Support NeoGAF

[jakonovski]

Why is it that lately all the "bad" games journalists have criticised Sony? Could it be the other way around, fanboys (and Sony PR) not being able to take criticism without throwing their toys out of the pram?

 

[PuppetMaster]

At least Tom explains why he thinks the story is bad.

He convinced me at least. It is completely implausable.

Then again, maybe I'm biased because I didn't like the demo and don't plan on buying the game. :/

Freudian slip?

 

[ElyrionX]

Dude reviews video games for a living and still manages to be INSULTED by a video game story? Even if it was just middle of the road mediocre... INSULTED? Really??! And you believe him?

Tom is just doing what he always does. Trolling for clicks.

Yeah, to call it "insulting" is mere hyperbole. But if you look past all that crap, he makes some really great points about the story and plot as well as many other things in both of his lists. You'll know what he means when you have played the game.

 

[[Nintex]]

I feel sorry for the mod who has to dig through this dirt :lol

 

[BobTheFork]

By far, the funniest thing about this thread is the double meaning of the term 'click bait' lol

 

[crowphoenix]

well, I would only suggest you read the dozen or so reviews that praise the story before being disappointed over the one that didn't

That is true. Ultimately, I will determine for myself when I pick it up this afternoon.

 

[BobsRevenge]

Didn't gamers think Grand Theft Auto, Metal Gear Solid 4 and Halo had mind blowing stories?

I mean, I had fun with them like I would with something like Terminator: Salvation.

Well, GTA4 actually did have a really good story (not mind blowing, but still). The gameplay got in the way of it really making sense, but the story itself was really quite good. As with almost every aspect of GTA4 though, GAF's backlash had to completely go the opposite way of what all the journalists thought.

GTA4 probably has one of the top 10 best stories as far as writing, presentation, and performance go in a videogame, but for some reason that isn't good enough anyways.

Gameplay makes stories in a lot of games lose credibility, but for some reason people only care about it when a backlash is in order.

 

[Drinky Crow]

Not true.

Good writing is good writing, regardless of the medium.

and bad writing is bad writing. i assume that, as THE play magazine authority on games writing, you'll agree that infamous has pretty lousy plotting and dialogue? i mean, even industry luminaries such as billiam x. harms the third have their off days, am i rite?

if i was a game developer or publisher, i would make it a strategy to hire a few folks from the gaming magazine cloisters just to make sure that their peers go just a little more lenient on our products. i mean, if they knew that their buddy jeffrey x. green the third (hypothetically speaking) was a producer on the product, there's no way they'd score it below a "sympathy 7" at the VERY least, right? does this sound like a good strategy, or shopuld i stick to my day job?

 

[BobsRevenge]

Freudian slip?

I was saying that the story is implausible judging by what Tom Chick said, not that what Tom Chick said was implausible.

Was that the misunderstanding?

 

[Drinky Crow]

If Infamous' story is good, GTAIV's story would be mind-blowing Pulitzer winning shit.

at the risk of stating the obvious, gta4's story apparently WAS mind-blowing, award-winning shiz to some 90% of the game reviewing set. the bar is barely visible, sunk as it has below the grass and well into the dirt.

 

[Shurs]

and bad writing is bad writing. i assume that, as THE play magazine authority on games writing, you'll agree that infamous has pretty lousy plotting and dialogue?

So you've played through Infamous?

 

[Arrowgigantic]

dunno man, according to the OP, Tom Chick is the Walter Cronkite of game journalism

Oh please, I've made no claims about Tom's criticism of Infamous, other than that 10 awful things and 10 great things seems a fair way to present your view of a game. The point of the original post is to highlight what a dumb move this was on the part of Sony's PR, not that they are being unfair to Tom Chick, or that they should be licking his boots, or that his opinion is "right".

 

[MC Safety]

and bad writing is bad writing. i assume that, as THE play magazine authority on games writing, you'll agree that infamous has pretty lousy plotting and dialogue? i mean, even industry luminaries such as billiam x. harms the third have their off days, am i rite?

if i was a game developer or publisher, i would make it a strategy to hire a few folks from the gaming magazine cloisters just to make sure that their peers go just a little more lenient on our products. i mean, if they knew that their buddy jeffrey x. green the third (hypothetically speaking) was a producer on the product, there's no way they'd score it below a "sympathy 7" at the VERY least, right? does this sound like a good strategy, or shopuld i stick to my day job?

