And y’all wonder why we keep running combovids and keep letting trolls post on the comments on the front page.
Nah, I already knew it was all about dat paypuh… but $RK could still use some quality control on that shit. Day one shit should never be front page material, but c’est la vie…
As long as people with poor taste and even poorer intelligence have access to the internet and money, someone will find a way to profit from it. Videogame ‘journalism’ is no exception.
Um, I said lovingly designed. It’s kind of assumed that theoretical game in question is good. Anyway it’s not about shmups. You could replace it with some nice little fighting game with only 8 characters and little or no fluff, or some nice little action platformer, or some nice little short but good adventure or rpg. Such games, at best can hope for maybe a “good” review, but they can never hope to get the truly “great” reviews that they truly deserve, the classics that they are (again, we’re assuming that these theoretical games in question are actually great).
Anyway, I just chose shmups (and more specifically, bullet hell shmups) because it’s probably the one sub-genre that is really counter to the whole rating system. If your a professional game reviewer, even if you like a shmup, how can you give a 9 or a 10 to a 45 minute game with sprite based graphics, that costs a ton and that most of your readers won’t be able to beat? No matter how good the game is, it could revolutionize the entire genre but the chances of it getting a review that reflects it’s true merit is pretty much nil. Make no mistake, I understand that the genre is niche and probably always will be, but like I said it’s just an example of how games can’t always get reviews that accurately reflect their quality.
What I’m saying is that games in general need to be reviewed by people who can understand and express their true merit (if any), and not focus on things like “DOES IT HAVE ENOUGH HOURS OF GAMEPLAY TO JUSTIFY THE PRICE TAG???” or other technical aspects that do not relate to the actual experience, the value of the experience, or other such things.
There are other games I can think of in other genres (rpg, adventure, etc.) that I feel like they would get low scores from most reviewers for purely technical reasons, despite the fact that they have wonderful atmosphere, emotion, immersion, etc. I know it’s subjective whether a game can overcome such elements or not, but what’s troubling is not that they often don’t but that they CAN’T the way most reviewing works. And last but not least, it reflects on the way that games to which this doesn’t apply to are being reviewed.
Yea the number rating system has got to fuckin go.
Day 1 shit gets alot of hits. People are either too lazy to develop their own tech or want to quickly be able to find material that they can use to hate on the game.
That said, day 1 GA unblockable super reset tech is legit.
lol,
I’m really not trying to be facetious, but I honestly thought game journalism sucked because it was about video games.
It’s in the same pile of shit as art and film critique, IMO. Writers have to make a living though, it ain’t their fault the system is broken.
What makes you say that? To the best of my knowledge, video game criticism hasn’t produced anybody on the level of a Pauline Kael, David Bordwell, Harold Bloom, etc.
Game journalism has it’s place. Giving interviews, confirmed information on new games, alerting us to stay away from poorly programmed/designed messes. etc.
User-created media like Twitter, Youtube and forums have 2 out of those 3 examples covered, honestly. And GameFAQs tells you everything you need to know about gameplay (in a lowest common denominator kind of way). I understand that gaming journalism in this climate is fighting for scraps… though the final insult are their fans (I said “their fans,” not guys like me who don’t respect gaming media) blocking typically unintrusive sources of revenue, or visiting forums that don’t go out of their way to credit the source.
You may have a point. It’s a lot easier to just gather general information and opinion in these days of the internet.
I think that Penny Arcade is a crap website and all of its contributors are garbage.
Shopenhauer already solved this shit ages ago.
http://ebooks.adelaide.edu.au/s/schopenhauer/arthur/essays/chapter1.html#chapter1
Some of you guys are getting off topic, but that’s to be expected on any game forum :lol:
You have a good point however, I’m a fan of numbered review scores because numbers in tandem with what the reviewer says they represent give a clearer picture to me of how the reviewer approaches the game than just the review alone. I like seeing why person X gave game Y score Z, it’s fun to get a peek into that nerdy part of another person’s brain. However, like I said before more often than not review scores do not serve that intended purpose for reasons described in detail in Squire’s link.
Well written game journalism such as the great preview articles and debate topics brought up in Game Informer (haven’t read GI in 2 years) can’t be replaced with social networking sites, and gamefaqs tends to break games down in a very dry, scientific way as opposed to a reporter style deluge of information game media outlets do. Both have their place. Oh and for the record am I the only person who finds it so ironic that Game Informer can have such great coverage of upcoming games and issues within the industry yet their reviews are absolute dog shit? I’ve always wondered how they got one half of their publication so right but the other half so horribly wrong. And by wrong I don’t mean me disagreeing with the review scores they give although that was often the case but that they often misunderstand the actual mechanics of the games they review and make it so obvious they spend less than a few hours actually playing said games before writing their reviews. More than a few times I’ve played a game and then read the GI review and blatantly see them say things that are factually false and I wonder do they even do fact checks for reviews anymore?
