Support NeoGAF

[BlackBanditSho]

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

Yes. It's Polygon Human Angle stuff.
When we get our funding on our indiegogo campaign, we'll be doing that as well.

Other than that, no such thing exists. It's really tough to tell if the audience wants it. That's why crowd funding is so crucial.

 

[captmorgan]

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.

Why would anybody ever agree to sit down to that? Or if they did I would just keep saying "no comment" or "we`re not ready to talk about that" untill you get bored of asking or your readers get bored and leave.

 

[BlackBanditSho]

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.

Thank you. That's Three.
I'm trying not to openly weep. The What Happened/Red Dead doc was exactly how I pitched doing Tyler's segment on the NeoGAF documentary. No funding. The Broll those guys shot for that docu was beautiful. You can ONLY do that by spending real time with your subject in an intimate way.

 

[Oblivion]

Since we're on the subject of journalism, what exactly is gaming's Watergate?

 

[RedSwirl]

The 1up Show.

...Okay seriously, a lot of what people in this thread seem to what basically sounds like what Polygon and occasionally Kotaku already do with their feature articles. Most of the negativity those sites get from GAF seem to be from their news reporting and reviews, but I see little attention paid to their features (many of which are freelance).

Polygon's features section is awesome in my opinion and every once in a while a couple of Kotaku's writers will put out some real investigative shit. Other sources of similarly great feature articles on gaming include Kill Screen and the features section of The Escapist. Penny Arcade also does a really good job of this in my opinion, but GAF seems to have lumped negativity on the whole site because of a single opinion article (which a lot of people on GAF seem to want more of).

This kind of stuff, along with interviews, is in my opinion the only valuable thing left in periodical game magazines. My old EGM subscription hasn't run out yet and every time I get a new issue the only section I really give a shit about is the monthly developer interview. That kind of stuff that actually requires a long deadline is what I'd still like toe see, just in digital form.

But really though, I want the Area 5 guys doing regular coverage again. No one does video coverage like them.

 

[Aquamarine]

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.

Unfortunately, companies can withhold "free perks" / advertising money / review copies of games / etc. from journalists at major sites (think IGN, Gametrailers) if they get too out of line.

That's the issue with hostility---when you act hard-line with major companies, you put your profit margins at risk.

 

[ZealousD]

I'm disappointed at how many people didn't read the OP and just started giving blanket rote opinions without going into specifics.

BlackBanditSho, I can't help but notice that you're counting how many people are agreeing with your approach, but you aren't counting how many people ignored you or are giving answers that you don't like. Are you sure you're looking for an unbiased assessment of what people actually want, or are you just looking for validation on an approach that you're already thinking about going down anyway?

 

[BIONIC-ARRRMMM!!]

More talk about feminism and sexism. Nobody has time for videogames anymore.

 

[PhantomR]

I'm a Nintendo fan. As such I want journalism where the people writing/podcasting actually know what the fuck they're talking about when it comes to the company's games, philosophy, dev divisions, personalities (not just fucking Iwata and Reggie), and strategy. I also want journalism where they actually treat Nintendo with the same respect they show Microsoft and Sony instead of being condescending pricks (I wish someone would've slapped Geoff for his interviews with Reggie and Miyamoto). As it stands, there are really only two....maybe three sites that do an amazing job of balancing the need for independent journalistic integrity and independence, with tailoring to the needs of knowledgeable Nintendo fans and not treat us like fucking mutants who should be immediately cleansed of our leprecy that was contracted by actually owning Nintendo hardware.

These sites have been kicking ass for quite sometime and I don't expect that to change....so I'm pretty good with what I have available to me for the time being.