I have not played Infamous, and cannot comment on the quality of its writing.

I was speaking strictly of Harms' other writings, which I've always found to be of some quality.

Also, is your day job eating donuts, Drinkster? If so, you should definitely stick with it.

 

[ElyrionX]

Well, GTA4 actually did have a really good story (not mind blowing, but still). The gameplay got in the way of it really making sense, but the story itself was really quite good. As with almost every aspect of GTA4 though, GAF's backlash had to completely go the opposite way of what all the journalists thought.

GTA4 probably has one of the top 10 best stories as far as writing, presentation, and performance go in a videogame, but for some reason that isn't good enough anyways.

Gameplay makes stories in a lot of games lose credibility, but for some reason people only care about it when a backlash is in order.

I would agree. As far as videogames go, GTAIV is right up there. That is, if you're only talking about the early to mid portions of the game because everything falls apart after he meets the mafia.

 

[mambadragon]

Regardless of what you think of Tom Chick or his Infamous review, I don't see how one can side with Sony on this. They granted the interview, and they should be chastised for taking away the interview because they suspected he'd be critical of the game. Yes the White House does this, so do movie studios, but that doesn't make it OK.

Also, am I crazy, or wasn't Tom Chick's article supposed to be taken as tongue-in-cheek anyway? Most of his top 10 bad points seemed intentionally silly, and he called the article a "review". I'd imagine he tried to write it in an entertaining way since he's known as a strategy guy.

 

[Drinky Crow]

tom, foolishly, believed he was writing for a slightly more sophisticated audience than the gaf ps3 monkey set -- and by "more sophisticated" i mean "capable of breathing and walking at the same time; has possibly tendered the idea of sex with another human being and, in extreme cases, may have performed the act as well; may have advanced into the 'can take nudges and jokes at their hobbies' expense' phase of post-adolescent life"

 

[HK-47]

Well, GTA4 actually did have a really good story (not mind blowing, but still). The gameplay got in the way of it really making sense, but the story itself was really quite good. As with almost every aspect of GTA4 though, GAF's backlash had to completely go the opposite way of what all the journalists thought.

GTA4 probably has one of the top 10 best stories as far as writing, presentation, and performance go in a videogame, but for some reason that isn't good enough anyways.

Gameplay makes stories in a lot of games lose credibility, but for some reason people only care about it when a backlash is in order.

It isnt good enough cause it isnt a good story.

If you were talk Lost & the Damned maybe, but GTA IV was a satire, like all the other games, that pulled every cliche and stereotype out of the woodwork, despite the previous 3 game covering all of them, and saying nothing new or interesting. Especially since the subject of our sympathy is suppose to be Niko, but they forgot to write him as such or give him any meaningful development after the first 20% of the game. At least Tommy V was funny.

 

[J-Rzez]

Why is he a black eye? Because he has some skill, some humor, and approaches things in a different way that every single other games writer?

Or is it just because he insulted a couple of games that you decided to champion long before they were released?

Should they give someone the time that writes 10 bad and 10 backhanded comments rather than someone else who doesn't have quite the same agenda to fill?

And what skill does this guy have? He brings forum board style to "real articles". There are people who know how to be funny and get a point across at the same time, like Yahtzee, which meets the criteria you've just spouted. This guy just flat out trolls like he copy and pasted his post at txb and posted it as an article.

 

[pakkit]

Sorry dude, but I give a damn if it was SONY, or Nintendo, or MS! If such a f+cker would write one of these shit-coverages about my game I would do the same.
F++k this f+cker

You're consistent, I'll give you that.

This is just plain stupid, guys. If you're PR, you don't cancel interviews and then don't tell the guy you cancelled it. I guess it goes along with SONY's new "underdog" vibe. :lol

Chick's article is anything but trolling, the titles are stupid, but anyone with a brain and two eyes could see that actual substance is contained within.

EDIT: What Drinky said.

 

[davepoobond]

He shouldn't get an interview on account of writing stupid top 10 lists.

exactly. who does this guy think he is? a journalist or something? you think you can write top 10 lists and have any sort of capacity to show how well you write or even explain anything about a game in such a manner?

 

[JonathanEx]

Right, so people are defending Sony going "criticise us and we'll waste your time and cut off coverage". That's a road we should really go down.

