Support NeoGAF

[hbkajshdvfbkjhvgkahsgdfka]

What I want from games journalism already exists in the form of Polygon, GiantBomb and RPS long form articles. The issue? Not enough of them and the focus is unfortunately on things like reviews, previews and exclusives which I don't care about at all. I like Kill Screen too.

What the majority of gamers want from games journalism is whatever games journalism is now. Top 5 cosplay babes lists and "hard hitting" questions that people confuse for "journalistic integrity".

 

[xenist]

I want to see old school journalism. I want industry types to sit down with journalists and actually have to be prepared. I want some in your face "hostility." I want feet held over the coals. I want advocacy. I want some Robert Fisk style combativeness.

Press isn't here to serve the literary ambitions of English majors. They have a role to play as an advocate. They have been seduced by the industry. They view themselves as creatives, as artists and as such they tend to side with the "creator" side of the game-maker/game-player dynamic.

 

[R1CHO]

Nothing will change.

Publishers make sure that interaction with anyone who asks questions will only ever result in the communication of sanitized, gleaming, immaculate PR.

There are a shit ton of developers out there willing to talk and nobody listening... yeah, it's going to be difficult to get something interesting from the pr manager of call of duty n+1; but there are more developers.

There are a lot of important independent developers, yet we usually get info and interviews from the same usuals, some of theme because they are very vocal, and the rest because they are friends with the more important gaming media sites.

 

[Proposed Law]

 

[njean777]

Less social issues being brought over into games is what I want. I play games to escape the real world problems not to exacerbate them.

 

[careless mango]

I consider journalism and game criticism as 2 different things

As far as journalism goes I want more stories from the human angle and more investigation into all area of the industry. As for game criticism, I want more period.

I understand the hurdles for journalism but criticism should be open season

The problem with that is the amount of mutual back scratching involved (See: 7 to 9 scale of game reviews).

Critics need to give some amount of good press to the games and regurgitate some amount of PR-speak/press releases to be able to stay in the loop, get copies of games early for review etc.

This also factors into the journalism part where game 'journalists' do not get access to developers/influential people for interviews or stories because they panned a game from the same company in a review.

Publishers see games press as part of the PR machine of their games and to some extent they absolutely are.

Spoiler

I'm, ofc, generalizing here.

 

[GeekyDad]

I don't need cheerleaders or moneyhats, but I surely wouldn't mind seeing less "serious" in my gaming news. What happened to the geeky, nerdiness of gaming? Shit's so serious these days. Nintendo Power had it pretty close. Sure, they had an agenda, but it was close. Shit should be fun...like gaming. Show me stuff, throw in some thoughts and observations, and get the fuck out of the way. EGM was the wrong direction for me, and it was sad to see others follow suit. I know I'm likely in the great minority in terms of GAF, but that's my two-cents worth.

 

[BlackBanditSho]

I really enjoyed Next Generation when it was still around. So classy, so thoughtful, so intelligent.

Next Generation was my all time favorite mag. Had the choice of working there or going to GameFan, and I chose Gamers Republic due to the cost of living in LA vs. SF. I doubt that that Next Gen would make it in today's market. I guess that's Edge. Or Kill Screen.

What I want from games journalism already exists in the form of Polygon, GiantBomb and RPS long form articles. The issue? Not enough of them and the focus is unfortunately on things like reviews, previews and exclusives which I don't care about at all. I like Kill Screen too.

What the majority of gamers want from games journalism is whatever games journalism is now. Top 5 cosplay babes lists and "hard hitting" questions that people confuse for "journalistic integrity".

Which is why i was posing the question around those specific examples that I gave. So far, the overwhelming indifference about that type of content is illuminating. I think that only one of you actually said that they appreciated that type of content. One person outright said that they don't care for that type of material, and the rest of you didn't say one way or the other specifically about THAT type of material.

I don't need cheerleaders or moneyhats, but I surely wouldn't mind seeing less "serious" in my gaming news. What happened to the geeky, nerdiness of gaming? Shit's so serious these days. Nintendo Power had it pretty close. Sure, they had an agenda, but it was close. Shit should be fun...like gaming. Show me stuff, throw in some thoughts and observations, and get the fuck out of the way. EGM was the wrong direction for me, and it was sad to see others follow suit. I know I'm likely in the great minority in terms of GAF, but that's my two-cents worth.

Well what EGM was, was a giant buyer's guide. To that end, it was the best at that type of material. You had a single game review with four different perspectives. Presumably, you could come to some kind of conclusion based on who you tended to side with. THAT was good.

So yeah, overall the responses in this thread are informative...and a little chilling. At least for me. I was hoping that somewhere around 10% of the responses would dig that kind of coverage. Indifference is actually worse than dislike.

 

[Northeastmonk]

I liked G4 and that group. But since that's over I don't really know. It seems like the journalist side of gaming has had its better days.

I can still find the journalist like Dan Hsu and a like. But those journalist from Game Informer aren't that entertaining anymore. I don't read game magazines anymore either. Its like extra eye candy attached to the paper. I picked up an EGM when they had a coming back issue and everything looked so cliche and who's who. Like in depth photos with surreal backgrounds. People were laughing at cafes. Like gaming existed in this little world you were never allowed to be part of.

Greg Kasavin was good, but he wants to make games rather than talk about them.

They all rather wear a fedora than be compelling journalist. That or there's no real groundbreaking news anymore. I guess companies at E3 were going after bigger guys like IGN and so forth. So the journalist with better personalities were left out.

Those geek shows on youtube are full of shit. They don't even talk about videos games except a few mmos. Sorry just had to say that. And IGN is a joke, they just need a swimsuit model doing their shows.

I think gaming journalist are fantastic, wonderful people. But at times... ehh who knows what the future holds. I've been held on a few times, then let go the rest.

I never knew who patrick klepek was until he appeared on G4, and i was thinking... "this guys pretty young, maybe he's new". Turns out he's probably one of the better journalist. So I don't know. Sometimes its like you're following these guy's career like a feather in the wind.

^just ranting a bit. Not like I get to talk about this with anyone else.

 

[famousmortimer]

How would people feel about a website that acted as a consumer rights advocate and media watchdog?

Setup like gaf in that there would be no reviews, no gifts, no free games, etc, so we couldn't be blacklisted. But taking a long form view of what's happening in the industry both in development and in gaming journalism and how that impacts the consumer.

Do people care about that or am I barking up the wrong tree?

 

[faceless007]

Longform features are what what I like, and Kotaku and Polygon have, contrary to their reputations here, had some really solid ones recently.

 

[CambriaRising]

Less pr rewrites and more feature stories on development studios, projects, postmortems on cancellations/delays, etc.

How would people feel about a website that acted as a consumer rights advocate and media watchdog?

Setup like gaf in that there would be no reviews, no gifts, no free games, etc, so we couldn't be blacklisted. But taking a long form view of what's happening in the industry both in development and in gaming journalism and how that impacts the consumer.

Do people care about that or am I barking up the wrong tree?

I care about that. The Eca is supposed to kinda be this but they are terrible.

 

[Earl_Grey]

Second question.

How much are you willing to pay for these things?

 

[Northeastmonk]

How would people feel about a website that acted as a consumer rights advocate and media watchdog?

Setup like gaf in that there would be no reviews, no gifts, no free games, etc, so we couldn't be blacklisted. But taking a long form view of what's happening in the industry both in development and in gaming journalism and how that impacts the consumer.

Do people care about that or am I barking up the wrong tree?

They can't. Half of them would have to buy their games.

Adam Sessler pointed that on Rev3. Its not like a newspaper or magazine where their adds are nonrelated. A movie reviewer can criticize a film and call it terrible. Without the fear of losing funding. Like back in the day when some fan has geocities website or some firelink shrine? lol What's good from this week type of thing?

Who would fund such a thing?

I don't even find Penny Arcade that appealing. I've mostly accepted it because I'd look dumb if I didn't. Same with the whole Pax Expo.

 

[Ashes]

A good journalist is a good journalist whatever the industry. Have good sources, good insight, express your self well, and you know, be entertaining.

With all due respect, Polygon have lost all credibility to me. Sure they have one or two good 'journalists', but their pre e3 show, which was presented by their head, I believe, proved to me that they are a mouthpiece for Microsoft, at least to some degree.

 

[Holy Order Sol]

I'd be alright with not having any.

 

[famousmortimer]

They can't. Half of them would have to buy their games.

Adam Sessler pointed that on Rev3. Its not like a newspaper or magazine where their adds are nonrelated. A movie reviewer can criticize a film and call it terrible. Without the fear of losing funding. Like back in the day when some fan has geocities website or some firelink shrine? lol What's good from this week type of thing?

Who would fund such a thing?

Kickstarter to get it off the ground and give it enough time to find alternate sources of income. But generating income would be its biggest hurdle in the long run, I'm sure.


I'm exploring a bunch of options as a sort of follow up to the no drm thing and this is one of them. I keep trying to get Adam Boyes to hire me but he hasn't seen the light, yet. I feel like i may be able to join some random pr firm but then that would make me part of the problem instead of the solution. This website is definitely part of the solution but as you've pointed out... it would be hard to make money from. I don't want to be rich but I'm sick of being poor.


Just brainstorming out loud, don't mind me.

 

[sonicmj1]

This recent Polygon feature covering the making of Defense Grid 2 is a great example of the sort of long-form journalism I like. It gets deep into the history of the developers and the process behind what they're doing. I'd love it if that stuff became less of a closely-guarded industry secret and was made more transparent by journalists.

 

[Lowlander2]

I want to see old school journalism. I want industry types to sit down with journalists and actually have to be prepared. I want some in your face "hostility." I want feet held over the coals. I want advocacy. I want some Robert Fisk style combativeness.

A true journalist would only go to war if that's where the chips fell. If they didn't, so be it.

It's not a journalist's job to get personally invested. Objectivity, transparency, is the ultimate goal, and one we keep chasing perpetually.

 

[Grand Funk Carwash]

I want games journalism that likes the stuff I like and really hates the stuff I hate.

 

[OldAsUrSock]

Real journalism without being paid out or biases. I want straight up opinions. If you dislike some part of the game then call it out and just because it is a popular franchise don't go easy on it. That is one thing I like about Angry Joe is that he gives his opinion and even if I do not agree he explains why he does not like it and not just go "I don't think the character jumps high enough." or something like that. I do not like seeing Mountain Dew, Doritos, or heavy Halo ads all over sites. I also do not like "The one thing I don't like about this game is that its almost too good." kind of reviewing. I need more professional journalism. Stop with the people in T-shirts, jeans, etc... Get some people in some suits! Many devs are in suits for interviews at least the interviewers could return the favor and bring some class into video games. The only country that I have seen gaming interviewers wearing suits was Swedish reviewers. The problem is that I don't speak Swedish! All of the UK and American journalists wear casual clothing. Another problem I have is that journalists get fired over giving their opinions or reporting the facts. Now I leave you with this.

 

[Jintor]

I was pretty impressed with the Edge I picked up the other day. Not impressed enough to buy it at the time, but I'd just shelled out a couple hundred on some dental work and was feeling kinda poor...

 

[JesseEwiak]

I want games journalism that likes the stuff I like and really hates the stuff I hate.

Unfortunately, this is a little too close to the truth for a lot of people. See, how most people were perfectly OK with the Kotaku article of the week about the sexual objectification in Tomb Raider, but go after the obscure Japanese RPG they like, and it's time to go to war.

Second question.

How much are you willing to pay for these things?

I think this is truly the important thing. We already have people "waiting" for the E3/Thanksgiving deal for Giantbomb so they have to pay $5/month instead of $/7 month when those guys put out more content than literally anybody with a social life or job can consume.

So, to all the people who want a game site that buys their own games, accepts no gifts, does all their travel, has no game related ads, and so on. Are you willing to pay up? After all, it's not going to be cheap.

Just one person at $25,000/yr is going to be $50/yr per person if you can get 500 subscribers. Increase that by x if you want any trips to E3, the person able to actually live in more than a one room apartment, and so on. To be blunt, I don't think enough people will pay for it and thus, the cycle continues.

 

[JesseEwiak]

A true journalist would only go to war if that's where the chips fell. If they didn't, so be it.

It's not a journalist's job to get personally invested. Objectivity, transparency, is the ultimate goal, and one we keep chasing perpetually.

I think this is another thing sort of forgotten about. In real journalism, not every interaction is three seconds from a fistfight. In certain cases, it can be, but the White House reporter for MSNBC wasn't asking Dubya why he was a war criminal.