 

[Amir0x]

I'm a Nintendo fan. As such I want journalism where the people writing/podcasting actually know what the fuck they're talking about when it comes to the company's games, philosophy, dev divisions, personalities (not just fucking Iwata and Reggie), and strategy. I also want journalism where they actually treat Nintendo with the same respect they show Microsoft and Sony instead of being condescending pricks (I wish someone would've slapped Geoff for his interviews with Reggie and Miyamoto). As it stands, there are really only two....maybe three sites that do an amazing job of balancing the need for independent journalistic integrity and independence, with tailoring to the needs of knowledgeable Nintendo fans and not treat us like fucking mutants who should be immediately cleansed of our leprecy that was contracted by actually owning Nintendo hardware.

These sites have been kicking ass for quite sometime and I don't expect that to change....so I'm pretty good with what I have available to me for the time being.

if you define yourself by your allegiance to some tribe, you begin to see demons everywhere.

 

[BlackBanditSho]

The 1up Show.

...Okay seriously, a lot of what people in this thread seem to what basically sounds like what Polygon and occasionally Kotaku already do with their feature articles. Most of the negativity those sites get from GAF seem to be from their news reporting and reviews, but I see little attention paid to their features (many of which are freelance).

Polygon's features section is awesome in my opinion and every once in a while a couple of Kotaku's writers will put out some real investigative shit. Other sources of similarly great feature articles on gaming include Kill Screen and the features section of The Escapist. Penny Arcade also does a really good job of this in my opinion, but GAF seems to have lumped negativity on the whole site because of a single opinion article (which a lot of people on GAF seem to want more of).

This kind of stuff, along with interviews, is in my opinion the only valuable thing left in periodical game magazines. My old EGM subscription hasn't run out yet and every time I get a new issue the only section I really give a shit about is the monthly developer interview. That kind of stuff that actually requires a long deadline is what I'd still like toe see, just in digital form.

But really though, I want the Area 5 guys doing regular coverage again. No one does video coverage like them.

pour one out for the 1up show. Greatest blending of ALL of this stuff. EXCELLENT fucking show.

 

[sestrugen]

less doritos, more angry joe

 

[catstronaut]

I want well-researched, well-written, interesting articles. I feel like a lot of people just treat games journalism like garbage no matter what. That's definitely not the case.

 

[tsumineko]

 

[BlackBanditSho]

I'm disappointed at how many people didn't read the OP and just started giving blanket rote opinions without going into specifics.

BlackBanditSho, I can't help but notice that you're counting how many people are agreeing with your approach, but you aren't counting how many people ignored you or are giving answers that you don't like. Are you sure you're looking for an unbiased assessment of what people actually want, or are you just looking for validation on an approach that you're already thinking about going down anyway?

I'm not actually agreeing or disagreeing. The whole point of the thread was to see the percentage of people that answered and wanted that type of content. I'm basing the next year of my life on the belief that there's a small audience out there that wants to see that type of content and possibly pay for it.

It's pretty clear what people actually want. They're showing what they want with numbers. What I'm trying to figure out is if there's a place in this industry for the stuff that I want to make. The stuff that Human Angle is doing.

There's NO wrong answer in this thread. People are expressing what they want out of their gaming journalism. Their answers comprise a completely different set of data that I'm interested in, but isn't quite what I was asking. If i was Gametrailers, IGN, Gamespot, or any of the other sites focused on news, then these answers need to be PINNED to the cubicles of every journalist there.

However, I'm a filmmaker who happens to be a gamer. When I was running my own site, or when I was running Gamer's Republic Online, these issues would not only be totally valid, but the direction I would've shifted my site towards.

What i'm looking at - specifically - is if the engaged, passionate, and active audience of NeoGAF gives a shit about the stuff they're doing on Human Angle/Polygon, or the stuff that I'm trying to do with my docs in the future.

My days of game reviewing, moment to moment journalism, etc are done.

That said, with my very small team, the issues of long-form, more in-depth stories, in the form of video documentaries? That, i can do.

There's nothing that I'm asking the audience to agree with or disagree with. I have ZERO stake in how the industry runs itself now. I'm after the very small percentage that wants to see a very specific type of content that doesn't really exist.