If they thought he wasn't worth talking to, why offer an interview in the first place? It's a reactionary move, and it's bad for the PR to start offering coverage in exchange for positive content: because that's the road this is the start of.

 

[BravoSuperStar]

To cancel it in such a manner is inexcusable. If they had a problem with this guy they shouldn't have set one up to begin with. But to be fair this kind of idiocy is par for the course for Sony PR this gen.

 

[mentalfloss]

tom, foolishly, believed he was writing for a slightly more sophisticated audience than the gaf ps3 monkey set -- and by "more sophisticated" i mean "capable of breathing and walking at the same time; has possibly tendered the idea of sex with another human being and, in extreme cases, may have performed the act as well; may have advanced into the 'can take nudges and jokes at their hobbies' expense' phase of post-adolescent life"

Indeed. *bubble-bobble*

 

[ElyrionX]

Right, so people are defending Sony going "criticise us and we'll waste your time and cut off coverage". That's a road we should really go down.

If they thought he wasn't worth talking to, why offer an interview in the first place? It's a reactionary move, and it's bad for the PR to start offering coverage in exchange for positive content: because that's the road this is the start of.

I don't think some people are defending Sony but it's more of a case where it makes business sense for Sony to do something like that. I can see it from Sony's perspective and if I were in the marketing or PR department, I would certainly consider doing something like that. Why waste resources on someone who probably isn't going to sell more copies of your game?

 

[JonathanEx]

I don't think some people are defending Sony but it's more of a case where it makes business sense for Sony to do something like that. I can see it from Sony's perspective and if I were in the marketing or PR department, I would certainly consider doing something like that. Why waste resources on someone who probably isn't going to sell more copies of your game?

Not telling him until he's there for it just comes off as a dick move. That's deliberately in spite. It comes off as hypocritical: waste their sites resources by taking up his time when the goal is not to waste resources on something that was already planned.

 

[BobTheFork]

tom, foolishly, believed he was writing for a slightly more sophisticated audience than the gaf ps3 monkey set -- and by "more sophisticated" i mean "capable of breathing and walking at the same time; has possibly tendered the idea of sex with another human being and, in extreme cases, may have performed the act as well; may have advanced into the 'can take nudges and jokes at their hobbies' expense' phase of post-adolescent life"

I'll admit, you are quite the angler

 

[mentalfloss]

I don't think some people are defending Sony but it's more of a case where it makes business sense for Sony to do something like that. I can see it from Sony's perspective and if I were in the marketing or PR department, I would certainly consider doing something like that. Why waste resources on someone who probably isn't going to sell more copies of your game?

Why waste resources setting up the interview in the first place?

 

[ElyrionX]

Yeah, of course setting up the interview and not informing him before hand that it was cancelled is not something I would condone at all.

 

[proposition]

Publishers need to find a more direct way to speak to their audience instead of always having to go through these publications who have so much leverage these days.

Really? Really?

So instead of reading an interview with Peter Moore telling the interviewer why his game is so good, we'll just read an article by Peter Moore explaining that his game is so good?

How exactly does that solve anything?

 

[PS2 KID]

I was wondering, if you have 10 stupid things and 10 cool things about Infamous, wouldn't that mean the game scored 50%?

 

[Cat in the Hat]

I was wondering, if you have 10 stupid things and 10 cool things about Infamous, wouldn't that mean the game scored 50%?

Your logic is flawless, or wait would it be a zero? If you start at zero and add 10 + but then you go ahead and - 10. You are left with 0. Or am I way off base here?

 

[J-Rzez]

I was wondering, if you have 10 stupid things and 10 cool things about Infamous, wouldn't that mean the game scored 50%?

Naw, the 10 cool things were pretty much backhanded. 0%

 

[patsu]

Should have told him in advance. but it's the right decision to cancel the interview.

Tom Chick mispelled Cole's name throughout the first "Top Ten" article. Some of his points were dubious or pointless. If he's not serious enough to write a proper article, may be he should quit and find another job.

 

[ElyrionX]

Your logic is flawless, or wait would it be a zero? If you start at zero and add 10 + but then you go ahead and - 10. You are left with 0. Or am I way off base here?

For Sony fanboys, that means it's a 12!!

 

[A.R.K]

Fuck him who cares. The troll deserved it. May be Sony should have notified him before hand but oh well shit happens Mr. Chick, just like your shit articles.

 

[forgeforsaken]

Tom Chick mispelled Cole's name throughout the first "Top Ten" article.

