Games Journalism General

  • Want to keep track of this thread?
    Accounts can bookmark posts, watch threads for updates, and jump back to where you stopped reading.
    Create account
SmileyTimeDayCare said:
Not that I pay attention to it anymore and never will again because it is so corrupt but:

Ratings that actually mean something from an outlet. There has to be some metrics to why this game is a 7/10 instead of feels.

No politics.

Just give your opinion of the game as a game, a metric driven rating and fuck off to the next game.
Click to expand...

That's a major issue with a lot of outlets. Too many people review games at them, so scores mean nothing. Ign alone has over 50 reviewers during any given year. There's no voice or standard. It's just a clusterfuck of wildly different approaches. That's why Youtube reviewers are so much better. ACG being especially great. I don't always agree with his scores, but he's consistent and often I can tell based off his descriptions whether I'll like something or not.

Piss said:
Just tell me what games are coming out, maybe some interesting behind-the-scenes stuff about them. And when they do come out, tell me if you liked them or not. Tell me the ins and outs of the flaws, and what's unique to the game. Basically, just, prove to me you actually enjoy video games, for goodness' sake.

Don't go on a tangent on how everyone of every type needs representation and shit. Or how certain styles are wrong.

If I see the words "diversity", "privilege", or "problematic" used seriously, I'm flat-out closing the article and disregarding everything I read. Those words make me look for a divisive angle that's always there when I see them. In my writing, I purposefully avoid using all three of those words, except in negative contexts.
Click to expand...

I will never get over the PCgamer Rimworld review where the critic complained about cis heteronormativity. 🤦‍♀️
 
For all of them, be they Kotaku and Polygon SJW dangerhairs or OAG and BoundingIntoComics Skeptic fedoras to be killed. Preferably by North Koreans or ISIS members and for said nonpartisan killing to be televised for my amusement on lolcow.tv
 
Game journalism is unnecessary. People get news through social media, devs should release announcements, statements, etc on social media, or on their individual sites, for them to spread around. Reviews should word of mouth or done by individuals, such as streamers, who would play the game in the first place.

I follow some people who filter game news, not the news sites themselves because they're full of BS I don't care for. I want the journo site to get cut out of the line, it's like a middle man and their opinions are always trash.

I read IGN when I was young until a Wii JRPG was reviewed by a guy who never touched JRPGs. Never read another journo site.
 
sophnar0747 said:
That's a major issue with a lot of outlets. Too many people review games at them, so scores mean nothing. Ign alone has over 50 reviewers during any given year. There's no voice or standard. It's just a clusterfuck of wildly different approaches. That's why Youtube reviewers are so much better. ACG being especially great. I don't always agree with his scores, but he's consistent and often I can tell based off his descriptions whether I'll like something or not.
Click to expand...
What's your take on Noah Caldwell-Gervais? I think he's done some amazing work, but he might be a bit too long-form for your audience (whatever that is).
 
I don't want it at all. I haven't looked at a dedicated video game site once in the 8 or so years since GamesRadar had it's talent flushed; all I need is an updated list of upcoming releases with trailers and gameplay. Reviews have always been shit and the only reason to read them is if they're written as entertaining standalone features in and of themselves, but that's not haughty enough for the journalism drop-outs working at these rags; they don't want to write something fun, they want to write serious shit in the hopes of one day freelancing for some division of CNN or Vice. I'll be fucked if I read some jerk-ass huff his farts for eight dry paragraphs about why he gave Kramer's Hentai Adventure a 6.5 on the fun factor scale. Reading about video games should be just as much fun as video games themselves, like old PC magazine articles, otherwise I might as well just play the damn games myself.
 
I want things like PlayStation Underground to come back as discs for modern consoles with interactive demos in them, behind the scenes videos, etc to explore. That shit was cool back then.
 
Recon said:
What's your take on Noah Caldwell-Gervais? I think he's done some amazing work, but he might be a bit too long-form for your audience (whatever that is).
Click to expand...

I actually love long form video essays. So his content is neat. That's the type of content I watch over reactionary bullshit.

Channels like SolePorpoise, Max Derrat, Gameumentary, and others I'm blanking on are the type of coverage I enjoy. It's in depth, well thought out, intelligent, and just enjoyable.
 