Video games, especially modern ones often have very close ties to the film medium however, they are fundamentally too different to compare and thus the critics of both mediums approach them differently . I could easily say the Jeff Gerstmann is the Roger Ebert of video game criticism, but that would not begin to encapsulate what either has done for the critical eyes of their respective mediums, it really is apples and oranges. However I posit a question to everyone:
Who are your favorite game journalists? And would you donate a few dollars to them directly if it meant they could write whatever good shit they write on their own professionally designed site with no advertising or corporate bullshit attached?
No, criticism is criticism. It requires first of all EXPERTISE which none of the journalists and media outlet reviewers have. If you want to learn about fighting games, you talk to experts on FG forums and get their “unofficial” reviews which are better than everything you’ll read from an official paid reviewer. That’s why criticism as a business is fucked up. Also if you have any respect for the depth of a fighting game, you’d understand that you can’t review it at launch, nor a week later, nor a month later. The gamers who want to get their reviews ASAP have no respect for depth, and would rather have a shallow review now than a masterpiece a year down the line.
BTW I ALREADY threw my money at the videogame review website I respect, and it was way more than a few dollars.
You cut and paste the entire article lol
I don’t whitelist. I just regularly subscribe or donate to the sites, services or twitch channels that I feel are worthwhile** if there’s an option to** (this part is highlighted because I haven’t seen that option for a certain site in a while). Most ads are way too obnoxious or intrusive now that nobody in their right mind is gonna want to sit through… let alone click on them just to see the content they really came for.
I’ve been saying for years that reviews need to eliminate scoring system, but now that I think about it, it probably won’t happen.
These sites thrive on the complainers and flamers because they’re actively clicking on a page to complain and flame. They might not like the score, but in the end the site wins because they’re getting hits over the controversy.
Real reason gaming journalism sucks:
- Because video games aren’t important. Seriously, they just aren’t.
- Because the behind-the-scenes stories of video games aren’t actually very interesting. Seriously, compare how different the day-to-day is of a pro athlete. Then compare it to your average day. Night and day, right? Then think about the digital asset manager of Rockstar Denver, whose day consists of drinking coffee, checking his email, and asking if those screenshots are ready yet. I had trouble not Xing the tab just writing that.
- Because there’s nobody to interview. Think about the NFL. You have 32 teams, each with a coach, each with a handful of household names. Meanwhile, how many major video game developers can you think of? Even harder, think of how many American game developers that you can name. I’d bet that most of you can’t name five.
- **Because there’s nothing to talk about if you interview them. **That’s the biggest thing. Short of those entertaining behind-the-scenes stories from trainwrecks like Aliens: Colonial Marines where people are willing to anonymously open up about how horribly things went wrong, there just isn’t that much that would actually be interesting to talk about in the game industry. If I sat down and talked with Reggie Fils-Aime, we all know it would go like this:
Me: So tell me about X UPCOMING GAME.
RFA: It’s gonna be ballin’ yo.
Me: What went wrong with X SHITTY GAME?
RFA: Well (bullshit goes here), which made it successful in (bullshit goes here).
Me: Any chance we see X SEQUEL THAT IS NEVER COMING OUT?
RFA: (Half-hearted laugh goes here). Well, we know fans are really wanting a new game in that series. While we love the enthusiasm, we aren’t ready to announce anything quite yet, but we want fans to keep sending their support.
Ok in lieu of point one being the adblocking:
I don’t adblock just to do it. I actually find the process quite tiresome and a waste of time for something I shouldn’t have to do. Ads have a purpose and I have no problem with them. HOWEVER I DO have an issue with being “forced” into things.
I can’t speak for everyone but at least for me I have a LARGE issue with being forced into things (might stem from a problem with authority but who knows.) All I know is that if you do something that not just casually informs me of something but flat out interrupts my life and I did not personally initialize, I get angry. So when you have a site containing ads that:
[list]
[*] Places/moves/adjusts itself to the center of my screen WITHOUT prompting me first
[*] Plays music or sounds WITHOUT me initializing it myself (such as the stupid M&M song I have to hear when I DON’T EAT CHOCOLATE - SRK…)
[*] Repeats over and over
[*] Is placed in an area that I HAVE to cross to get to the content (so basically FORCING me to initialize the ad in my attempt to get to the content - Speaking to you SRK)
[*] Basically just interrupts my online experience in any way WITHOUT my DIRECT consent AT THAT POINT AND TIME (meaning the answer “you gave your consent by coming to the site | clicking the link | visiting the page | etc” is NOT a valid answer). I have to click that ad on that particular experience)
[/list]
than for that particular moment, fck your ads, fck your articles, f*ck your site. Period. I have NO issue giving money to those in need. I have no problems buying products from ads. In fact MOST if not near all of my purchases in anything other than food/drink (necessities of life) come from online ads. Basically, I have no qualms in purchasing things from companies or sites EVEN if the product has NOTHING to do with what I came to the site for. But the second you try and force ANYTHING onto me, I don’t care if it’s a pocketwatch that can stop time, I will NOT buy it JUST for the simple fact that you forced it onto me; like/need the product or not.