If that audience isn't there, and if the NeoGaf responses and my struggling indiegogo campaign are any indication, I might be barking up the wrong tree.

Trust me. I'm not looking for validation. There's nothing to validate. I'm just counting heads and wiping the sweat from my brow.

 

[Amir0x]

I want well-researched, well-written, interesting articles. I feel like a lot of people just treat games journalism like garbage no matter what. That's definitely not the case.

I think that's what everyone wants.

I hope everyone forgives me for making an even larger point than perhaps this thread is purely about, but I think it all ties together:

Game Journalists two biggest problems are as follows:

a.) Credibility
b.) Writing Quality

The credibility factor usually arises in three scenarios: when a major site attempts to analyze a big piece of news about the industry in a way that is pretty transparently in deference to a particular company, when reviewers across the board are seen as refusing to critically analyze a title (i.e. AAA titles and their notoriously consistent 8.0-10.0 scale), or when a site is known for posting salacious and unfounded rumours.

The credibility factor does not go away by a well written piece like what is in the OP. I think we do want that, and Polygon should be commended, but it's an easy place to be - you're not siding with any groups of fans over the other, you're not taking sides with any company over another, you're not forcing yourself in a position to choose between consumers or your advertisers.

Articles like that in the OP do go some way to diffusing the writing quality complaints (that is to say I've read a fair bit into the article, although not til the end, and it seems fairly well edited). But because writing quality is so consistently bad across the board (look at Ben Kuchera's recent article comparing Dual Shock 4 to his first sexual experience, or the countless IGN articles that fail to get even the most basic details right about a game they're covering), it's hard to simply get past the perception with a few good pieces.


You mention Kotaku in your OP, BlackBanditSho. This is a good illustration of that problem. Kotaku has a few good pieces from time to time, I've read them when they're posted here, but the issue is Kotaku's signal:noise ratio is so dramatically high that it's impossible not to often simply think of them as bad across the board. It's easier to simply see the occasional decent article linked on GAF than it is to surf the site and find something on my own, that's how bad it is.


These issues are only going to go away when a complete change happens with game journalists which

a.) Puts consumer rights above the desires of their advertisers
b.) Puts the negative influence of swag, free flights and hotel stays, desire to get jobs in the industry, etc behind them entirely and simply are brutally honest about the problems in the industry and their business practices
c.) Editors at various sites decide to start taking their jobs more seriously and making sure they feel how important it is that when you sign off on something, it follows your seal of approval and thus is a reflection on your own work ethic.

There's a long list of fixes that can be applied, but I simply don't know of any meaningful way to apply them.

 

[SymbolicGamer]

The more biased, the better.

Because being unbiased means you don't favor anything. If you don't care about what you're talking about, why should I?

 

[BOTEC]

pour one out for the 1up show. Greatest blending of ALL of this stuff. EXCELLENT fucking show.

While we're all spilling alcohol all over the place, I'd like to pour one out for the old Escapist PDF magazine. There was some stellar stuff in those issues, before they turned into just another video site, it was the closest to my hope for game writing. I wonder if the Internet Wayback Machine has any of that stuff?

 

[Satchel]

Honest journalism?

At this point, just about all of them are simply PR machines for one of the manufacturers.

So far, Kotaku AU has been the most even handed I've found.

 

[ZealousD]

What i'm looking at - specifically - is if the engaged, passionate, and active audience of NeoGAF gives a shit about the stuff they're doing on Human Angle/Polygon, or the stuff that I'm trying to do with my docs in the future.

For what it's worth, this has been the first thread I've read on GAF where people are actually praising the quality long-form articles being posted on Polygon.

Every other post about Polygon tends to be negative, because they don't like something Arthur Gies has tweeted or something.

It is pretty standard human nature to magnify the negatives much more than praise the positives though, so maybe that doesn't mean anything.

 

[beastworship]

investigative journalism would be nice but not practical with it costing time and money. the most basic element games journalism should practice is brutal honesty. if you have a strong opinion please share it without fear of repercussions, tell me how horrible a game is and why you think it so, establish a rapport with me by offering violent opinions and i'll literally value you enough to become my purchase guide. considering the landscape of advertising and journalism i see why it's not overly common even though most crap games or creep people get railed on but anyone that masks themselves by using strange signals and ambiguous silence is a person i tend to ignore.

 

[jschreier]

This might shock some of you, but not everyone likes or wants the same things out of a video game website. What some of you call "noise" or "shit" on Kotaku might be interesting or valuable to plenty of other people. I am perfectly okay with knowing that my longform work will appeal to a different crowd than my columns about JRPGs. And I'm not sure why so many of you people aren't okay with seeing a constant barrage of news, longform work, and investigative reporting aggregated on NeoGAF every day. So many of you complain about the state of game journalism, yet on a daily basis you get loads of interesting content completely free thanks to hardworking game journalists whose reporting is constantly cited here. There are plenty of problems in the field, but it often feels like many people just complain because they like complaining.

I mean, you talk about signal-to-noise ratio: the legitimate grievances sure get drowned out when so many posts in threads like this are always ridiculous generalizations about how there's no investigative gaming journalism (there is), how all game journalists want to work in development (they don't), and how we all get paid by Microsoft (we obviously only get checks from Valve).

 

[Amir0x]

This might shock some of you, but not everyone likes or wants the same things out of a video game website. What some of you call "noise" or "shit" on Kotaku might be interesting or valuable to plenty of other people. I am perfectly okay with knowing that my longform work will appeal to a different crowd than my columns about JRPGs. And I'm not sure why so many of you people aren't okay with seeing a constant barrage of news, longform work, and investigative reporting aggregated on NeoGAF every day. So many of you complain about the state of game journalism, yet on a daily basis you get loads of interesting content completely free thanks to hardworking game journalists whose reporting is constantly cited here. There are plenty of problems in the field, but it often feels like many people just complain because they like complaining.

I mean, you talk about signal-to-noise ratio: the legitimate grievances sure get drowned out when so many posts in threads like this are ridiculous generalizations about how there's no investigative gaming journalism (there is), how all game journalists want to work in development (they don't), and how we all get paid by Microsoft (we obviously only get checks from Valve).

The type of people who want articles about nude Smash Bros. art are generally not the type of consumers of content I would give half a shit about catering to, at least if you want to form a positive reputation around a site.

Of course, the problem is that in the case of Kotaku, there are good things hidden among all the bad, and then you're confusing the shit out of people who might want to read the good stuff and not the bad. It's mixed marketing, basically. Who is your customer? Why do you want them? Is your customer low brow hentai addicts? Is it gossip mongers? Is it consumers of discerning game journalism?

You can say 'all of them', but I'd say that's simply not a very good business plan. And it tends to lead to a perception of shoddy journalism across the board, even when it's probably just most of the time.

 

[Cynar]

The more biased, the better.

Because being unbiased means you don't favor anything. If you don't care about what you're talking about, why should I?

You like fox news, don't you?

 

[jerry113]

Don't really need gaming journalists anymore. As long as gamers and developers can upload gameplay footage to youtube, why do we need people to review games? Why do we need people to describe footage in words when we should be able to see the footage and decide for ourselves?

 

[ZealousD]

This might shock some of you, but not everyone likes or wants the same things out of a video game website. What some of you call "noise" or "shit" on Kotaku might be interesting or valuable to plenty of other people. I am perfectly okay with knowing that my longform work will appeal to a different crowd than my columns about JRPGs. And I'm not sure why so many of you people aren't okay with seeing a constant barrage of news, longform work, and investigative reporting aggregated on NeoGAF every day. So many of you complain about the state of game journalism, yet on a daily basis you get loads of interesting content completely free thanks to hardworking game journalists whose reporting is constantly cited here. There are plenty of problems in the field, but it often feels like many people just complain because they like complaining.

I mean, you talk about signal-to-noise ratio: the legitimate grievances sure get drowned out when so many posts in threads like this are always ridiculous generalizations about how there's no investigative gaming journalism (there is), how all game journalists want to work in development (they don't), and how we all get paid by Microsoft (we obviously only get checks from Valve).

Can I ask you a question?

....why are you here?

It's like clockwork. Somebody bashes Kotaku and you swoop in to try and defend it. It happens so often. I swear it's all you're contributing to this forum. It seems rather sad and pathetic. You're like a one-man Kotaku Defense Force.

Look, if you really want GAF to stop criticizing Kotaku then the best course of action is for you to actually influence the site to be more in line with what GAF wants. If you're not planning to do that then accept the criticism as part of your cost-benefit analysis and move on. You're a part of Kotaku so nobody is going to be influenced by your opinions as they'll see it mostly as a self-serving reflex and not a legitimate unbiased opinion. Your efforts are futile.

 

[Raptor2155]

I want them to actually act like journalists, not PR mouthpieces.

 

[hwy_61]

I love Patrick Klepek's style. More of that, I guess.

 

[jschreier]

Can I ask you a question?

....why are you here?

It's like clockwork. Somebody bashes Kotaku and you swoop in to try and defend it. It happens so often. I swear it's all you're contributing to this forum. It seems rather sad and pathetic. You're like a one-man Kotaku Defense Force.

Look, if you really want GAF to stop criticizing Kotaku then the best course of action is for you to actually influence the site to be more in line with what GAF wants. If you're not planning to do that then accept the criticism as part of your cost-benefit analysis and move on. You're a part of Kotaku so nobody is going to be influenced by your opinions as they'll see it mostly as a self-serving reflex and not a legitimate unbiased opinion. Your efforts are futile.

Re-read my post. Almost none of it is about Kotaku. The one line that mentions Kotaku could apply to any gaming website. I am talking about games media as a whole, because I find that subject interesting. 80% of threads here start due to articles from gaming websites - articles you get for free - yet so many people just continue to insist that all gaming journalism is shit end of story. It drowns out attempts at real discussion about real, specific issues. It's a bummer.

 

[-COOLIO-]

i kinda like the daily penny arcade articles.

 

[El Sloth]

I'm not sure if this qualifies or even if Robert Ashley himself would call it "journalism", but I'd like more stuff like A Life Well Wasted. If a Life Well Wasted is the gaming version of Radiolab (also arguably not really journalism), then I'd like to see the game version of This American Life.


I guess what I'm really trying to say is that I want NPR to start covering video games more.

 

[ElectricBlue187]

Some semblance of ethics and a willingness to disassociate from those who behave unethically would be a nice place to start

 

[Astery]

Yes, I love them, more core casual gamers may not want anything more than game news, but I certainly love them.

In terms of what I want, I want them to be more objective, which unfortunately it won't be happening much. Adam Sessler is the only guy who I aware of who meets and thinks on most perspectives (publishers, devs, users) and I respect him more than anyone else in this field.

 

[BlackBanditSho]

I'm not sure if this qualifies or even if Robert Ashley himself would call it "journalism", but I'd like more stuff like A Life Well Wasted. If a Life Well Wasted is the gaming version of Radiolab (also arguably not really journalism), then I'd like to see the game version of This American Life.


I guess what I'm really trying to say is that I want NPR to start covering video games more.

There are people within the gaming industry that REALLY REALLY want to do that.

As an exercise before i did the NeoGAF episode, I tried practicing NPR audio-style storytelling in the vein of This American Life and Snap Judgments. I never posted it because I wasn't happy with it. That said, people are trying. Many of us WANT it. It's incredibly difficult and takes considerable skill. I'm working on it, and the more episodes of my documentary that I get to do (if i get funding), I hope to become good enough to deliver. One day. https://soundcloud.com/sakinnuso/fu-kung-episode-one/s-EoMa7

 

[ZealousD]

Re-read my post. Almost none of it is about Kotaku. The one line that mentions Kotaku could apply to any gaming website. I am talking about games media as a whole, because I find that subject interesting.