I'm rather sure he does that intentionally as it's something he does all the time with various games.

 

[ghst]

I was wondering, if you have 10 stupid things and 10 cool things about Infamous, wouldn't that mean the game scored 50%?

i can think of 10 stupid and 10 cool things for every game i've ever played. as can anyone who doesn't suffer from brand induced mental deficiency.

 

[PS2 KID]

Your logic is flawless, or wait would it be a zero? If you start at zero and add 10 + but then you go ahead and - 10. You are left with 0. Or am I way off base here?

It's like a quiz. You get 20 questions but if your instructor considers 10 of them to be wrong, logically you scored 50%.

 

[Willeth]

Yeah, of course setting up the interview and not informing him before hand that it was cancelled is not something I would condone at all.

I think that's the only part of this that is in any way shady. Chick is allowed to write whatever the hell he wants - he's made a living doing just that, oddly enough. The publisher also has the right to refuse to give interviews to anyone they want - the enthusiast press doesn't have a right to see anything if the publisher/developer doesn't want them to.

However, not telling the interviewer that they're not welcome until they're on the doorstep, having spent money for the 'privilege', is a dick move. If, of course, it was intentional and avoidable. If not, then that's just an awkward situation and there's not much else to talk about.

 

[Drinky Crow]

I'm rather sure he does that intentionally as it's something he does all the time with various games.

yup. he does this with any game that has either really turgid, really derivative, or really cynical marketing-slanted writing.

 

[patsu]

I'm rather sure he does that intentionally as it's something he does all the time with various games.

Then he can't complain about the ill treatment. Just suck it down and go to the next interview... and be prepared to get rejected again. It's business as usual.

 

[Thomper]

It's like a quiz. You get 20 questions but if your instructor considers 10 of them to be wrong, logically you scored 50%.

Yes! Game reviews: they're just like a quiz! Every pro and con is completely identical in value, and they always add up to or take away from a total of 100%. You cracked the code; well done.

 

[pakkit]

However, not telling the interviewer that they're not welcome until they're on the doorstep, having spent money for the 'privilege', is a dick move. If, of course, it was intentional and avoidable. If not, then that's just an awkward situation and there's not much else to talk about.

How, in this 21st century, could SONY's PR reach Chick before he reached the interview? The telegraph was not functional, and the rubberband and two cups just wouldn't stretch far enough, I'm afraid.

 

[A.R.K]

Then he can't complain about the ill treatment. Just suck it down and go to the next interview... and be prepared to get rejected again. It's business as usual.

right and GAF is still symathic towards this 40-year old so called 'journalist' who acts like a 4 year old with his trolling articles. Fucking give me a break GAF. :lol

 

[Cat in the Hat]

For Sony fanboys, that means it's a 12!!

There is no justice in this world i'm postive of that.

It's like a quiz. You get 20 questions but if your instructor considers 10 of them to be wrong, logically you scored 50%.

You sir are a GENIUS

 

[paparazzo]

This needed its own thread? Really? Oh GAF.

 

[PS2 KID]

Yes! Game reviews: they're just like a quiz! Every pro and con is completely identical in value, and they always add up to or take away from a total of 100%. You cracked the code; well done.

See the thing is even if he liked the game, metacritic and gamerankings have to post some kind of numerical score. It's logical they come to the conclusion that it scored 50% based on those top 10 lists. Unless you count them as two separate reviews of course.

 

[EmCeeGramr]

PERSONALLY ATTACKING A MAN BECAUSE HE DOESN'T LIKE YOUR TOYS IS OKAY

MENTIONING WHERE BABIES COME FROM, ON THE OTHER HAND, IS FILTH AND WILL RESULT IN ANGRY PMs FROM SAID BABIES

 

[pakkit]

See the thing is even if he liked the game, metacritic and gamerankings have to post some kind of numerical score. It's logical they come to the conclusion that it scored 50% based on those top 10 lists. Unless you count them as two separate reviews of course.

Are you actually being serious?

 

[Thomper]

See the thing is even if he liked the game, metacritic and gamerankings have to post some kind of numerical score. It's logical they come to the conclusion that it scored 50% based on those top 10 lists. Unless you count them as two separate reviews of course.

I think even the people at Metacritic and Gamerankings are smart enough to know that 10 negatives and 10 positives don't mean they have to give the game a 50% in their database. Because that would be a really stupid thing to think.