New Games Journalism

Kotaku has a piece up today mentioning a style of video game editorializing called The New Games Journalism. This piece links to several others. State Wiki has a piece from early this year on what New Games Journalism is, and an examination of its goals. An example of the style is available on the Eve Online site in the PC Gamer article All About Eve. (large pdf) A seminal work referenced when discussing the style is Bow, Nigger, a sharply written and gripping piece about a duel in Jedi Outcast. From the editorial: "For one thing, my screen name has nothing to do with my ethnicity and for another, it's only a game and the fascist doing the typing is probably hundreds of miles away and far beyond anything you could call an actual influence on my life. But still... It's not very nice is it?"

Comments

What game journalism needs

[Anonymous Coward]

A Consumers Reports/Union for gamers. It would take no advertising money, and be funded only by subscribers. Yes, it would cost a little more, but you'd be sure the reviews weren't bought and paid for by the gaming companies.

Re:What game journalism needs

[Anonymous Coward]

Um, why not just use gamerankings.com?

Reviews being "bought and paid for" is not the problem. The problem is that game journalism tends to develop bias completely on its own even without bribery. This is kind of inevitable. Games are art and as such quality is subjective. If journalist A honestly thinks Halo sucked and journalists B, C and D think Halo is great, who is to say who is right? These are opinions, not facts, that we are working with here, and so mr. A's review would be just as valid as B, C and D's. However if you are the kind of person who would tend to agree with mr. C's assessment, then mr. A's journalism won't be of much use to you.

Re:What game journalism needs

[Golias]

Games are art and as such quality is subjective. If journalist A honestly thinks Halo sucked and journalists B, C and D think Halo is great, who is to say who is right?

Which makes game reviews totally different from movie or music reviews.

Oh wait, no... it's exactly the same. There really is nothing new about "game journalism", except that it's typically done by far, far less experienced writers.

Re:What game journalism needs

[Anonymous Coward]

Well, that was sort of the exact comparison I was trying to draw with the "games are art" comment; a "Movie watcher's union" that subsists without advertising isn't necessary, and even if there were it wouldn't produce unbiased or universally applicable reviews any significantly more often than advertising-based sources do.

Re:What game journalism needs

[Anonymous Coward]

Coral cache of pdf

Re:What game journalism needs

[Elwood P Dowd]

it wouldn't produce unbiased or universally applicable reviews any significantly more often than advertising-based sources do.

I think the advertising complaints are due to a few standout crappy sites. Gamespy and IGN are completely, 100%, worthless shills. I have never once visited their sites without regretting it. Penny Arcade is advertising supported, and I find every single one of their articles to be worth reading. But when people are complaining about advertiser bias, they're talking about IGN and not Penny Arcade.

Re:What game journalism needs

[superpulpsicle]

Best game journalism comes from ebgames.com and amazon.com review posts. These are people who buy the game or tell you straight dirt or what sucks or broke.

Their messages are short to the point, and they review it for the love/hate of the product for no money. The reviews come from people of all backgrounds, sex, diversity, age etc. What journalism is more pure than that?

Re:What game journalism needs

[ViolentGreen]

There have been plenty of isntances reported where an author reviewed his own book multiple times. I seriously doubt that game companies don't have people (officially or unofficially) doing this.

Besides, that's not jounalism.

Re:What game journalism needs

[Anonymous Coward]

Well, the messages would be a lot shorter if the "reviewers" would leave out a few exclamation marks. Luckily, they do save space by spelling "you" as "u", and avoiding all that extra room normally occupied by capital letters, commas, and full stops.

Seriously, though, I do find Amazon game reviews helpful, once I do the preliminary "fan boy" filter. In fact, I think Amazon would have a great service going if they let you exclude messages containing the letter "u" surrounded by whitespace, or more than one exclamation mark.

Re:What game journalism needs

[generic-man]

Are you serious? Take a look at the number of reviews posted by fanboys on EB and Amazon.com -- people who post a 5-star review of a product that hasn't even shipped yet, people who post a 5-star review solely to cancel out someone else's 3-star review, and so on.

On many review sites, voting becomes an act of advocacy, which basically means that everyone's shouting at each other. I'd rather read a few professional reviews than a thousand shouted blurbs.

Re:What game journalism needs

[ewhac]

If journalist A honestly thinks Halo sucked and journalists B, C and D think Halo is great, who is to say who is right? These are opinions, not facts, that we are working with here, [ ... ]

Um, what? There are plenty of metrics on which computer games may be evaluated that aren't subjective.

Your example of Halo is well-taken. I bought Halo for the PC and, overall, I would rate it as an average game. Why? Because its technical execution on the PC was quite flawed. Despite having a dual-1GHz Pentium 3 system with half a gig of RAM and an nVidia GeForce 5900, the framerate and responsiveness of the game was chunky as all hell. It's not like the geometry was all that complex, or that the machine was a slouch.

Are the graphics smooth? Are the controls responsive? Is the network play (if present) smooth and tolerant of dropped or delayed packets? Does it require unusual system specs? Does it benefit from custom peripherals (e.g. joystick, steering wheel, gaming pad, etc.)? Does it demand you place the CD in the drive to play it? Does it require you to install invasive spyware and provide personally identifiable information before the game will deign to run? These are all objective criteria, and are crucial for evaluating the purchase of a $50.00 product.

Schwab

Re:What game journalism needs

[Infonaut]

Which makes game reviews totally different from movie or music reviews.

I think one of the things that differentiates movie and music reviews from game reviews is that the craft of reviewing movies and music is predicated on there being something other than stylistic differences to review.

Video games are art, but in most respects the vast majority of video games radically favor style over substance. A FPS game is not making a statement about anything. It has no opinion. It can be stylistically amazing and very exciting to play, but there is no statement that can be reviewed.

Now think about music. You may not like Public Enemy, but they obviously are putting out a message that you can at list critique. Britney Spears is generally panned by critics because she is not really making any artistic statement. She's a prime example of style over substance.

First Person Shooters currently rule the roost in video games. What is the message of Halo 2 or Killzone? In many ways they all share the same message, which is that killing huge numbers of living opponents is a good thing. How much more can you say about the message behind such a game?

Re:What game journalism needs

[neura]

A less experienced writer is no less qualified to give you a useful opinion or list of facts about a game.

I find that "well experienced writers" simply do not give you the information necessary to decide on the purchase of the item in question. They tend to polish their text and method of conveyance so much that the purported reason for their writing of the article borders on invisible. That and they tend to spend too much effort/time glorifying or destroying a particularly small point of the game instead of covering it completely.

Re:What game journalism needs

[Beyond_GoodandEvil]

That killing "living opponents" in a virtual world is better than killing an opponent in the real world? Or what does is say about society as a whole that killing is so much fun? Where is Master Chief's motivation coming from?

Re:What game journalism needs

[DeadScreenSky]

That machine was a slouch in the CPU area. Barely faster than an Xbox CPU, but with all that 'wonderful' Windows overhead. Halo1 may not have a lot of geometry, but it features tons of shader effects, large environments, advanced AI, and bump maps on everything. (Not a lot of PC games have done some of this stuff prior to Halo, so drivers and everything simply weren't tuned for the game's requirements, which just exasperated performance issues.) Gearbox should have certainly done a better job on the port, but your machine had a pretty big weakness. :D

And a problem with your criteria is this - most games sold today exceed your requirements (ex: see most console games). Where do we go from there? Meeting a technical level is great and important, but ideally most games are going to achieve that. We need to be able to go further...

