-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Let's talk about Kotaku
- Thread starter Nibel
- Start date
Parakeetman
No one wants a throne you've been sitting on!
They always were like that, trying to make posts of any sort of crime related incidents that has the slightest mention of anything video game related in it. Seriously was grasping for straws on multiple occasions in the past.
I frequently saw people sitting in front of me viewing Kotaku during college classes. It was a freshman class though so that could be it.
Zabant
Member
My philosophy for kotaku is 'wade through the rough to find the diamond.'
There was a period there I considered unbookmarking them and stopping visits on a regular basis, but the articles got better (barring a few repeat offender writers) and some of the cross content they do with dudes like Keighley and Jeff in these Pre-Show events kept me around.
There was a period there I considered unbookmarking them and stopping visits on a regular basis, but the articles got better (barring a few repeat offender writers) and some of the cross content they do with dudes like Keighley and Jeff in these Pre-Show events kept me around.
Sapphire Dreams
Member
They're a gaming tabloid, plain and simple. using sensational subject matters that trends in recent events to draw clicks. 90% of their articles are either shit or nothing unique or original.
That being said, I still prefer then to IGN. At least Kotaku didn't have nearly as many shitty editorial as IGN.
That being said, I still prefer then to IGN. At least Kotaku didn't have nearly as many shitty editorial as IGN.
I used to visit Kotaku every day a few years ago, but I think I've only been there once after the redesign, and I'm sure many are in the same boat as I am. So I think there might definitely be some truth to this. Also, if the journos really do get pay per click, that explains why guys like Ashcraft can continue to write the way they do.
Muchi Muchi Pink
Member
I love how kotaku is "Look at that creepy japanese game (Not Dragon's Crown btw.)" And the next article is "Here have some hawt looking girls in Pikachu costumes "
It was once.
stephentotilo
Behind The Games
Oh boy. Well, no, we don't get paid per click. We also don't expect everyone to like everything we publish. Like any other media outlet ever, we hope that what we publish is interesting enough for people to read.
We've been around eight years, so surely we've published something you loved and something you hated. Sometimes we've made mistakes. We try not to be rash. We proudly publish a diverse array of opinions. Our track record in reporting and breaking news is very good.
I know the gender stuff is divisive. We try to be balanced, honest and transparent. Even the latest controversial piece, about Blood Dragon, included one of the developer's objecting to our writer's take on the game.
I think that covers most of it. But I'm always open to suggestions about how Kotaku can improve, moreso from people who actually seem to have read the site, which hopefully includes many of the people commenting in this thread.
We've been around eight years, so surely we've published something you loved and something you hated. Sometimes we've made mistakes. We try not to be rash. We proudly publish a diverse array of opinions. Our track record in reporting and breaking news is very good.
I know the gender stuff is divisive. We try to be balanced, honest and transparent. Even the latest controversial piece, about Blood Dragon, included one of the developer's objecting to our writer's take on the game.
I think that covers most of it. But I'm always open to suggestions about how Kotaku can improve, moreso from people who actually seem to have read the site, which hopefully includes many of the people commenting in this thread.
I don't know how I feel about banning them on here. I would be fine either way really. I was an extremely regular Kotaku commenter for years, but have finally stopped after the Kinja update made it next to impossible to comment easily, so I have a lot of experience reading their stories to draw on when I talk about Kotaku.
They have some okay stuff sometimes. It's undeniable. Sometimes they get scoops, or have interesting stories.
I used to get really upset about Ashcraft's off topic posts, but even those I eventually learned to forgive, despite their tendency to emphasize only the weirdness of Japan - a process that has "othered" Japanese culture in the minds of most gamers now (When you could take virtually every Ashcraft article and change the title to "What the fuck Japan?" you know you have an issue).
But by far, the most damaging thing they've done is run tabloid style, sensationalist articles. This isn't new. It's older than 27 months, but I do think it's gotten even worse; especially in regards to their gender/social justice articles.