Right right. You're talking about the games media as a "whole", because you find that subject "interesting". Not because you feel that these perceptions essentially amount to insults to you, your chosen profession, and Kotaku.

Look. You spend a heck of a lot of time defending Kotaku and the "games media" here. The issue here is that you're a part of that machine that's being criticized. You are not an unbiased opinion. Nobody is going to pay attention to what you say. It's the same reason that criminals typically do not testify at their own trials. There's nothing to be gained for you here by doing this. GAF sees you as "part of the problem".

80% of threads here start due to articles from gaming websites

Articles that are typically not really "journalism". How often are gaming blogs the source of their own news content? 80%+ of the news I see posted on gaming website sites are reposts from other gaming websites! Kotaku and Polygon and IGN are aggregators just like GAF is!

 

[xenist]

Unfortunately, companies can withhold "free perks" / advertising money / review copies of games / etc. from journalists at major sites (think IGN, Gametrailers) if they get too out of line.

That's the issue with hostility---when you act hard-line with major companies, you put your profit margins at risk.

Not my problem. They should get their business guys to work on this. And their lawyers.

 

[Amir0x]

Right right. You're talking about the games media as a "whole", because you find that subject "interesting". Not because you feel that these perceptions essentially amount to insults to you, your chosen profession, and Kotaku.

Look. You spend a heck of a lot of time defending Kotaku and the "games media" here. The issue here is that you're a part of that machine that's being criticized. You are not an unbiased opinion. Nobody is going to pay attention to what you say. It's the same reason that criminals typically do not testify at their own trials. There's nothing to be gained for you here by doing this. GAF sees you as "part of the problem".

Whoa whoa whoa. While it's fair to point out that he has an inherent horse in this race, it's absolutely wrong to say we don't pay attention to what he says, or we don't value the opinions of journalists in this discussion. That's entirely absurd.

You can't have a truthful, open and complete accounting of the issues in the industry without people within that system sharing their thoughts as well.

So while I, like you, have a problem with many practices in modern game journalism, I do not share your sentiment. This isn't a trial. Also, the reason criminals do not typically testify at their own trials are extremely varied. Often times, a lawyer will say it's absolutely vital their client share their story, others not. It's a strategic choice, and it often relies on how articulate and charismatic your defendant is.

 

[ElectricBlue187]

Honestly i'd rather listen to developers talk in interviews or talk to each other than listen to a journalist say anything, you get a bit more honesty there I find.

 

[Tim the Wiz]

I don't care about puff pieces on voice actors. I want analysis of the industry and serious criticism not swayed by a driving need to placate corporate PR for access or build a resume to get hired by a publisher, allied to the interests of us, the consumer, the readers.

 

[MikeOfTheLivingDead]

I want to see a Scott Raab like writer interviewing people who actually make games, not producers, not studio talking heads. Actually if anyone has ever read the book Smartbomb, I'd like to read more in that vein.

 

[JordanLMiller]

I would love a site that writes articles professionally and not like they were written by someone who was posting on gamefaqs a month ago.

I want reviews that don't give every game a 9.0 or higher. No being swayed by publishers.

Have a halfway readable site that isn't a nightmare to navigate.

 

[Oblivion]

Can't we criticize Kotaku without criticizing Jason. Along with Totilo, he's the best journalist there.

 

[JesseEwiak]

The type of people who want articles about nude Smash Bros. art are generally not the type of consumers of content I would give half a shit about catering to, at least if you want to form a positive reputation around a site.

Of course, the problem is that in the case of Kotaku, there are good things hidden among all the bad, and then you're confusing the shit out of people who might want to read the good stuff and not the bad. It's mixed marketing, basically. Who is your customer? Why do you want them? Is your customer low brow hentai addicts? Is it gossip mongers? Is it consumers of discerning game journalism?