Disregarding that, I do agree a similar review check should be made on all software (especially for framerate, being relatively bug-free, and controls). But I think we should treat it as a basic requirement - it shouldn't factor into the game's 'important' score like it does now ("One star off for a bad framerate!"). It should just be a separate score, a simple yes or no. Then the game's content should be reviewed separately.

Right now if a game has a good story, or fun multiplayer, or some other really positive factor it can somehow outweigh basic unacceptable faults like a crappy framerate. That isn't right - devs need to be held to a certain level of expected technical quality. We don't really see films released that are unintentionally lit incorrectly, right? It needs to be that if a game can't work correctly, it completely fails some kind of very important criteria. No amount of quality in the rest of it should let it avoid that mark of shame.

Re:What game journalism needs

[Infonaut]

Or what does is say about society as a whole that killing is so much fun?

I would ask a slightly different question, which is this: What does it say about our society that it is so difficult for anyone to make money selling games that don't involve killing or exploitation? Is it that game designers can't think outside the violence paradigm, or that most attempts to do so make less money? Either way, The Sims and Myst are the exceptions that prove the rule.

All About Eve

[Anonymous Coward]

I was hoping this was an article about 80's and 90's goth-rock music group, All About Eve, but sadly no, it is merely an article about some online game :(

Oh, that'd explain the gaudy blue colourscheme ...

Re:All About Eve

[Anonymous Coward]

The whole article appears to be a cleverly disguised GNAA troll. How else do you explain the link in the summary?

Re:All About Eve

[Anonymous Coward]

I thought it was the classic 1950 movie All About Eve.

This isn't journalism.

[Anonymous Coward]

It's blogging.

Re:This isn't journalism.

[FortKnox]

Yeah... everytime I hear about 'new journalism' its always blogging.

We have to remember that, sure, it may be viewed as journalism, but what it shouldn't be viewed as is 'news' nor 'fact.'

Re:This isn't journalism.

[Anonymous Coward]

As opposed to, say, painfully obvious fake memos on CBS?

The best blogging is a lot more accurate than much of today's slanted "journalism."

- Crow T. Trollbot

Re:This isn't journalism.

[zaren]

The "Bow, Nigger" piece may just be a blog, but it's a much better written piece than the vast majority of the blogs I've seen. It may be a bit light on the actual details of the game, but it told me a lot more than any commercial or screen shots on a web site have shown me. It showed a bit of not only the mechanics of the game, but the culture of the world it's created. I found it very insightful, and made me a bit more interested in playing the game.

Re:This isn't journalism.

[Anonymous Coward]

Look at the root of journalism. Journal.
You provide for an audience a word picture of circumstances and/or events based on your perception. You may try to stay as close to the dispassionate facts as possible in reporting these things but it is still being viewed through your own personal filter. Different people who are trained to be "impartial" still have the tendancey to see things differently.

Re:This isn't journalism.

[Minwee]

What it showed me is that "Wankers play JKII online", "Macroing is rewarded" and "There is no reason not to cheat".

That made me even less interested in playing it than I was before.

Re:This isn't journalism.

[Lemmy Caution]

Perhaps. But that may be more information than most reviews give. Instead of a bland piece about the game as a piece of software, you get something about the game experience in total here: what it actually feels like to play it (for this person, at this time.) That's far more information than I usually get.

And the fact that, at the end, he won over that race-baiting creep, made it very satisfying.

People need to get over it.

[Nosf3ratu]

A word is a word. I'm a whole hell of a lot of ethnicities (Irish, Native American, German, Romanian, Polish).

When someone calls me a nazi, a dumb pollock (sp?), or an Indian (hint: Native Americans are not from India, idiots.) I do not get offended. Because they're words.

[Insert something about twigs and rocks]

Re:People need to get over it.

[Anonymous Coward]

[Insert something about twigs and rocks]

I'll give it a whirl:

Twigs and rocks may be bollocks,
but you can suck my rocks.

Re:People need to get over it.

[Anonymous Coward]

There was this one time, at "Bugsy's Bar" in the Flamingo Casino in Las Vegas, where some Tony Soprano-wannabe bartender told my friend and I (Brits on gambling holiday) that he was "proud to be one quarter Scots-Irish". We asked him if he had ever been to Glasgow, Edinburgh, Dublin or Belfast and he told us (get this!): "Not yet, but I've always wanted to visit Australia".

Absoloutely fucking priceless.

Re:People need to get over it.

[Rude Turnip]

"...(hint: Native Americans are not from India, idiots.)..."

Yeah, really. You'd think everyone would know by now that they're of Asian descent.

Re:People need to get over it.

[gobbo]

Sometimes, words cause the killing, maiming, and screaming to start. It's worth paying attention to those words. The words themselves don't hurt, but the results do.

Call me a baldheaded cracker; I don't care really, because at the end of the day my paleface still gives me (subtle, but noticeable) privileges.

Here's a hint: with most words, context is everything. There are a hundred ways to use the word "right" -- and some of them are threatening.

Re:People need to get over it.

[GeorgeWBorscht]

Dad??

Re:People need to get over it.

[snuf23]

I never really understood why "Native American" was considered a PC term.
I mean it wasn't America until the West made it America.

Re:People need to get over it.

[rpillala]

The article isn't about the word "nigger."

I'll post something useful instead of just leaving it at that, so maybe it will be worth your time to read the article:

The author starts by describing a decline in gaming magazines and their sales and speculates on two options for improving profitability. The bean counters (the author thinks) will want to increase profits by cutting costs (labor costs) on the assumption that the actual writing in the magazine is irelevant. The editors should take a different approach, which is to make the magazine better by writing about games in a different way. He uses "Bow, Nigger" as an example of a different and better way of writing about games.

Along the way, the author understands that it's very very simple to write a buying guide and simpler still for a fanboy to do it. It's my opinion that game publishers (the bean counters) wouldn't mind publishing something in which all games are recommended.

Re:People need to get over it.

[mc6809e]

I never really understood why "Native American" was considered a PC term.
I mean it wasn't America until the West made it America.

Would you prefer "stone-age peoples of North America"?

Re:People need to get over it.

[Nosf3ratu]

Good point, but it never was India.

Re:People need to get over it.

[Dekks]

I dunno, sounds like something a Drunken Irish Nazi would say.... :)

Re:People need to get over it.

[Anonymous Coward]

Hint: Americans who throw a random "and Native American" or "part Cherokee" into their ancestry just have a grandparent who liked to tell stories. If you're not on a tribal roll, or at least have a direct ancestor who was, you're not an Indian.

Re:People need to get over it.

[cheeseSource]

Stictly speaking it isn't PC anymore. Aboriginal is more appropriate. Yes, aboriginal and native mean pretty much the same thing...And because of the location it still ends up being Aboriginal American which completely defeats the purpose...

Yes, I have aboriginal descendents.

Re:People need to get over it.

[gunnk]

I think the point being made was that no one living here prior to European colonization called the continents of the western hemisphere "America", so it struck that poster as odd that Native American should be considered the politically correct term.

Personally, (and my grandfather was a mix of Cherokee and Sioux) I prefer Native American over "descendents of aboriginal peoples of the western hemisphere", especially since the peoples of the Americas didn't actually have any word denoting the land masses now known as the Americas. Of course, for myself I usually just stick to "mutt" as I'm a major mash-up of Native and European heritage (two tribes and at least 4 European nations).

Re:People need to get over it.

[Anonymous Coward]

Indigenous works just fine.

Re:People need to get over it.