If you asked me 3 years ago if I considered myself a feminist, I probably would have said yes. I'm a liberal, far to the left of the Democratic Party, with a pair of social science degrees and some entry level experience studying gender issues in school. "Why be opposed to a movement just advocating for equality?" That's probably what I would have said 3 years ago; before I read two years worth of gender articles at Kotaku with cross-post comments from Jezebel readers.
With the exception of one or two stories, almost all of their social justice articles have been so poorly executed, so purposely designed to provoke conflict and comment wars, so poorly thought out, so biased and one-sided, that it really forced me to open my eyes to the unique form of tyranny pseudo-feminist thought can really lead to. Only one side was ever presented to these articles in every single case. Dissent was always criticized, marginalized and mocked. There were no attempts to promote meaningful discussion.
If you want a very thorough, mostly credible breakdown of how poorly thought out and unfair just two of their gender articles can be, I really suggest you read this.
Or you can listen to David Jaffe's response to another of their articles that erroneously labeled him a misogynist.
There are countless other articles that deserve in depth rebuttals, going back for three years. If you're not a regular Kotaku reader, you probably missed the vast majority of them, as they really only spread to other sites (Destructoid, NeoGAF) within the last year. Here's an awful one. Find my old comments buried in there if you want to read a rebuttal. Here's another pair of awful ones, both with old rebuttals in the comments from me (and hundreds of other commenters). There are too many others to list really.
Before social justice, the tabloid narrative was primarily focused on trashing Japanese games, and the Japanese game industry. Ashcraft's articles were much more contentious and inflammatory back in the day. East vs. West was the clickbait for countless articles.
I'm certain that some of you are still wondering, "what's the problem? It's a free internet where we can say whatever we want." That's true, I don't deny that. But gutter journalism has really resulted in gutter culture. Just my personal opinion here, but in all my time as a gamer (20+ years now), I've never seen discussion around games be more toxic, vitriolic, and disappointing - and it's escalating and accelerating. Bloggers have created a professional sport out of trolling, provoking reaction, focusing on insignificant minutia and using it to ruin entire games. Many people find themselves wondering aloud, "remember when video games used to be about fun?" This isn't a dismissive sentiment. It's just expressing how much gaming culture has landed in the sewer, and I put the overwhelming bulk of the responsibility for that decline on bloggers' shoulders.
Will banning Kotaku change any of that? I doubt it, but you never know. Exposing how ridiculously off base some of their articles really are has its benefits too. They're still going to put stuff out there like their horrible criticism of George Kamitani. Now that their comment section is so walled off, it's beneficial to have the ability to tear their stories to shreds here and offer alternative perspectives. Does that outweigh the increased exposure they get here? I don't know.
They have some okay stuff sometimes. It's undeniable. Sometimes they get scoops, or have interesting stories.
I used to get really upset about Ashcraft's off topic posts, but even those I eventually learned to forgive, despite their tendency to emphasize only the weirdness of Japan - a process that has "othered" Japanese culture in the minds of most gamers now (When you could take virtually every Ashcraft article and change the title to "What the fuck Japan?" you know you have an issue).
But by far, the most damaging thing they've done is run tabloid style, sensationalist articles. This isn't new. It's older than 27 months, but I do think it's gotten even worse; especially in regards to their gender/social justice articles.
If you asked me 3 years ago if I considered myself a feminist, I probably would have said yes. I'm a liberal, far to the left of the Democratic Party, with a pair of social science degrees and some entry level experience studying gender issues in school. "Why be opposed to a movement just advocating for equality?" That's probably what I would have said 3 years ago; before I read two years worth of gender articles at Kotaku with cross-post comments from Jezebel readers.
With the exception of one or two stories, almost all of their social justice articles have been so poorly executed, so purposely designed to provoke conflict and comment wars, so poorly thought out, so biased and one-sided, that it really forced me to open my eyes to the unique form of tyranny pseudo-feminist thought can really lead to. Only one side was ever presented to these articles in every single case. Dissent was always criticized, marginalized and mocked. There were no attempts to promote meaningful discussion.
If you want a very thorough, mostly credible breakdown of how poorly thought out and unfair just two of their gender articles can be, I really suggest you read this.
Or you can listen to David Jaffe's response to another of their articles that erroneously labeled him a misogynist.
There are countless other articles that deserve in depth rebuttals, going back for three years. If you're not a regular Kotaku reader, you probably missed the vast majority of them, as they really only spread to other sites (Destructoid, NeoGAF) within the last year. Here's an awful one. Find my old comments buried in there if you want to read a rebuttal. Here's another pair of awful ones, both with old rebuttals in the comments from me (and hundreds of other commenters). There are too many others to list really.
Before social justice, the tabloid narrative was primarily focused on trashing Japanese games, and the Japanese game industry. Ashcraft's articles were much more contentious and inflammatory back in the day. East vs. West was the clickbait for countless articles.
I'm certain that some of you are still wondering, "what's the problem? It's a free internet where we can say whatever we want." That's true, I don't deny that. But gutter journalism has really resulted in gutter culture. Just my personal opinion here, but in all my time as a gamer (20+ years now), I've never seen discussion around games be more toxic, vitriolic, and disappointing - and it's escalating and accelerating. Bloggers have created a professional sport out of trolling, provoking reaction, focusing on insignificant minutia and using it to ruin entire games. Many people find themselves wondering aloud, "remember when video games used to be about fun?" This isn't a dismissive sentiment. It's just expressing how much gaming culture has landed in the sewer, and I put the overwhelming bulk of the responsibility for that decline on bloggers' shoulders.
Will banning Kotaku change any of that? I doubt it, but you never know. Exposing how ridiculously off base some of their articles really are has its benefits too. They're still going to put stuff out there like their horrible criticism of George Kamitani. Now that their comment section is so walled off, it's beneficial to have the ability to tear their stories to shreds here and offer alternative perspectives. Does that outweigh the increased exposure they get here? I don't know.
GenericBadGuy
Member
I agree with a lot of what Shinta said as someone who was reading Kotaku for years and reading a lot of Shinta's posts. Like GAF, I didn't get brave enough to post instead of lurk until recently, and over at Kotaku that was quickly killed by their site revamps. Your comments will not be read on the site now unless you were in the inner circle beforehand.
In general here I think Kotaku posts good/bad/pointless articles, GAF posts extreme opinions about them constantly, and Jason gets a lot of respect for continuing to swim with sharks and give an inside look at the journalism process.
In general here I think Kotaku posts good/bad/pointless articles, GAF posts extreme opinions about them constantly, and Jason gets a lot of respect for continuing to swim with sharks and give an inside look at the journalism process.
IrishNinja
Member
i'm not done with it yet, but this is a pretty interesting piece, thanks for posting it
These are just my humble thoughts:
- Kotaku comes off as hypocritical when taking the moral high ground on representation of women, because you yourselves often post stories that are just galleries of sexy cosplay pics or other stuff of that nature. Personally I like sexy cosplay pics, but when you trade in that kind of content you shouldn't criticise others doing the same thing.
- Your writers are often flippant about things gamers care about, just to try and be funny. The best example I can think of is the European Wii U Virtual Console 50/60Hz thing. Nobody is visiting your site just for the laughs, so I wish you'd put good reporting before 'comedy'.
Edit: I do think you guys publish a lot of good stuff and I still have the site bookmarked. I'm not slating your site or anything.
breakfuss
Member
hahaha! so true.
oO Arekkz Oo
Neo Member
Kotaku talk about games?! Wow, that's news to me!
PaulExcellent
Member
Yep, and that is how I got here.
peanutbutterlatte
Member
Jettison Brian Ashcraft and Patricia Hernandez into space. Problem solved.
Shao Kahn Brewing a Stew
Banned
I stopped visiting Kotaku because of their MASSIVE diversification into non-gaming articles, and useless rants.
