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
Y’know what, let’s pretend the whole “but you can skim through a book, why can’t you do that with video games” argument actually had weight; it would still be a shitty argument. Different media provide different kinds of experiences, so of course a video game shouldn’t be expected to have the same qualities as a book. It would be like whining about a book not having pictures even though movies do.
 
Y’know what, let’s pretend the whole “but you can skim through a book, why can’t you do that with video games” argument actually had weight; it would still be a shitty argument. Different media provide different kinds of experiences, so of course a video game shouldn’t be expected to have the same qualities as a book. It would be like whining about a book not having pictures even though movies do.

In the context of someone that is employed to review something it makes it both sad and asburd that they are trying to come up with reasons for why they can't do their work while asserting that they are the only ones qualified for the job. Literary critics can't exactly shrug and say they skimmed the first quarter of a book then wrote the review. Restaurant critics can be temperamental cunts but they won't give a place one star just because they saw a couple kissing at another table and it reminded them of their ex-girlfriend and it filled them with jealousy.
 
Not sure if this thread is also for game critics, but this KingK faggot annoys the shit out of me. This dude literally says that the special stages suck because they're "not connected to the world"


 
Y’know what, let’s pretend the whole “but you can skim through a book, why can’t you do that with video games” argument actually had weight; it would still be a shitty argument. Different media provide different kinds of experiences, so of course a video game shouldn’t be expected to have the same qualities as a book. It would be like whining about a book not having pictures even though movies do.
If I read a book review and halfway through the author said "Well I had to rush this review out so actually I just read the summary on the back of the book" I'd say that person didn't do their job.
Same deal with a video game. How on earth can you tell me if a game is good or bad when you won't play it?
 
Ars Technica put out an article praising Death Stranding for having a games journalism difficulty. It's the same tired argument of a "a book doesn't make you take a gatekeeping quiz to keep reading it!"
Meanwhile, Kotaku thinks fighting games need to be an olympic sport.

Speaking of Kotaku, Jason Schrier is still salty about not getting a review code for Borderlands 3.
Which I'm sure had no baring on Kotaku's decision to bash the game in there review of the first 6 hours of the game.
Ok, so whatever happened to cheat codes? Do we really need to make games so easy to the point where they play themselves?
 
Ok, so whatever happened to cheat codes? Do we really need to make games so easy to the point where they play themselves?


They realised it was easier to sell you them as DLC. I miss cheat codes as it was a totally new way to play a game - after a crappy day there was nothing like activating god mode and laying waste to everything in your path. I've no problem with very easy modes though, as for me games are meant to be enjoyed. For some, that comes with ultra-hard challenges and for others it's just about experiencing the story or levels.
 
Ok, so whatever happened to cheat codes? Do we really need to make games so easy to the point where they play themselves?
One possible reason is that dev tools have changed. Console games are now made more like PC games with developer consoles and licenced engines. There is no need to write a "cheat code" to skip to a specific level or give yourself all of the weapons to test things any more.

Well there is a reason why game journos love walking simulators and cinematic games, they're so lacking of gameplay to the point they feel more like watching a movie than playing a game
The fact they are made by their friends doesn't hurt either.

I was going to make a joke about game journalists getting a blow job in exchange for a review, but that got me thinking about if there will ever be a game journalism #metoo moment.
 
One possible reason is that dev tools have changed. Console games are now made more like PC games with developer consoles and licenced engines. There is no need to write a "cheat code" to skip to a specific level or give yourself all of the weapons to test things any more.

uwot? how do you think games get tested (inb4 "modern games getting QA")?
as others said they either get sold (codemasters was one of the first doing it back then with colin) or put in as unlock for achievements etc, but the main reason you don't see free cheats anymore are achievements. can't have someone fudge the precious gamerscore, how could people e-peen with it otherwise? and since it's a lot cheaper to just flag it off than put in extra modifiers most devs/publishers opt for that.

Wasn't Zoe Quinn trying to start one before Alec committed suicide?

nah, she was just looking for another easy payday, there was no greater plan behind it.
 
uwot? how do you think games get tested (inb4 "modern games getting QA")?
What are you talking about?

If you were making a game for a console (let's say the Sega Megadrive), you would have to play the game on real hardware at some point. You can't exactly hook up a keyboard and bring up a dev console. So if you wanted to test a weapon, instead of having to play through the entire game every time, you a simple code to get everything and try it out.

PC games never had this restriction. That's why cheats on PC involve bringing up a dev console and typing in a command instead of elaborate combinations.

From the Xbox 360 onward, cheats codes disappeared. Consoles were similar enough to PCs and even used the same engines. You didn't need to boot it up on real hardware every time you tweak something. Even if you did, you could plug in a keyboard and use that for your commands. Generally speaking, you don't want console players to easily fuck around with the dev console because they cause any number of problems.

Wasn't Zoe Quinn trying to start one before Alec committed suicide?
She was trying to start one in the indie dev scene, not the games press.
 
From the Xbox 360 onward, cheats codes disappeared. Consoles were similar enough to PCs and even used the same engines. You didn't need to boot it up on real hardware every time you tweak something. Even if you did, you could plug in a keyboard and use that for your commands. Generally speaking, you don't want console players to easily fuck around with the dev console because they cause any number of problems.

and guess what became more prominent during with the 7th gen? "stupid console players" also means nothing when they could literally brick their xbone by fucking with developer mode. before that devs never needed to put in cheat codes either because even way back they used devkits and certification usually doesn't use cheat codes to begin with (else you get fun stuff like tokyo xtreme racer 3's yen "conversion").
the other reason you don't get a dev console is especially sony is super paranoid about someone breaking out of their walled garden, hence everything being locked down tight (same reason mods are castrated in general and even more on ps4).

TLDR cheat codes disappearing has nothing to do with with the development process.
 
Imagine being paid to write articles about what video game pornography you watch and how you make your Sims characters engage in semen cafe orgies and whatnot. Truly and honestly an example of true and honest journalism :lit:

By the way, she's one of the exceptional individuals who gave careercow Ana Valens/Phil Wythe's troon smut visual novel Blood Pact a flamingly positive review.
 
Porn's worse than humor. If it doesn't appeal to you personally, it's going to make you go "ew" no matter how good it is. I really think it's almost impossible to do a reasoned critique of it.
 
Porn's worse than humor. If it doesn't appeal to you personally, it's going to make you go "ew" no matter how good it is. I really think it's almost impossible to do a reasoned critique of it.
Eh, like any review I think as long as you make it clear just how subjective your perspective is, it can be done. And if all else fails you can look at the technical aspects.

But that would require talent to pull off well, and a willingness to accept to accept that other people can disagree with your perspective without taking it personally - neither of which, I suspect, the woman who wrote the article possesses.
 
Back
Top Bottom