[WIAKywbfatw]

I'm sorry but I disagree. I find it offensive when I see people using labels like "jew" or "nigger", or language such as "rape" online. It's not because I'm black, jewish or a rape victim, it's because this sort of language just isn't necessary.

And it's not about being labelled anything because I get just as offended when I see other people being targeted, it's because that displaying that level of idiocy and bigotry isn't something that 99 percent of the perpetrators would have the balls to do in real life. As the Penny Arcade "shitcock" strip illustrated, the anonymity of a public server just seems to draw a certain amount of sheer stupidity and bring out the moron in otherwise rational people.

I swear, if half these idiots had the faintest idea of what it's like to be sexually assaulted then they'd never use the word rape in jest. If they have the slightest idea of what real violence felt like then they wouldn't think of threatening to track someone down, rape their family in front of their eyes, kill them and then start on you (as one less than well-adjusted young man once did to me) just for besting them in a 1v1 matchup.

Seriously, there are some gamers who are clueless imbeciles when it comes to what they say and do, and it seems to me that the proportion of gamers who you'll come across like that online is far greater than the proportion of people who you'll come across like that in real life.

Frankly, I don't need it: I play games to enjoy myself not to encounter racial hatred. And online gaming doesn't need it either: it's this sort of anti-social behaviour that gets gaming a really bad name.

Re:People need to get over it.

[Nosf3ratu]

Your post makes excellent points, and I hope it as modded up as so. My initial statement was not in reference to hate speech in general, nor was it specifically talking about the use of such words in online gaming (or slashdot).

What I take great offense to is when someone goes on a literary witch hunt against classic novels because a character uses "nigger" in dialogue. Such censorship all for the sake of "political correctness" is abhorrant and should be laughed out of a court of law.

And it's not partisanship. Both parties (moral majority and PMRC, for example) are guilty of these types of actions. It needs to stop. It's a word.

Furthermore, it's a synonym. I'm against the censorship of dialogue such as in the same fashion that I'm against the notion that "poo" is somehow more proper for "shit". The definition for each is digested food that smells really bad and comes out of your (ass|butt|anus|hole|chocolate railroad).

Re:People need to get over it.

[Reignking]

Well, we're all good then, since India is in Asia :)

Re:People need to get over it.

[BorgCopyeditor]

What I take great offense to is when someone goes on a literary witch hunt against classic novels because a character uses "nigger" in dialogue. Such censorship all for the sake of "political correctness" is abhorrant and should be laughed out of a court of law.

True enough, but is this really happening? Or are you just getting worked up at the thought of it happening? And why is that, anyway?

Re:People need to get over it.

[jIyajbe]

I am offended by people calling it the "western hemisphere"! This is true only because the evil British overlords have defined where East and West begin and end (Greenwich, England).

I have a right to my viewpoint as to which hemisphere I live in!

Re:People need to get over it.

[Anonymous Coward]

yeah whatever, you're white.

Re:People need to get over it.

[necro2607]

Everything someone says is merely a "word". It's the idea behind the words that bothers people... If someone makes fun of me, obviously I don't care about the word either. What bothers me is the idea the person is expessing, for instance if they're implying I'm a less "valid" person than he/she or someone else is... It's the whole feeling of someone else indicating to you that they feel you are "below" them in some manner, and the feeling that someone else is hostile towards you when you don't feel you deserve it.

"Sticks and stones may break my bones but words will never hurt me" is probably the most misguided defensive statement I've ever heard, seeing as how it's an outright lie, as evidenced by the extremely noticable reactions essentially all people have to insults/taunting etc.

Re:People need to get over it.

[Anonymous Coward]

See here, which contains relevant links: http://www.hpana.com/news.17495.26.html

It happens. More so in the mid-90s when everyone was going apeshit over "political correctness."

Hadda post anonymously because of some retarded limit on /.

Re:People need to get over it.

[dastardly_villain]

Calling Native Americans, such, always seemed like a slap to the face to me. Like, "Yeah, you were here first but, y'know, we're here now. How aboput we work something out where you can borrow your own land?"

Re:People need to get over it.

[Anonymous Coward]

Rape: To destroy and strip of its possession; "The soldiers raped the beautiful country"

This is the context I use rape in. I was raped by lady vox last night. This doesn't mean sex, this means she beat my royal ass. And it fits in with the description. Its a good word to show that something was done forcefully. A word can have more then 1 meaning. For example, hacker.

Re:People need to get over it.

[thrash242]

Not really.

I'm a native American, meaning I was born on one of the American continents. I'm not an aboriginal American, however, as my ancestors relatively recently (in the grand scheme of human history) came over from Europe.

So I think Aboriginal American is more correct.

Re:People need to get over it.

[Anonymous Coward]

Here's a little thought for you to chew on a bit.

"No one can offend you without your permission."

I wish I could remember who I first heard say that, but it really opened my eyes a bit. Someone can call you all sorts of nasty things that you'd rather never hear spoken, but they don't decide that you're offended, *you* do.

Being offended is an emotional response. You don't have to let your emotions rule your life. You can simply decide *not* to give someone permission to offend you. Joe Schmoe can insult you all he wants, but he can't offend you unless you *let* him.

Re:People need to get over it.

[WIAKywbfatw]

So where did this alternative meaning of "rape" come from? It came from people actually using violent sexual behaviour - the traditional meaning of the word "rape" - to describe how they beat someone. It's not "a good word to show that something was done forcefully", it's using violent language to project violent imagery.

There are a hundred better ways to describe beating someone in a game - "total domination", "whooping someone's ass", etc - and a fair proportion of those wouldn't be to everyone's liking but "rape" is hardly a word that's a readily acceptable alternative to 99 percent of the population, and definitely not to 50 percent.

Is it any wonder that gamers get easily stereotyped as mal-adjusted geeks with poor social skills when language as colourful as "rape" is considered a harmless part of their lexicon? Come on, would you use it to describe to your girlfriend, wife, mother or grandmother how effectively you won a game? I don't think so, and I think you know why.

Re:People need to get over it.

[gobbo]

That's called restitution, dude. (Yeah, ok mods, I've taken the bait of a troll.) While it may be unfair in most applications, and almost always a bureaucratic bungle, quota programs are an attempt to address the ongoing, unfinished results of centuries of abuse. You are obviously just too ideologically mired (or just plain parochial) to see how skin privilege actually works on the grand scale. Every time I've been to the USA, I'm struck by how in-your-face this residual madness is.

You don't have equality in the 'States, despite half-witted quota programs, and you won't for a long time. It isn't as simple as the "Sneetches."

Re:People need to get over it.

[gobbo]

especially since the peoples of the Americas didn't actually have any word denoting the land masses now known as the Americas

A fairly common cross-cultural legend on the continent commonly called it "Turtle Island." That name is now in vogue in the aborignal community, at least in Canada.

Re:People need to get over it.

[Telastyn]

While I don't disagree on the anti-social behavior conclusion, I am curious to know if you really think that the people you describe as idiots online and rational in real life actually are rational?

To me anyways, it seems like these people would [and do] continue with their lack of empathy whenever there's no consiquence for doing so. The internet provides such a lack of consiquence, as does certain other 'asshat heavy' areas like freeways and sporting events.

Once again imo, it doesn't matter if people can behave politely in real life if they still hold such prejudices.

Re:People need to get over it.

[Catnapster]

I swear, if half these idiots had the faintest idea of what it's like to be sexually assaulted then they'd never use the word rape in jest. If they have the slightest idea of what real violence felt like then they wouldn't think of threatening to track someone down, rape their family in front of their eyes, kill them and then start on you

Your assertion is fallacious. By your logic, if they had the slightest idea of what real violence felt like, they wouldn't be playing first person shooters (where most threats of this type are made), which are games in which you pretend to kill people.

The important thing to remember about these slurs is that they're just words. Words mean different things to different people. The intent behind the words is much, much more important than the word itself. "Nigger" can be a terrible racial slur, or part of a friendly greeting. I have heard it used both ways. Personally I do not use the word - it doesn't make sense to me as an insult (seeing as I don't hate people of African descent) , and as a white male, I would probably be putting myself in physical danger if I ever tried to use it the friendly way some African-Americans do.

Maybe I don't know about this kind of thing because I'm a white American middle-class male, and we all know that if you're part of this privileged group, you're virtually untouchable. So I guess you can disregard everything I just wrote. Sorry for wasting your time.

Re:People need to get over it.

[Aim Here]

I find it mildly ironic that people are in uproar over words being used to describe one form of violence spoiling their online gaming - i.e. mimicking in gory detail and with anatomical precision the mass slaughter of one team of guys by another team.

Games are all about trivialising violence, and you're usually playing the part of a killer or dictator or some other nasty type. It's a slightly odd double standard.

(Not that I'm defending the moronic racist/sexist/homophobic/xenophobic gibberish I come across in my regular counterstrike sessions)

Re:People need to get over it.

[FortyTwoFish]

Wrong, the definition of rape as forcible sexual assault came from the "pillaging" definition, because usually, when a city or village was pillaged by Romans, barbarians, etc., survivors were often abducted and sold into slavery. This was referred to as rape. Now, the modern definition likely arises from the fact that many of those slaves were taken for sexual purposes, but the original definition is still valid.

Re:People need to get over it.

[Saeger]

"rape" is hardly a word that's a readily acceptable alternative to 99 percent of the population

The problem is that you take yourself and language too seriously. I assume that you're probably over 30 now, and you consider being a P.C. conservative a mark of professionalism and adulthood.

The juvenile language used on gameservers is just colorful fun; It's not a serious insult. The funny thing is that I tend be way more "offensive" on servers that have automatic censorship filters in place. I consider censorship to enforce disneyesque worldviews like yours way fvcking more offensive than being called a gay nigger or a dumb cunt.

Re:People need to get over it.

[WIAKywbfatw]

Come on, be fair, in the modern usage of the word what springs to mind? And ask 100 or 1,000 people to define it, what do you think they'll be describing?

Re:People need to get over it.

[WIAKywbfatw]

I hate censorship as much as anyone else here on Slashdot but what I'm not talking about censorship, I'm talking about respect for other people.

Would you walk up to some random guy in the street and call him "nigger" or "jew"? If you were playing pool against some guy you'd just met in a bar and you totally outclassed him would you tell him that you've just "raped" him? No? Why not? Is it perhaps because such language would be offensive and inappropriate?

The fact that he's two foot away from you and could easily take a swing at your head factors into the equation just a little bit too, doesn't it? It's a lot riskier situation than doing the same thing online when you're hiding behind the anonymity of the Internet, isn't it?

Re:People need to get over it.

[Anonymous Coward]

(What you're saying is a non-sequitur, but still)

Oh thank God you're here to decide for other people what parts of their heritage count or not.

Hint: You don't get to decide other people's history. If they have a grandparent of some ethnic background, and they claim that - they can damn well claim it.

Your statement reads like those ethnic minorities in America who pick on successful kids in their community for "trying to be white". Give it up please. If they share the same background, they can claim it, or not, as they wish.

Re:People need to get over it.

[Anonymous Coward]

Have to reply to this - an attempt to address the ongoing, unfinished results of centuries of abuse?

Please explain, if the past is what's keeping "the people down", how recent immigrants and refugees can do so well, when they come into the country with absolutely nothing?

You have children of Vietnamese peasants who are top scholars, and doctors. Refugees from Africa who can become multi-millionaires.

And yet someone who already lives in the country can't make a go of it, because 10 generations ago they had one relative who was abused?

Okay. Whatever you say.

Re:People need to get over it.

[Anonymous Coward]

Ahh, but the insensitive are in real life as well as in the game. If they're boring enough to use such language, at least there you can cut them in two; where as in Real Life, you've rather no options at all.

Let them play as they will, and be who they are. It's us and it's them, and it's primal and exciting that way. And it's a game, and it's time to die.

Bow down you sons of a bitches! Forces of good.... engage.

Re:People need to get over it.

[gobbo]

Please explain, if the past is what's keeping "the people down", how recent immigrants and refugees can do so well, when they come into the country with absolutely nothing?

Well, Mr. Coward, a little homework into what it's like having your traditions stripped from you, your land and livelihood robbed, your language denied, your worth measured in either death or ducats, and the nature of culture (hint: it isn't individual, it's multigenerational), and you might begin to be able to answer your own question. It isn't the past keeping people down, it's the ongoing fruits of past policy. Try googling for 'effect s of slavery' and 'residential schools' for a start.

For what it's worth, I know millionaire lawyer First Nations people ('Indian' to Americans) and federal politicians from the Black community, and of course successful immigrants. They all acknowledge their own hard work, as well as noting the ongoing institutional violence directed at some of their communities and residual damage that hasn't healed yet from three generations back. Part of their hard work was in overcoming those obstacles, not just in entrepeneurship.

The myth of the american melting pot leads to a blindness about the nature of cultural transmission.

Re:People need to get over it.

[Anonymous Coward]

First Nations is good, as it respects their POV rather than the POV of the European invaders.

They brought as parrots and balls of cotton and spears and many other things, which they exchanged for the glass beads and hawks' bells. They willingly traded everything they owned ... They were well-built, with good bodies and handsome features ... They do not bear arms, and do not know them, for I showed them a sword, they took it by the edge and cut themselves out of ignorance. They have no iron. Their spears are made of cane ... They would make fine servants ... With fifty men we could subjugate them all and mke them do whatever we want." --Christopher Columbus

Re:People need to get over it.

[Anonymous Coward]

First Nations is a better term, as it respects their POV rather than the POV of the European invaders.

They brought as parrots and balls of cotton and spears and many other things, which they exchanged for the glass beads and hawks' bells. They willingly traded everything they owned ... They were well-built, with good bodies and handsome features ... They do not bear arms, and do not know them, for I showed them a sword, they took it by the edge and cut themselves out of ignorance. They have no iron. Their spears are made of cane ... They would make fine servants ... With fifty men we could subjugate them all and make them do whatever we want." --Christopher Columbus

Re:People need to get over it.

[Fig, formerly A.C.]

That's called restitution, dude.

I never did anything that I need to be punished for. Why am I forced to make restitution for anything? That's silly.

(Yeah, ok mods, I've taken the bait of a troll.)

Nope, not a troll. Trolls post A.C.. I'm just someone with something to talk about who is not afraid of avoiding a "taboo" subject. It's not a fair situation, and I won't pretend that it is by keeping quiet.

While it may be unfair in most applications, and almost always a bureaucratic bungle, quota programs are an attempt to address the ongoing, unfinished results of centuries of abuse.

Again, I didn't do the abuse, why am I paying for it? It's time to level the playing field. You can't create equality while legislating perks for ANYONE.

You are obviously just too ideologically mired (or just plain parochial) to see how skin privilege actually works on the grand scale.

No, and no. I just don't think it is fair to slight againt anyone. Hey, white folks are people too. Don't we deserve a fair shake at things? Don't we deserve the same rights as anyone else? Does my white skin make me inferior? Then why don't I have the same rights as anyone else?

Every time I've been to the USA, I'm struck by how in-your-face this residual madness is.Go walk around a minority community and see how you are treated, then come back here and tell me that the in-your-face madness is one sided.

You don't have equality in the 'States, despite half-witted quota programs, and you won't for a long time. It isn't as simple as the "Sneetches."

I agree, but all these laws do is reinforce the schism. Make everyone truly equal under the law, and the social aspects of it all will work itself out in time.

Re:People need to get over it.

[Fig, formerly A.C.]

He has a point. Like it or not, the main obstacle that minorities need to overcome is their own culture. Past atrocites aside, sometimes you need to just get over it and get on with it. Adapt. Survive. That includes dressing/acting/speaking in such a way to get that job you're after, even if it doesn't reflect your "culture". I hate dressing up, but I did it to get my job and I do it to keep my job. I have to adhere to the standards of the employer. I can't tell you how many people I saw interviewing at places I've worked who were unwilling to make that step, and were not hired because of it. That's not just here, that's anywhere in the world.

The problem wasn't what's happened in the past, the problem is that history is now a crutch to avoid doing what everyone else has to do to survive.

Re:People need to get over it.

[cheeseSource]

Good point. You could use native vs. aboriginal to speak about individual vs ancestors. The problem word though is American. Since aboriginals were here before it was America there is debate about whether it's an appropriate term.

Re:People need to get over it.

[thrash242]

America is just a name for the Continent(s). They're aboriginal to this continent. I don't see what the problem is. They aren't called Native/Aboriginal Citizens of the United States, but Americans, meaning aboriginal/native to the continent. What would you prefer them to be called, "Aborigines of That Large Landmass in the Western Hemisphere Across the Atlantic from Europe that Was Inhabitied only by Said Aborigines Until 1492"? I don't think all the tribes that lived here had one name for the whole landmass, did they?

I don't go for the whole politically correct thing and don't have any sort of moral objection to calling them "injuns", but I think aborigines is just more accurate.

Re:People need to get over it.

[gobbo]

I never did anything that I need to be punished for. Why am I forced to make restitution for anything? That's silly.

It isn't about you, it's about this entity called society, which is the aggregate of its citizens' behaviour over time. Your interaction with society involves this interaction with the continuity of society's history; every time you walk into a Carnegie library, you're interacting with the continuing legacy of robber-baron philanthropy, with all its mixed bag of ongoing historical implications. In the same way that our children et. al will have to deal with our toxic dumps, we have to deal with our toxic socological remnants.

Saying 'why should I pay taxes / be inconvenienced / be refused access in order to clean up that problem' doesn't make the problem go away. The half-life of oppression is probably greater than an order of two generations.

I didn't do the abuse, why am I paying for it? It's time to level the playing field. You can't create equality while legislating perks for ANYONE.

This IS about levelling the playing field. The economic effects of years of prejudice continues. Levelling the playing field without filling in the holes isn't effective. I think that one of the issues here is that the ideological emphasis on individualism obscures the actual workings of collective behaviour. Think of the social security crisis, and how people are looking forward to how unfair it will be to those paying in to the system in 30 years. Another issue is the North American cultural denial of the existence of class, which leads people to seek other explanations for their troubles.

Go walk around a minority community and see how you are treated, then come back here and tell me that the in-your-face madness is one sided.

That's what I meant. My first visit to Chicago was stunning: I thought such segregation was limited to places like Johannesburg. Sure it goes both ways. You want people to be happy and patient with the situation?

all these laws do is reinforce the schism. Make everyone truly equal under the law, and the social aspects of it all will work itself out in time.

I agree that they probably do reinforce schisms, given the general ignorance about how the present includes past effects. Making everyone truly equal--even defining what is equal--is much more complicated than you suggest. Legislation like that generally ignores structural problems and focuses on specific documentable behaviours by individuals. Do you think that structural problems will naturally self-correct in a reasonable period of time? Then again, you seem to be ignoring (or denying) those structural issues.

Don't we deserve the same rights as anyone else?

The issue, here, is that you have more rights (in practice, if not in legislation). If economic benefit doesn't accrue, why bother investing or saving? The benefits derived from treaty-breaking expropriation of land is evident in real-estate speculation, for instance, and people are looking at how some corporations still exist that benefitted directly from slavery. (If you think that corporate law isn't fundamentally flawed, and that in fact yes, they should be given the rights of an individual with none of the responsibilities, they why yes, there are still 'people' around who directly stole labour through slavery--implicating the shareholders.)

Education isn't working very quickly, so the government decided to be a vanguard and lead the way. I'm not defending their boneheaded execution of a solution, but I am defending the attempt to fill in huge holes in the playing field.

Re:People need to get over it.

[gobbo]

Like it or not, the main obstacle that minorities need to overcome is their own culture. Past atrocites aside, sometimes you need to just get over it and get on with it. Adapt. Survive. That includes dressing/acting/speaking in such a way to get that job you're after, even if it doesn't reflect your "culture".

Oh, I agree that we all take personal responsibility, and cultures and subcultures take collective responsibility, in order to improve things. No kidding!

However, stating that that's all they really have holding them back is just ignoring enormous social problems that are "overdetermined"--that is, they are shored up from many angles and processes--and doomed to failure. At worst, it is a form of "blaming the victim." "If she didn't dress purty, she wouldn't get raped" just doesn't fly anymore, unless you're advocating Taliban values.

The problem wasn't what's happened in the past, the problem is that history is now a crutch to avoid doing what everyone else has to do to survive.

This is a half-truth. Crutch to some, yeah, no doubts. History isn't just the past, however. What do they teach people in high school history these days? Isn't it obvious that history is an ongoing process? Social systems are complex, like fluid dynamics. Drop a pebble in: the mineral is on the bottom, but the pond continues to respond. Remnants of old processes persist, and a drop of water can't do much about it. Past atrocities don't just stop--I have friends with murdered parents. You tell them to ignore its effects on their upbringing. I have friends who've lost everything to fraud and are left with burdensome debts. You tell them to not go bankrupt. I have friends who were sexually abused as children--tell them to ignore that and see what happens.

Generally, all those success-story exceptions you might come across will tell you that they had to work harder than the competition to get accepted, sometimes MUCH harder. The individual can overcome, but society is an aggregate, and greater (or, well, lesser) than the sum of its parts. Both levels must be addressed.

You didn't actually read the linked piece,

[Anonymous Coward]

did you?

Because this doesn't seem like it responds in any coherent way to the linked piece except that it does involve some sort of word.

Imagination is all it takes

[NightRain]

I hope this "new style" of games journalism doesn't catch on. I mean sure Bow, Nigger was an interesting read, but it didn't actually tell me anything useful about the game, other than it's good enough to let the authors imagination fill in all the details required to have a good gaming experience.

Given that any game will fit that requirement when played by the right person, the whole thing becomes a little meaningless...

Re:Imagination is all it takes

[Anonymous Coward]

Agreed. These pieces are great- AFTER the traditional coverage has gotten all the "facts" out of the way (data? info? speculation?). It's writing with all prose and no exposition. It might be nice to read, but it accomplishes little- or worse, can give the author a lot of leeway to make a game seem like more or less than it is, by simply only relating their like/dislike without a broad focus on the usual features and summar of industry hype.

Re:Imagination is all it takes

[crashfrog]

Do you think it just might be possible that one could read or write about video games for a purpose beyond simple consumer awareness?