Calooby said:
I want things like PlayStation Underground to come back as discs for modern consoles with interactive demos in them, behind the scenes videos, etc to explore. That shit was cool back then.
Click to expand...
And has been rendered obsolete by the internet. It's not just journalism, either. Going to the movies isn't nearly as much of a thing. Watching the news or reading the paper is gone. The arcades died after consoles because we didn't need a middleman to sell us our gameplay anymore. There's hardly anything a games journo can offer us and even if someone does write a stunning article, the signal to noise ration of the modern Internet is not going to do them any favors.
 
Recon said:
And has been rendered obsolete by the internet. It's not just journalism, either. Going to the movies isn't nearly as much of a thing. Watching the news or reading the paper is gone. The arcades died after consoles because we didn't need a middleman to sell us our gameplay anymore. There's hardly anything a games journo can offer us and even if someone does write a stunning article, the signal to noise ration of the modern Internet is not going to do them any favors.
Click to expand...
On another side of things, if you make "feelies" or merchandise that is well crafted, you're bound for customers and followers. It could be something like the Dollar Shave Club or the Dog Treats Club where they create as specifically to their subscribers. Not talking about games journalism on this post, though.
 
purpleboy said:
For all of them, be they Kotaku and Polygon SJW dangerhairs or OAG and BoundingIntoComics Skeptic fedoras to be killed. Preferably by North Koreans or ISIS members and for said nonpartisan killing to be televised for my amusement on lolcow.tv
Click to expand...

What's wrong with Bounding? I've never watched a video of his before, so I wouldn't know.
 
Calooby said:
I want things like PlayStation Underground to come back as discs for modern consoles with interactive demos in them, behind the scenes videos, etc to explore. That shit was cool back then.
Click to expand...
My knee-jerk reaction to this was to agree, based purely off nostalgia, but thinking about it I remember now that demo disks and interactive magazine inserts like that were still commonplace until only recently. OXM kept publishing demo disks with little extras included in them, like avatar items and whatnot, until their U.S. print publication ceased in 2014. PC Gamer tried to create their own Steam app that would have allowed you to play short demos embedded in articles and other nifty little things like that but nobody used it. Extras mean nothing when they're only designed to provide fleeting disposable coverage for other products. Why would I want a demo disk with a level from Vanquish on it when I could just download the Vanquish demo, or even the full game, on it's own? Hell, you don't even need a demo when you can just go on Youtube and skim through live gameplay.
 
Crichax said:
What's wrong with Bounding? I've never watched a video of his before, so I wouldn't know.
Click to expand...
Nothing’s really wrong with the site, but it’ll be funny to watch fat autistic men die
 
Oo, that's a great question.

Personally, I don't go to any dedicated gamer sites, but I do follow individuals who review games.
1) You don't have to be the greatest player in the world. But you do have to be competent enough to convince me you understand how the game works.
2) Bring something extra to the review. Understand the subject the game is simulating (if applicable), and let that inform your review. Tell me something I don't know.
3) Be entertaining. This is hard to define, but a good, amusing delivery will score points.
4) I don't have to agree with your judgment, but I have to respect your opinion.
 
"No politics" is completely untenable. I just wish people would stop being disingenuous and making up shitty interpretation because they don't like something some dev has said like that whole The Last Night fiasco or the faux-woke neolibs who were mad that Night in the Woods didn't have a message about how poor people are subhuman mayonnaise ghouls and therefore was actually pro-Trump n shit like that.
 
sophnar0747 said:
Weird question, but as someone who writes about gaming, its culture, and all of the assorted nonsense that occurs within journalism about those subjects, I'm curious, what do you want out of the medium as a whole? I'm sure most of us agree that the incestuous and unethical bullshit that happens with writers who act as more of a political activist than a gaming enthusiast need to go, but that aside, what do you want out of game journalism as we head into 2020?
Click to expand...

What type of venum are you aiming for?
 
I think there is still a place for journalists in gaming, and amazingly I think that place is... Actual journalism. I don't need a paid game reviewer, that boat sailed when I can read hundreds of autistic reviews on steam from players who are intimately familiar with a game, its genre, etc, probably more so than any paid reviewer. But internet autists can't get a foot in the door of a multinational corporation to grill them on their business practices, or talk to an executive about laws on monetization of kids games. That sort of thing requires a real reporter and not some glorified blogger working for gizmodo.
 
I really just miss the days when I could go on gaming websites and say "this is not an obvious hit-piece against a certain company/game/group of fans". I don't mind political commentary in parts of a larger article, but when you post shit like "I wanted to be more compassionate in Resident Evil 2, a zombie game, and save lives instead of killing zombies" is where it gets grating.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom