reviews after the release date.

 

[v0yce]

Great right up, and sad but true when many think there is or should be a relationship.

You do understand that Kotaku wants this relationship back right?

Jason himself has said as much

We have tried many, many times in many, many different ways to talk to them and resolve things. It didn't work.

 

[MrJoobJoob]

Kotaku has been blacklisting me for years. Not once has Totilo or Schreier responded to my many comments on Kotaku or on Reddit. Not once. I will no longer stand by and be blacklisted. #teardownthiswall

 

[Kalren]

As a consumer, I appreciate what Kotaku has done. I don't disagree with publishers limiting access to their product, that's their prerogative. But it allows me(and reminds me) to question the relationships that exists between publishers and the press. The recent Rooster Teeth is a great example of the manipulation that publishers exert, overt or otherwise.

 

[Dicktatorship]

so how's operation volcano doing?

operation what? If this has something to do with e-drama then I'm clueless. I try to stay as ignorant as possible about controversies in my hobby, lest they be conflated in my mind.

Great right up, and sad but true when many think there is or should be a relationship.

The minute you form a relationship outside of objective reporting, is the minute your integrity has been compromised.



Based Boogie? Now I read everything. I needed that laugh.

Oh and I just noticed this after all this time..

jschreier
Press Sneak Fuck
(Today, 11:44 AM)

Hahaha, love it.

Well to be fair I don't like his videos, but he seems like such a sweet man. It just pains me to think that people would actively do him harm.

Even if this were true -- it isn't -- how would it even work? How would a news outlet blacklist a YouTuber? The concept doesn't even make sense.

How does jet-fuel melt steam beans Jason? You tell me!

 

[kavanf1]

You're thinking way too hard about this.

I'm sure they're trying to do all that stuff but a really easy first step is to just say "no contact with Kotaku." That way there's no confusion if someone was speaking with approval or leaking info or whatever.

Publishers don't need Kotaku anymore than they need Joe Blow youtuber. If they don't think Kotaku is worth the hassle then that's that. I doubt they have dart boards with Jason's face on it or something. They're simply not important enough to concern themselves with so they cut ties.

And Kotaku is trying to make enough noise about it to show they are important enough for Bethesda or whoever to care.

You say I'm overthinking, maybe so but it is a subject I am close to and have a lot of experience with - not in the games industry mind you, but the principles still apply. I have no strong opinions on kotaku, aside from what I mentioned already about enjoying jschreier's investigative stuff. The point is, they're going to do what they do - as would any other media outlet who received a leak. Pissing the media off by blacklisting them is just bad PR. They could have aimed for a better outcome by keeping the media on side while making sure that no sneaky/arrogant/axe-grinding employees get the opportunity to tell the media anything they don't want them to know. It would be a win-win for them.

Instead, kotaku have gone ahead and reported on their adolescent behaviour and it's turned into this shitshow. Like I said, it's an immature industry.

 

[jschreier]

Kotaku has been blacklisting me for years. Not once has Totilo or Schreier responded to my many comments on Kotaku or on Reddit. Not once. I will no longer stand by and be blacklisted. #teardownthiswall

hi

 

[DeepEnigma]

You do understand that Kotaku wants this relationship back right?

Jason himself has said as much

Why are you omitting my whole quote, and only framing what you want?

Take something out of context to support your narrative, eh?

Great right up, and sad but true when many think there is or should be a relationship.

The minute you form a relationship outside of objective reporting, is the minute your integrity has been compromised.

 

[Coolio McAwesome]

I love that a GAF user feels the need to ask this.

As if the blacklisting, in any way, could be justified for your particular outlet.

I love that a GAF user takes issue with a question that was completely relevant to the discussion at hand.

The question was completey appropriate and he clearly had no qualms in answering it. If two entities have a working relationship with each other and one of the entities acts in bad faith or in an unethical manner, then blacklisting is obviously an appropriate course of action. It's completely valid to inquire into whether or not there was any unethical behavior.

For what it's worth, blacklisting most certainly can be justified. Whether or not it was in this particular case is sort of the entire point of this discussion. Frankly, the notion that blacklisting can't be justified is a bit ridiculous.

 

[Kintaro]

I don't know.

Still seems like you want your old flame back.

Yeah, this one is going to have to be explained to me.

"We are not in a relationship with the people we cover."

But you are. You're most definitely in a working relationship with those who allow you access, give you materials and more.

Of course, we’re talking about video games here. This is entertainment. It’s silly. It’s fun. Nobody’s going to die if reporters are too close to publishers. And it’s perfectly OK for a journalist to be friendly with PR people and developers—in fact, it’s necessary for any good reporter to do his or her job. We’re in the business of telling stories, and often that means working together with devs and PR people in ways that are beneficial to everyone.

But we’re not on the same team. And we’re certainly not in a relationship.

If you are working together with devs and PR people, is that not a business relationship? And if you run stories that runs the chance of fracturing that business relationship (on one side), is that not akin to a break up?

 

[DeepEnigma]

Well to be fair I don't like his videos, but he seems like such a sweet man. It just pains me to think that people would actively do him harm.

He is also pro-GG, uses words like "fag", as well as receives gifts from publishers and console makers. No wonder he attacked Kotaku for defense his beloved PC publisher (admits he is a PC fanboy as well).

He is not as "innocent" as he passes off at times.

And Kotaku has done nothing to "harm him".

 

[Penguin]

I don't think either side is wrong in this scenario.
Kotaku had a right to publish what they did.

And companies don't NEED to play ball with the press.

I think it does make Ubi/Beth seem a bit petty, but other than that. I think both sides are in the right, it's just not a pretty situation.

 

[Imbarkus]

Too Human was very much Dyack's baby. EL OH FUCKING EL if you think the situation is remotely similar for Dave Lang. These situations don't correlate.

Comparing the press and what kind of conversations the devs are willing to have with them between the two eras is valid. What insider perspective did we get on Assassin's Creed Unity's mess? None because Ubi's PR game is effective, it seems.

Batman gives us a modern anomaly: a case of multiple parties, which allows for anonymous finger-pointing. Which is pretty much what that X-Men Destiny article was all about.

 

[kavanf1]

I don't understand the assumption that this isn't already the case at every major publisher or studio, or that stricter controls aren't implemented after a major leak happens, or that tightening internal security is mutually exclusive with blacklisting the offending publication.

Every major publisher/studio already has controls in place to minimize leaks.
Every major publisher/studio tightens security and imposes new access restrictions after a major leak.

The assumption is based on the sheer volume of leaked info out there. They might have some control but clearly they aren't fit for purpose. Maybe Rockstar should share how they manage themselves internally, they seem to do better than most when it comes to containing leaks.

 

[fvng]

I can't speak for anyone else, but I was allowed to write four positive articles about Fallout 3 and one about Assassin's Creed 2 for Kotaku.

So.

There goes your theory.

I didn't say it was a theory Or assert it as truth. I asked if anyone checked to see if there was a bias against their games happening. A legitimate question in light of this news.

 

[DeepEnigma]

I don't think either side is wrong in this scenario.
Kotaku had a right to publish what they did.

And companies don't NEED to play ball with the press.

I think it does make Ubi/Beth seem a bit petty, but other than that. I think both sides are in the right, it's just not a pretty situation.

Pretty much correct on this. The story was written to explain to their readers why. No harm in being honest. I respect that. And they did not hide the reasons why, just that it is petty when it boils down to no laws or personal agreements were broken.