When your local university has classes on film criticism, do you mock them because they're considering greater questions than whether or not "Blade: Trinity" is worth seeing this week at the multiplex?

Get over yourself, for a minute. As surprising as it must be, it's possible to have thoughts about the video game experience beyond "should I buy this or not?"

Re:Imagination is all it takes

[thistle]

Except he has actually captured the one thing a demo can't. The emotional aspect of becoming a part of a game. Why do you need a reviewer to explain the graphics, the controls, the endlessly pedantic list of details that would be answered with a ten minute download and 2 minutes of gameplay? This is like asking someone to describe a picture when they could just print the damn thing. I want to know the things you can only know after tens of hours of obsessive and total devotion to a gameworld. I want to know how it is going to feel. I want a small hint at who I will be in this game. I want to know what it will mean to me.

Re:Imagination is all it takes

[NightRain]

Well I must have missed something, because I thought the entire purpose of the article was alternatives to traditional reviewing style. My comment was made in that context. If you're seeing another context, then of course my comment won't apply.

When your local university has classes on film criticism, do you mock them because they're considering greater questions than whether or not "Blade: Trinity" is worth seeing this week at the multiplex?

Firstly, I don't remember mocking anyone. It was not intended as a sarcastic, biting comment, it was just my thoughts on the matter.

That being said, if I went to a class on film criticism, I'm sure they would do more than simplytalking about conveying the personal experience you have when watching a film. That might be a valid part of it, but surely you need to deconstruct the film at least a little.

Re:Imagination is all it takes

[NightRain]

Why do you need it? Because without it, him describing his personal experience is simply no use at all in determining what your own experience will be like. The author obviously loved the game, but was that because the graphics were so great they immersed him? Or was it simply because he loved Star Wars, and any game that allowed him to have a light sabre duel online would invoke such a reaction in him?

He describes a purely personal experience from a purely personal perspective, which makes for great reading, but not for a good review.

Bear in mind, I am criticising the article from the point of view of a review, and from that point of view only.

Re:Imagination is all it takes

[crashfrog]

Well I must have missed something, because I thought the entire purpose of the article was alternatives to traditional reviewing style.

No, it was to point out that the term "video game journalism" has other meanings besides "holiday shopping guide." Which apparently still hasn't occured to you.

Re:Imagination is all it takes

[NightRain]

Lose the personal attacks huh? I told you how I interperated the comment/article. No need to snipe away at me because you saw it differently.

Wow.

[Telastyn]

I'm honored that a professional games journalist would take so much time and effort to write a formal essay which states the obvious fact that something like Penny Arcade casually talking about the games they play is far far more useful to me a consumer than slock ign/gamespy/gamespot reviews.

I never would've figured that out.

Re:Wow.

[Attaturk]

I think the Penny Arcade Vs. 'establishment' games media argument has striking parallels with the Jon Stewart's Daily Show Vs. 'real' news networks argument.

Penny Arcade has people light-heartedly talking about the way it is, not simply regurgitating obvious nonsense just like the games companies and corporations would like.

The Daily Show has people light-heartedly talking about the way it is, not simply regurgitating spin and propaganda just like the administration and its supporters would like.

I think the positive upshot of that is that the great unwashed, the mainstream public, the consumers, whatever you want to call them, seem to be finally wising up. If you publish or broadcast nonsense, spin, marketing drivel or a barrel load of cliché then it's pretty obvious that your audience is starting to leave you in favour of something more intimately connected with truth and public opinion.

Re:Wow.

[Kurrurrin]

The Daily Show has no spin? What channel are you watching? John Stewart places enough left wing spin on the subject matter it'll make tops dizzy. I'm not saying that its not funny, but to say it has no spin is like saying peanut butter doesn't stick to the roof of your mouth.

Re:Wow.

[Attaturk]

I disagree there - no surprise heh - The Daily Show presents fake news, satire and comedy. If you think satire directed at the administration is left wing spin whereas satire directed at, let's say, the Democrats is not then we need to have a talk about subjectivity. ;-)

Additionally neither Penny Arcade nor The Daily Show claim to be authoritative news sources - they're satirists. My point was not necessarily that they are more trustworthy than the regular news channels, but that they are perceived by the public to be so. This isn't so much an endorsement of PA and TDS as it is a slamming indictment of the regular news channels.

Oh and I never said that there was no spin on TDS - I simply implied that its sole purpose was not to regurgitate spin like say, Fox News does.

Re:Wow.

[zaffir]

Making fun of republicans is considered left-wing spin now?

Re:Wow.

[Anonymous Coward]

If you publish or broadcast nonsense, spin, marketing drivel or a barrel load of cliché then it's pretty obvious that your audience is starting to leave you in favour of something more intimately connected with truth and public opinion.

Unfortunately from the perspective of a broadcaster or publisher this is not a problem of using too much spin, but a problem of not using the right kind of spin. The solution is not to abandon spin but to simply incorporate superficial aspects of "truth and public opinion" into your spin methodology. "The O'Reily Factor" demonstrates that all you have to do is label your spin "not spin" and you will get the exact same effects-- from a popularity standpoint-- that you would from actually speaking honestly with your viewers.

Re:Wow.

[Anonymous Coward]

Whatever.

There's some truth to a joke they had on that show a while back, "the facts are biased against the Bush administration". heh. Your viewpoint seems to reinforce that.

Re:Wow.

[Kurrurrin]

Durring a campaign, when you mainly praise the other candidate... yes. ;)

Re:Wow.

[Kurrurrin]

I'd say that there wasn't spin on the show if the satire directed was even, but it wasn't, not in the least. During the campaign, Bush was lambasted while Kerry had to survive the occasional cursory remark, often dealing with something more superficial as opposed to idealogical.

I understand that the show is satire. However, when satire is unevenly applied, even in a fake news setting, it is spin.

PS: Kerry recieved the most positive press for a candidate in at least 20 years. To say that the press was all for Bush is a bit naive.

PPS: Stewart already beat you to the punch on slamming the regular news channels. ;) In a rather hilarious way, no less.

Re:Wow.

[Kurrurrin]

I voted for Badnarik, so whatever indeed. Seems I'm the only unbiased one here ;)

Re:Wow.

[Anonymous Coward]

You must have only watched the Bush camp segments.
Kerry was portrayed as the undead feading on peoples souls/brains.
As a clueless peg board.
As lots of not so nice things.

PS the top poster was pointing out the subject of your PPS.

Re:Wow.

[zaffir]

I cannot think of one instance of the Daily Show praising Kerry or any Democrats. Did you see what they did with the democratic national convention?

While game magazines may be going downhill...

[tcopeland]

...books about programming games seem to be doing fine. At least, Charles River has published a bunch of high quality games titles, including the excellent Game Programming Gems series.

They're also starting a Journal of Game Programming, which looks nifty in an academic sort of way. But that's the way game programming seems to be these days - either you're a content artist or you've got a PhD in physics and can speak fluent assembler.

Re:While game magazines may be going downhill...

[Anonymous Coward]

You, sir, are both a thief and a murderer, for you have killed a baboon and stolen his face.

Re:While game magazines may be going downhill...