I still accidentally visit it due to previous habits, but it always leave a bad taste in mouth.
I still accidentally visit it due to previous habits, but it always leave a bad taste in mouth.
I have no problem with Kotaku at all. Even if their signal-to-noise-ratio is clearly below most gaming news sites it is still better than most forums so... meh! I don't get paid to read each of their articles, so I don't... much like you wouldn't find me reading a thread about a JRPG I don't own in NeoGafs community forum.
I dislike sites like Kotaku and N4G , what i did looong time ago was never visit any of those anymore, stopped clicking on any Kotaku/Lame blog thread/link/stuff/thing lol, and problem solved 
The more attention people pays to them the more they will keep making flame/derrogatory/nonsensical "articles" i believe.
The more attention people pays to them the more they will keep making flame/derrogatory/nonsensical "articles" i believe.
This is a far too common refrain of yours. I listened to the Brainy Gamer podcast you were on - it consisted of you repeating this same thing ("our goal is to be interesting") every thirty seconds while alternately claiming you were just blogging / not just blogging.
"Interesting" is a nice way of saying "stuff people click on." It doesn't mean interesting in any deep sense like engaging or thought-provoking. "Interesting" is the word you always trot out - not "accurate" or "thoughtful" or "novel" or "valuable" or "informative" or "well-written." There doesn't appear to be any individual or organizational pride at Kotaku for inherent quality of work.
Why claim what is obviously false to everyone? You don't try to be balanced, instead you claim that 3 hours is an eternity in internet time and use that as excuse to print a hot scoop about how Schreier doesn't like some guy - a "story" that would be no more or less relevant printed 6 months later.
Stop printing garbage.
If your goal is to not print garbage just because it's "interesting" then stop printing garbage. There's no universe in which "Stop hiring 14-year-olds" is valuable, interesting in any real sense, journalism, "reporting", a "story" of any kind or better than something a 14-year-old would write.
If your goal is to be "interesting" at the expense of everything else then your goal is being achieved and the only thing that needs to change is the pretense that Kotaku is trying for anything more. Just own what you do. Take some pride in being the National Enquirer or McDonalds of video game writing. ( "Hey, that National Enquirer did some good reporting on John Edwards!" said a guy like Schreier) But when people ding you on quality take your lumps.
Edit: It's disingenuous to even ask for suggestions on how Kotaku could improve. The axis people want improvement on is an axis you clearly don't care about. McDonalds will not improve food quality at the expense of value meal pricing, the National Enquirer will not improve reporting accuracy at the expense of sensational headlines, and Kotaku will not improve fundamentals of writing and reporting at the expense of "interest" as measured by clicks. All of those improvements run counter to the business.
BrokenEchelon
Banned
Joystiq:CNN::Kotaku:Fox News.
That's not really praise for any of those four entities.
Having a diverse array of terrible, hyperbolic opinions turned into click-generating content doesn't get you any gold medals.
That's not really praise for any of those four entities.
Having a diverse array of terrible, hyperbolic opinions turned into click-generating content doesn't get you any gold medals.
MoGamesXNA
Unconfirmed Member
This reflects my sentiments. I used to really like Kotaku two years ago but that has transformed into an active avoidance of the site entirely.
There isn't another gaming news site on the internet I even do this to.
Muchi Muchi Pink
Member
Yeah, last news was about an anime meme quite popular in japan.
I appreciate your effort to post here Stephen, thank you
I agree with most of what the guys before me said; they articulated it better than I ever could have - Kotaku reps say one thing on podcasts/GAF/etc., but do a whole different on their website; this is not the first time that you're asking for feedback and since there is so much feedback in almost every Kotaku related thread it seems like you're trying tranquilize people at this point
I was a regular of Kotaku and you even gave me a star for a CallOfDuty/Limbo picture back then; but man, things seem to have gone downhill and it's quite a shame since sometimes article pop up that make you think "is this really from Kotaku? It's pretty good!"
I agree with most of what the guys before me said; they articulated it better than I ever could have - Kotaku reps say one thing on podcasts/GAF/etc., but do a whole different on their website; this is not the first time that you're asking for feedback and since there is so much feedback in almost every Kotaku related thread it seems like you're trying tranquilize people at this point
I was a regular of Kotaku and you even gave me a star for a CallOfDuty/Limbo picture back then; but man, things seem to have gone downhill and it's quite a shame since sometimes article pop up that make you think "is this really from Kotaku? It's pretty good!"
Secretarial Dog
Member
well-written post. thanks
Parakeetman
No one wants a throne you've been sitting on!
SlipperyFishes
Banned
It's PR talk designed to deflect the rousing rabble (us) when we ask for change, claiming always that they do what they do best for the readers.
Then they look at the current trend in clicks, numbers and page views. They use that to justify their output and claim "it's working". But the thing is those numbers could always be higher, and by writing about things that aren't pantsu/dick museums/any controversy then Kotaku would fix the issue and once again appeal to those they've summarily kicked in the nuts.
CambriaRising
Member
It's the worst first impressions which always stick.
Freshmaker
I am Korean.
It's a bold stand from a publication that froths over booth babes etc as well.
HyperBitHero
Member
Patricia Hernandez once made an article about one of my videos. It was nice of her, but I still don't like the site.
Pretty much.
ComputerMKII
Banned
I came in to post this.
I'd rather see Kotaku "Hit quotas" as some people have put it by putting out stuff like this, stuff like the ridiculous character design in Dragon's Crown, about whatever they want, because they're ostensibly right, sexism, homophobia, and the other topics they cover are problems, and while admittedly there are the cases where it's perhaps a bit nit picky, like the Blood Dragon gay joke, I think the articles usually have something of worth, be it the developer reaction in that particular piece, which showed the mindset of the developer.
I think the "all they want is clicks!" argument is somewhat invalid as that's always the case, everyone wants to be able to sustain their website, they choose to cover topics they want to, but that will also draw in clicks. The dragon's crown story come to mind, I think the character design was awful and belittling, but the "14 year old" phrasing was clear sensationalism. But their case stands, it was a character designed to cater to the dumb teenage boy contingent, regardless of whether or not the phrasing was purposefully sensationalised
And besides, while this becomes old hat to regular GAFfers and to "hardcore" gaming fans in general, there is always someone whose first exposure to someone pointing out discrimination in the industry, and maybe it'll help refrain from hurling swears out on XBL in the future.
So do I. Beyond to you Goldfarb.
I think the "all they want is clicks!" argument is somewhat invalid as that's always the case, everyone wants to be able to sustain their website, they choose to cover topics they want to, but that will also draw in clicks. The dragon's crown story come to mind, I think the character design was awful and belittling, but the "14 year old" phrasing was clear sensationalism. But their case stands, it was a character designed to cater to the dumb teenage boy contingent, regardless of whether or not the phrasing was purposefully sensationalised
And besides, while this becomes old hat to regular GAFfers and to "hardcore" gaming fans in general, there is always someone whose first exposure to someone pointing out discrimination in the industry, and maybe it'll help refrain from hurling swears out on XBL in the future.
So do I. Beyond to you Goldfarb.
Wolves Evolve
Member
Some observations from this article and dozens like it over the last few months.
1. There is a grain of truth to the accusation that Kotaku is seeking audience through controversy. It is absolutely the best business practice for them right now, and with margins in advertising the way they are, the volatility of the business, it makes sense. Kotaku has made explicit it's strategy and it's selling out in promoting anti-sexism - and no business it its position would do so if there is a net commercial loss. A good opinion piece writer, a columnist is hired TO generate angry audiences. Whatever the status quo is, oppose it to form your audience.
2. This article and others like it are disingenuous - their real target is vocal feminism. I don't buy for a second that objectivity is any single person's most cherished outcome for journalism of this kind. This article is laced with anti-feminist rhetoric both explicit and implicit. The idea that an issue like sexism needs "balance" is disgusting, and should be disgusting to thinking people everywhere.
3. If Kotaku Is Building A Pro-Feminist Gaming Brand, It Is Doing It Terribly. This one is really simple. The site taken as a whole uses both exploitative articles, images and stories of a sexual kind in tabloid format AND solicits opinion pieces from feminist columnists. The reasons so many here characterise the site as 'trash' is because of the aggregate cognitive dissonance of these two things happening at once. If the site was openly pro-feminist and cut out the other material, I think many here would accept it for what it is.
1. There is a grain of truth to the accusation that Kotaku is seeking audience through controversy. It is absolutely the best business practice for them right now, and with margins in advertising the way they are, the volatility of the business, it makes sense. Kotaku has made explicit it's strategy and it's selling out in promoting anti-sexism - and no business it its position would do so if there is a net commercial loss. A good opinion piece writer, a columnist is hired TO generate angry audiences. Whatever the status quo is, oppose it to form your audience.
2. This article and others like it are disingenuous - their real target is vocal feminism. I don't buy for a second that objectivity is any single person's most cherished outcome for journalism of this kind. This article is laced with anti-feminist rhetoric both explicit and implicit. The idea that an issue like sexism needs "balance" is disgusting, and should be disgusting to thinking people everywhere.
3. If Kotaku Is Building A Pro-Feminist Gaming Brand, It Is Doing It Terribly. This one is really simple. The site taken as a whole uses both exploitative articles, images and stories of a sexual kind in tabloid format AND solicits opinion pieces from feminist columnists. The reasons so many here characterise the site as 'trash' is because of the aggregate cognitive dissonance of these two things happening at once. If the site was openly pro-feminist and cut out the other material, I think many here would accept it for what it is.
Let me preface this by saying that I don't dislike Kotaku as much as most of the people in this thread. I still visit it semi-regularly to glance through headlines to find the handful of articles I find interesting.
That being said, this comment reminds me of when I worked at Best Buy years and years ago. They trained us to constantly tell customers about how we didn't work for commission, and how that meant we'd be looking out for their best interest and not necessarily the most expensive option.
Guess what? That was total shit. Yes, we didn't get commission, but we sure as hell had a boss who would come around multiple times per day with up-to-the-minute statistics about what we're selling. And if we weren't selling enough of the high-priced, high-margin items, our ass would be out the door.
So when you guys say stuff like that, all I hear is you trying to pull the wool over the audience's eyes. It doesn't matter that you don't get DIRECTLY paid per click. I'm sure you damn well are looking at which writers are getting the most clicks and compensating them accordingly. I'm also sure that clicks are guiding what sort of stories are being written.
And there's nothing necessarily wrong with that. Just be honest about it, it's the nature of the beast and everyone knows that.
Sum real talk up in hur.
Interesting, and to those websites that have actual good stories about the subjects they choose to talk about , and still get hits. What of them? or are they just gods among men.
Love the news and reviews. More of that please.
The editorials and crusader-type articles? Not a fan of how they're written or presented currently. I think you should let your writers know to stop being so antagonistic towards developers about an issue if they object to it. Discussions cannot be constructive when they sound so irate. And maybe also tell them to not insult the devs or your audience who aren't offended about the same issue as much as them. It only hurts your site's rep, imo.
http://cat.kotaku.com.meowbify.com/
anyway, that's why all i need is allgamesbeta. they just post the news, the pics and some video. it's down now ( ◜︹◝
chickdigger802
Banned
kotaku has enough decent articles to make them worth while.
Do note that hey... if you don't wanna click on a 'click bait'... don't click on 'read more'.
Not sure why people give so much a fuck about all this stuff.
How many videogame or any news sites these days don't have clickbait things?
And how many of those are still around?
Do note that hey... if you don't wanna click on a 'click bait'... don't click on 'read more'.
Not sure why people give so much a fuck about all this stuff.
How many videogame or any news sites these days don't have clickbait things?
And how many of those are still around?