Bottom line: take a second to properly choose the type of ads your site houses or companies that you work with as the type of ads on the site determines whether I allow them be (as I would prefer) or if they are to obnoxious to be allowed to function. I understand the struggle trust me I do, but I won’t lie to you in this. My personal experience online not being f*cked up is MORE IMPORTANT TO ME THAN YOUR PAYCHECK. PERIOD. It’s selfish I know but let’s be honest… if your ads weren’t so PUSHED into my face I would have NO reason to block them would I not? Aight then, next subject.
Secondly, while I sympathize for the plights of you writers/site owners/etc and COMPLETELY understand the reasoning behind the sh*t articles and over-sensationalized titles, I really need to ask a question here: Does me NOT blocking your articles stop all of that? Like If everyone stopped blocking their ads all at once, would every shit article be IMMEDIATELY taken down and never put up again because it sounds to me like the process would STILL suck but just revert back to BrokenProcess V.1. So no… I don’t feel that funding this broken process is going to help it get where it needs to be but just perpetuate it endlessly within this vicious cycle. It’s time for a change. It’s time for a REAL monetization process to be implemented so this cycle can end. Some ideas were thrown and I kinda like them. Like I said I AM WILLING TO SPEND MONEY ON YOUR SITES. Just not to shit and when the product is forced down my throat.
Try something new. Calculate how much a person is worth a week/month/year and set up a subscription option based on that. Add a donation button. Offer small incentives. I purchased so many twitch chat icons it’s ridiculous and I NEVER USE THE CHAT! I just find them hilarious and I like to own things even when I don’t use them (like a coffee maker - bad habit I know but eh if it looks nice and I got the extra cash…). Tailor your ads to your site and your articles. I can’t TELL you how many times I’ve purchased things just from having the right ad at the right time (SRK I’m talking to you - Madcatz). Possiblities are out there, people just need to stop trying to fix/endure the current system and chuck it for onw where everyone wins.
WHAT INTEGRITY???
Game Journalism has NEVER had it!
From day one when the first multi-game console contests began – Atari 2600 Vs Bally Astrocade Vs Whoever-Else-Launched a cartridge-based console in the second half of the 1970s --, there’s always been a slobbering, biased fanboy element to the videogame industry reporting… In other words, like any outlet that covers an area of entertainment, they cuddle up to whoever the industry leader is and basically b$%w them!
I’m older than at least 90% of the people who regularly post on SRK – including most of the game importers and arcade parts vendors. I find it funny people speak of “objectivity” and “lack of bias” when such things are not humanly possibly! You can have an educated opinion but that is NOT the same thing as fact. That’s a subtle distinction that I think over 60% of the people who post here STILL don’t get it… They believe if they yell and type something enough, that makes it so [fact]!
It’s unfortunate that videogame journalists have historically been no better in any other field of reporting. (It’s debatable whether entertainment reporting is as bad as corporate news reporting covering politics and industry. I still feel the latter’s is even more corrupted and more untrustworthy. Unbiased reporting is even less likely when it’s beholden to and OWNED by the same entities they’re reporting on.) Videogame journalists are even more biased when they work directly for industry companies (Nintendo, Sega, Sony, Microsoft) and/or on officially licensed magazines like the late Nintendo Power. When their paycheck depends on them being positive about first-party product, you can expect them to go positive on whatever said-first party company releases even if it’s the worst Sonic or Mario Bros game ever released.
Bias is even worse when you have very clear game industry leaders such as has always been the case (excepting a few close “neck-and-neck” years) since the 32-bit console era of the mid-1990s. That’s when it’s a “bad time” to be a fan of the second or third-place game console in sales. I’ve got the bruises from the Sega Saturn and Sega Dreamcast eras to prove this! The bandwagon mentality really kicks in when one console outsells its competition are least three or four-to-one and you can expect to be the most abused kid on the block if everybody else owns the “number one” system regardless of the amount of shovelware released on it… It’s amazing how stupid people get about having to be like everybody else and own the same shit their friends and classmates have even if the consoles and games aren’t particularly to their likes. It’s a dumb way to waste money, IMHO.
But then again, I’ve never been particularly drawn by “who’s most popular” and go after what interests me most and whoever I think will deliver the best bang for my buck… There’s too much going on in the world and not that many years in life to be so concerned about what everybody else thinks.