[headisdead]

However happy I am with the contetion that games magazines are going down hill, I'm not sure that the State Wiki article really solves the problem: namely, print media is trying just as hard to come to terms with the fact of the internet. If what makes the distinction between good and bad journalism is its similarity to the specialised press, then its really about professionalism. And as far as I'm aware, the author of "Bow, Nigger" is not a professional journalist. Therefore, in meiner Meinung, the point should surely be that as we become aware of the increasing diversity and (often) prolificacy of sources of journalism--across all genres--we're going to keep finding great writing like this around, and a lot of bad writing. But people are becoming as skilfull with their own filtering out of this information as any aggregator, using various tools and reading techniques. I think it calls for celebration of this, rather than industry-specific worrying.

Jedi Outcast and Jedi Academy

[Anonymous Coward]

Am I the only person who loves trolling on "RP" servers?

eve-online

[joeldg]

eve-online is quite a fantastic game.. and it does not surprise me to see it listed here.
The entire world has a very rich history and in the game you can actually go sight-seeing and compare to the histories and see all the stuff referenced.
If you are a EO gamer, take a jaunt over to New Eden and see some of the huge ancient structures..

Re:eve-online

[Anonymous Coward]

Been there, done that. AFAIK I was one of the first to go there in the full game. I was bitterly dissapointed to find the complete lack of any money making opportunities and got podded several times on the way by idiots thinking I was trying to steal their Arkonor

A summary in English?

[Anonymous Coward]

"The New Games Journalism" is horribly written. Who are the money-men? What is a year-zero? Can someone translate this crap into English?

The cleverness of "Bow Nigger" and the other

[Dark Paladin]

And of the Eve piece (just finished reading it) is that unlike normal "reviews", you don't wade through "here's how you play, blah, blah, blah, and then you click this".

The author in both pieces inserts just enough information so you get the ghist, and you understand why it's so enjoyable. I read "Bow Nigger" some time ago and nearly fell out of my chair with enjoyment. After reading several reviews of "Jedi Knight II", this was the first piece that made me want to go play it - right now.

Not every game review should be like this - but I'd rather read 100 "Bow Nigger" tales than yet another "Halo 2 rocks because it's pretty!" Tell us why you loved it - and don't bog me down in the details, tell me why you liked it. What part? What scene in the game? Was there a moment that made you go "woah", or was it just the constant puzzle of trying to find the best place to stay alive with the adrenaline pounding in your ears?

Anyway. Just my $0.02.

not hard journalism but human interest

[gmknobl]

The "Bow, nigger" piece is not any new type of journalism really. It's just a new area to report on. This piece is more a human interest story when you break it down. Mixed with loose sci-fi I guess. So is it journalism? I guess, if you into reading about playing games. This story, particularly, is more about how involving and how much of an alternate life (for those without one?) OMRPGs can be. Not a comforting look at the field IMO. But I don't see it as bringing anything new to the field of journalism. I mean, this writer is just reporting on what he did that day. Which makes it more a log or diary than anything else. Yeah, it's journalism but it's nothing new at all.

Re:not hard journalism but human interest

[gmknobl]

Hmmm, so I'm moderated down as Overrated? And that's the second one too. Probably some right-wing looser probably had nothing better to do than downgrade an statement he disagreed with. Such is the way with a public anything these days.

I wish I could open the second link...

[Anonymous Coward]

But seeing as I am at work, no way!

Ahem, I'm sueing unless the piece is changed to

[Nine Tenths of The W]

"Make a gesture of mutual respect in a non subservient manner that is not reminiscent of slavery, Jedi of colour."

Re:Ahem, I'm sueing unless the piece is changed to

[Dark Demon]

Our overlords of Jesusland would prefer us to use the term, "Jedi not lacking color".

I've read sharper and grippier...

[Anonymous Coward]

...in some goth blog. Or it would be more accurate to say I've stopped reading much later. If this is the new games journalism, I'll stick with the old-fashioned just-the-facts-ma'am Joe Friday old-school games journalism.

Bow, Nigger

[Anonymous Coward]

I have not RTFA, but does this Bow, Nigger have anything to do with Gary Nigger?

There are millions

[Jakhel]

of these assholes in the online gaming world who think that it is cool or funny to call someone a nigger. I'm willing to bet that the majority of these dumbasses are little kids who wouldn't dare say the word in public, or to a black person's face for that matter. In fact, I would bet that you can't get in 1 hour of gaming in any FPS without hearing some kid, who sounds like they haven't even reached puberty yet, saying "hang all niggers, lynch them blah blah blah". It really fucks up the gaming experience.

The percieved anonymity of the internet has allowed cowards and ignorant fucks all over the world to show their true colors. The worst part about it is that your kids, and possibly even your coworkers, are probably some of them! Good to know that we've made such great strides towards eliminating social inequality.

Re:There are millions

[Nine Tenths of The W]

TBH I've found more anti-semitism. If someone doesn't know your ethnicity you're far more likely to be called a dumb Jew than a stupid nigger. IME

Re:There are millions

[Johnboi Waltune]

Most online games will ban players who use racist language. I remember in Ultima Online, I had several kiddies banned for using racial slurs. Other than banning everyone under 18, complaining about these individuals is the best way to clean up the game.

Re:There are millions

[Mr Guy]

See, in Everquest we tend to go with "Damn idiot". I guess petitions and bannings really do work...

Re:There are millions

[Anonymous Coward]

Agreed. You'd be suprised at who you're talking to on the net. Anonymity on the net goes both ways (Ironically, this coming from an AnonymousCoward! =). Personally, being a black myself , that word means nothing to me. It's ether. Something self-conscious people use to try and get a rise out of you.

That said, it isn't what the article is about...And Blogging as journalism is definitely old news.

Re:There are millions

[rjelks]

They sound like kids, but I have a bad feeling a lot of the players you're talking about are more into the 20-40 age group. I'm all for anonymous, free speech, but I do see the downside to it in this context. All you can really do is stop playing or frag the h*ll out of them.

Re:There are millions

[Anonymous Coward]

Spoken Like a true kike!

Re:There are millions

[PylonHead]

Yea, but homophobia's got them both beat.

Everything is gay, and everyone is a faggot.

Re:There are millions

[Anonymous Coward]

Spoken like a true butt pirate. :)

Re:There are millions

[BorgCopyeditor]

See, in Everquest we tend to go with "Damn idiot"

Oh, great! So you just assume they're going to hell!

Re:There are millions

[Zangief]

Then, become more skilled with the sniper weapon of said game, and camp the shit out of those racist-homophobic idiots!!!

Re:There are millions

[Holi]

nah that would be "Damned Idiot", I think the parent is just trying to help them on their way.

Re:There are millions

[kfg]

I'm willing to bet that the majority of these dumbasses are little kids who wouldn't dare say the word in public, or to a black person's face for that matter.

I take it you haven't met Rex Cramer. Danger seeker!

KFG

Re:There are millions

[Anonymous Coward]

This behavior occurs because:

1) Most people are secretly racist

2) A lot of gamers are kids and teenagers with lots of testosterone and undeveloped, developing or inherited notions of group identity

3) Online games create a competitive environment where winning boosts self-esteem and "psyching out" opponents is a valid strategy

4) Online games create an anonymous environment where antisocial behavior is not checked by fear of actual harm or harm to reputation

Re:There are millions

[Anonymous Coward]

it's not about the actual meaning of the word. it's just a funny word. it's funny because it's so antiquated, and so shocking. to some, shock value is funny. to those who don't like stuff like aqua teen and mr. show, because you start to think just a LITTLE too much about why you have no sense of humor, well, i can't help you. but i'm in my mid 20s, have friends the same age, and calling people niggers is just a cheap way of testing peoples insecurities and senses of humor.