 

[DICKS AHOY]

even more journalists starting childish twitter arguments and bait-ish insults that spiral wildly out of control so it's easier to make a mental note of which ones to avoid

 

[ERC198X]

I want to see more investigative reporting, and less corporate arse-kissing.

A certain Polygon editor has that nailed down to a science

 

[Squire]

I love stuff like that. I absolutely love it.

I think it's important to put a spotlight on the people who make games, in whatever way they contribute. Especially AAA games.

With indie games, I feel like that stuff comes out naturally in covering them because they're personal and that's 90% of it.

You get assets and trailers for Assassin's Creed and Ubisoft tells you how a bajillion people are making it, but you so easily forget those are real people making it. They've got their own lives and experiences and inspirations and I wanna know about that stuff, too.

Edit: And Human Angle is excellent. I wish it was a straight-up TV show because they're just killing it with that series.

 

[BlackBanditSho]

Edit: And Human Angle is excellent. I wish it was a straight-up TV show because they're just killing it with that series.

Cool. That makes TWO votes for Human Angle-like content. Starting to feel a little better now.

 

[JordanN]

Andriasang was the perfect games journalism to me.

They just reported news and there was very little self commentary. Any real commentary was done in the comment section where it belonged.

No BS, no shameless pandering, just the good stuff.

 

[RoboPlato]

Gametrailers E3 coverage was excellent. Professional, well informed, with a mix of hard questions and information. I loved it. That and Polygon's articles like the behind the scenes mess of Homefront are what I want.

 

[DICKS AHOY]

Gametrailers E3 coverage was excellent. Professional, well informed, with a mix of hard questions and information. I loved it. That and Polygon's articles like the behind the scenes mess of Homefront are what I want.

Polygon is absolutely one of those love/hate cases for me. They have a ton of great behind-the-scenes articles on a wide range of different games (like that Armature reboot of Mega Man X for instance), but their reviews are almost always terrible and their writers come across as children on twitter which they rely on far too heavily.

They're in a position that makes them seem like corporate apologists who don't care much for their readers, yet at the same time that position probably also helps them get a lot of really interesting scoops other sources can't.

 

[Daingurse]

Who is the Vice equivalent of games journalism? Does that even exist?

 

[Takamura-San]

I would like to see more websites that don't have a review staff.

Reviewing games is what is killing any hope of having any journalism in the industry.

With review comes:

Ad pressure
Access issues

When you cover the industry without these caveats it could lead to more honest discourse.

 

[StUnNeR H2K]

Unbiased. Is any news unbiased?

 

[SneakyStephan]

How he has changed.

From obnoxious troll to some kind of soapbox union man for the gamers.

And @ op

Serve your readers and their best interests.
Not what you rationalise should be their best interests, but what THEY feel are their best interests. (don't be like the PA guy or EAgies or the other clowns)
Write interesting shit, do real research and real investigative journalism, find interesting stories.
Don't be one of those that think their job is to copy press releases and hype vidyagaemz, all it does it cheapen it.

 

[DICKS AHOY]

How he has changed.

From obnoxious troll to some kind of soapbox union man for the gamers.

Tell me about it. Even if I didn't agree with what he had to say nowadays, at least he articulates himself far better and more level-headed than he did as recently as early last year.

 

[OrangeYouGlad]

Andriasang was the perfect games journalism to me.

They just reported news and there was very little self commentary. Any real commentary was done in the comment section where it belonged.

No BS, no shameless pandering, just the good stuff.

Is it journalism if you just regurgitate news? At some point something breaks that should result in some questions being asked.

 

[Deleted member 80556]

How would people feel about a website that acted as a consumer rights advocate and media watchdog?

Setup like gaf in that there would be no reviews, no gifts, no free games, etc, so we couldn't be blacklisted. But taking a long form view of what's happening in the industry both in development and in gaming journalism and how that impacts the consumer.

Do people care about that or am I barking up the wrong tree?

I feel like GAF is that sometimes. Maybe not that part that impacts the costumer, but aside from that, GAF could fill that roll.

Or what else are you thinking, Mortimer?

 

[Takamura-San]

I want to see old school journalism. I want industry types to sit down with journalists and actually have to be prepared. I want some in your face "hostility." I want feet held over the coals. I want advocacy. I want some Robert Fisk style combativeness.