You can say 'all of them', but I'd say that's simply not a very good business plan. And it tends to lead to a perception of shoddy journalism across the board, even when it's probably just most of the time.

What if the reason you can get your bosses to approve the long-form investigative articles is because the nude Smash Brothers art is bringing in enough hits to make up for the fact that the long-form article won't?

 

[Amir0x]

What if the reason you can get your bosses to approve the long-form investigative articles is because the nude Smash Brothers art is bringing in enough hits to make up for the fact that the long-form article won't?

If the only legitimate way to get those articles is by burying them in that type of content, then the only thing I can say is you have to be willing to accept a wholesale reduction in the potential reputation of game journalism as a profession. And you probably shouldn't get annoyed when people point out that it's really awful stuff, because it is a symptom of a business decision you made. (The universal 'you', not discussing you specifically).

 

[Zukuu]

Kyle Bosman. Just be honest and personal when it fits.

 

[Just_myles]

Well I have been trying lately but, a lot of what I have been seeing is pretty much like blogging(opinion pieces etc.). I honestly don't know who the real "journalist" are.

To me it's like this:

Game enthusiast media
Game Bloggers

If anyone can elaborate or give me a better breakdown i'm all ears.

 

[ZealousD]

Whoa whoa whoa. While it's fair to point out that he has an inherent horse in this race, it's absolutely wrong to say we don't pay attention to what he says, or we don't value the opinions of journalists in this discussion. That's entirely absurd.

It doesn't come across as somewhat pathetic to you? That he constantly comes into these threads and makes it his primary contribution to the community?

 

[Amir0x]

It doesn't come across as somewhat pathetic to you? That he constantly comes into these threads and makes his primary contribution to the community?

no man, it's his job, and people are criticizing it, it only makes sense that you'd feel passionate and informed about that subject to constantly keep commenting about it.

It's like the way my ears perk up whenever I heard an Earthbound topic... I simply must comment, ya know?

But seriously, jschreier is a good guy, he means well, and he is always generally polite and passionate, and I do believe game journalists on NeoGAF should have just as much right as we do to comment on these subjects. It only makes sense to get the full picture, otherwise we're just intentionally handicapping the discussion, wouldn't you think?

 

[zoku88]

Honestly i'd rather listen to developers talk in interviews or talk to each other than listen to a journalist say anything, you get a bit more honesty there I find.

Well, it depends on how you define honesty. Because those developers still want you to buy their games.

I, myself, enjoy the type of discussions they have on 3MA, where they talk about the design of strategy games (and semi-frequently have a designer on the show as well.) And grill them on why the designed things a certain way. Why they feel it doesn't actually work. Etc.

 

[JesseEwiak]

If the only legitimate way to get those articles is by burying them in that type of content, then the only thing I can say is you have to be willing to accept a wholesale reduction in the potential reputation of game journalism as a profession. And you probably shouldn't get annoyed when people point out that it's really awful stuff, because it is a symptom of a business decision you made. (The universal 'you', not discussing you specifically).

That's journalism in general though. You either work for a publication where something else pays the bills (ie. where you only have people at CNN in random international places because of the ratings from the random missing white girl stories / Sports Illustrated because people buy the swimsuit issue) or you have someplace that's basically living off donations and or a patron (ie. The National Review which has been running at a loss from day one or something like The New Republic, which was just kept on because a Facebook millionaire bought it.)

If people can barely keep The American Prospect open, I quite frankly doubt you could keep a site open for too long that didn't give out grades, didn't accept swag, and had no 'junk' stories. Even someplace like RPS doesn't necessarily have any 'boobs' stories, it's also has a much smaller reach. So, yes, it is a tradeoff.

Now, I do think that maybe Jason shouldn't come in to defend his site everytime somebody posts a link to a random wacky Kotaku story, but at the same time, when somebody posts a link to a Rolling Stone interview of President Obama, nobody says, 'lol Rolling Stone and posts a link to their cover story of Britney Spears or something.'