Press isn't here to serve the literary ambitions of English majors. They have a role to play as an advocate. They have been seduced by the industry. They view themselves as creatives, as artists and as such they tend to side with the "creator" side of the game-maker/game-player dynamic.

I would like this too, but as of now there's no reason why any of these industry types would ever sit down to have their asses grilled. The only time they expose themselves is at E3 and that's because they present. No one right now has the power to pick up the phone and schedule that kind of interview.

 

[SatoAilDarko]

Personally the opposite of what it and any type of journalism has become, opinion-dominated. Its all about personalities and talking heads. I really don't want people's opinouns, just the straight facts so I can judge for myself. It would be fine if it was confined to opinoun pieces but it seems whatever news is reported the writer adds in his two cents. It's the same reason why the only news channel I can tolerate a bit is CNN Headline News because it usually just goes through stories without commentary. I wish there was a videogame equivalent (is IGN the closest to staight news stories?).

 

[VeryGooster]

I think if there are going to be op-ed pieces on certain decisions, viewpoints, or the cultural aspects in the industry, I'd rather they'd be written to entice discussion, as opposed to say shaming or soapboxing. I understand people have different viewpoints on something, but I'm tired of reading something written so condescendingly. While they're not a game site, the Gizmodo "Microsoft caved; thanks a lot, internet" article was putrid and completely baseless. I'll admit too, while I enjoyed the harsh tone of Jim Sterling's pieces about Microsoft, he's at least a guy who's willing to discuss the other side of it when challenged.

I also like things like Polygon's feature on Rob Wiethoff, or their one feature about Bungie (and Destiny).

If stories are going to break based on a developer or figurehead's tweet, follow up on that, get a comment. Don't just say "Hideki Kamiya says Vanquish 2 next week in Nintendo Direct" and that's it.

 

[JordanN]

Is it journalism if you just regurgitate news? At some point something breaks that should result in some questions being asked.

Definitely. Especially since it was a site that reported Japanese news in english which can be very hard to come by.

There's still room for the "how" part in gaming journalism but I just like how straight forward everything was with that site.

 

[TheSpoiler]

I've had the most fun writing for places that were smaller. They'd say, hey, write whatever you want.

None of those places got the flood of views they deserved, especially Gameblurb, but the sites were honest, and I will forever respect that.

Games journalism is garbage right now because of two things: access (that encompasses everything from early reviews to breaking news) and oversaturation.

There are hundreds of websites doing the exact same things over and over. Why not combine into a larger, better megasite? When I start up my own site again, I'm joining up with a few other people.

 

[Takamura-San]

Is it journalism if you just regurgitate news? At some point something breaks that should result in some questions being asked.

I presume they ask questions though their channels. Companies have no reason to go beyond "no comment". It would then be the job of a journalist to go beyond and look for someone to inform outside the official channels. I don't know how difficult is to achieve that.

Something like the recent 180 done by Microsoft. Who would be in the position to get information on how that decision was reached? Or get more details on that story?

 

[TheSpoiler]

I presume they ask questions though their channels. Companies have no reason to go beyond "no comment". It would then be the job of a journalist to go beyond and look for someone to inform outside the official channels. I don't know how difficult is to achieve that.

Something like the recent 180 done by Microsoft. Who would be in the position to get information on how that decision was reached? Or get more details on that story?

Depending on your access, either very hard or very easy.

The former is what kills smaller sites. MS won't talk to Gamerspin.com or whatever.

 

[Currygan]

- well written articles about interesting subjects that encompass the whole medium, besides previews, reviews and interviews
- reviews with no score, but a long, precise analysis of the goods and bads
- constantly updated newsfeed from every available source on the net
- creative, sharp writing, both competent and engaging


in short, RPS

 

[Takamura-San]

Am I the only one that believes that having a review section on the website, basically kills the hope of having any kind of real reporting?

 

[Squire]

Am I the only one that believes that having a review section on the website, basically kills the hope of having any kind of real reporting?

Hopefully, because it's kind of a silly notion. The best outlets still have entertainment sections that cover and review things

You shouldn't have to kill one to be good at the other.

 

[bro1]

We need a Roger Ebert of gaming.

 

[PFD]

Funny how most posters completely missed the point by not reading the OP.

And to answer the question, yes I'd love to see more content in the same vein as human angle. That article you linked to was fantastic, thanks for sharing it.