Re:There are millions

[CliffEmAll]

I have to agree. I find that almost all people I meet who are racist are age 30 and above. And I don't mean it in the sense of using racial slurs and talking about hanging people, although that does happen too. My parents, for example, have never said anything I can remember that was a specific attack against black people, but anytime they tell me a story or something they always mention the race of the people involved, as if it is extremely important to understanding the story. I think it is just a holdover from when segregation and lynchings were the norm. Children, on the other hand, seem to be completely oblivious to race.

Re:There are millions

[Anonymous Coward]

The best Kentucky Fried Movie reference... Ever!

Re:There are millions

[Anonymous Coward]

5) They're probably Republicans

Re:There are millions

[Anonymous Coward]

And if you say it to a black person's face, it will become a cheap way of getting your ass kicked. Trust me, I know.

Re:There are millions

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm for mixing both. Ban everyone under an arbitrary age (12,18,21,40) and then go for the people who are old enough to know better but still act like asshats in game.

appropriate?

[dr.fishopolis]

am i the only one here who feels it's horribly inappropriate for the editors to allow the words "Bow, n*****" to be underlined and highlighted in the top article of the front page of slashdot?

I honestly can't believe I'm looking at this

Re:appropriate?

[JPelorat]

Voldemort!

Re:appropriate?

[Zorilla]

I'm with what George Carlin said about this one. The word has no harmful intent in and of itself; it's all about the context in which you use it.

This article did not use it to directly demean black people, so it's pretty much safe.

Re:appropriate?

[rhakka]

yes, you are. grow up and read the piece.

Re:appropriate?

[lukewarmfusion]

You're being too sensitive. The word's context is that of a quote (read the article). There is no racist usage of the word except from the quote in the story - a phenomenal writing about a game, by the way.

Re:appropriate?

[dr.fishopolis]

oh, it's my immaturity that doesn't allow me to see the benefit of highlighting and underlining "bow, nigger". thanks for clarifying this for me.

Re:appropriate?

[Anonymous Coward]

You probably aren't the only one, but that doesn't mean you aren't a hyper-sensitive idiot, too. I suspect that you probably expect them to replace "Bow, Nigger" (which, by the way, is the name of the article linked to, thereby making the way in which they linked it perfectly acceptable) with something like "this article" to be as inoffensive as possible. You probably also cringe when reading through a directory listing at your local library, too, don't you? Look at all those books and articles with dirty words in the titles! Like, OMG!

Reading Richard Wright and Langston Hughes probably gives you a horrible case of the screaming heebie-jeebies because because they both use words you think are offensive in their writing from time to time, doesn't it? You're probably one of those jerks who would change the title of "Black Boy" to "Boy of Color" to assuage your latent and misguided feelings of guilt if you had the chance.

Yeah, slavery was bad. Racism is bad. Don't practice them. But also don't pretend bad stuff never happened and try to cover up all hints that it may have. How else will anyone ever learn right from wrong?

Get a clue.

Re:appropriate?

[Anonymous Coward]

highlighting and underlining "bow, nigger"

Perhaps because it's a hyperlink? If you don't like the underlining, adjust your browser preferences.

I agree with the other poster, though -- read the article, *then* come back and post.

Re:appropriate?

[KD5YPT]

Um... its a link to an article detailing a gamer's experience against a fucktard. I think the phrase pretty much sums up the attitude of said fucktard.

Re:appropriate?

[KD5YPT]

Its "He who must not be named". Please do not traumatize the kids.

Although I seriously doubt those in the magic community will resort to such primative and ineffective form of communication we muggles called the "internet".

Re:appropriate?

[rhakka]

You're welcome. Now pull your knee jerk reaction back and read the fricking piece and you'd understand why it's not a problem. However you just stop at seeing the words and freak out.

Immature, hypersensitive, or stupid, I guess you can take your pick.

Re:appropriate?

[dr.fishopolis]

ok, all you people are right, it's entirely ok to leave "bow nigger" underlined in a headlining piece, absent of context except for a link you can click on.

your sophomoric strawman arguments about what i also must believe are a nice touch.

now, i have read the article, and i can honestly say i don't get it. It's some guy whining about being mistreated online, who by the end really thinks he's fighting good and evil by playing a 3 year old, average, FPS.

Is gamining journalism really worse off for not making regular use of sentences like "Blammo." and words like "wanker"? I just don't get it. You may now go back to your strawman attacks.

Re:appropriate?

[dr.fishopolis]

yes i "freaked out" and had a "knee jerk reaction" by calmly calling something inappropriate. nice to see slashdot has become just another usenet flame spot for the angst-ridden crowd, lates

Re:appropriate?

[Anonymous Coward]

Now, let's make this REALLY clear.

"Bow, Nigger" is the title of a pretty good article.

A Slashdot editor chose to link to that article.

When linking to an article, using the title of the article as the link text is generally considered to be the right thing to do.

Nobody chose to highlight and underline those words. They simply used those words as a link, and your web browser underlines and highlights links. On my browser, for example, the words "Bow, Nigger" were a different color until I read the article, and basic black now. No underlining anywhere to be seen.

Get over it. Using racist terminology with the intent to insult is bad. Using it in a casual, descriptive sense is bad. Discussing other people's use of racist terminology, and the potential motives behind such use, and the emotional response to that use, and the appropriate reaction to such use, is a GOOD thing. Even if it's only one small aspect of the article in question. Of course Slashdot should have posted that.

I sure as hell DO NOT want to live in a world where Slashdot can't post a link to that article simply because the title includes the word nigger.

For the record, not that it makes any difference whatsoever, my parents are brown, one grandparent black as night, one grandparent white, one grandparent as close to pure native american (Taino) as you can find in Puerto Rico. My wife is white, my cat is orange, and my dog is just plain scruffy.

Re:appropriate?

[Anonymous Coward]

"knee jerk reaction" by calmly calling something inappropriate

A "knee-jerk reaction" is when somebody reacts immediately upon seeing/reading/hearing/etc. something. You read the word "nigger" and posted your "this is inappropriate" post before examining the article to see if:

a) it was relevant
b) it was informative
c) it was in no way related to what you thought

So yes, I'd say that's exactly what you did.

HAND.

Re:appropriate?

[snorklewacker]

It's the name of the fucking article written by a black man who didn't let some racist moron destroy his fun. Grow up.

Re:appropriate?

[Anonymous Coward]

> it's all about the context in which you use it.

Like how "Vulcan" is out of context in your sig?

Re:appropriate?

[gclef]

Seriously, read the story that's linked there. The story has that title for a reason. No, it's not a good word, but it's still just a word. It won't kill you, it won't hurt you, and the article is a good one.

Re:appropriate?

[rhakka]

calling something inappropriate without even looking into the context is indeed a knee jerk reaction, certainly irrational, and entirely stupid.

Suck it up. You were dumb. Move on.

Re:appropriate?

[Anonymous Coward]

It's not the fact that you find the article title offensive that makes you look stupid. It's the fact that you don't even know that your web-browser is what determines that those words, because they were a hyperlink, got highlighted and underlined. Learn something about the internet and how it works and you won't look like a moron in public.

Re:appropriate?

[Anonymous Coward]

he's not black

Re:appropriate?

[dr.fishopolis]

haha good stuff.

1. i read the article before i posted
2. i've been developing intranets since 1997. i know how underlining and hyperlinks work.
3. slashdot knows how hyperlinks work. they know 98% of users don't have their own stylesheet, and adhere to the defaults of their browsers (people can come up with statistics to prove anything, Kent. Forty percent of all people know that.)... though i like the "if you don't want to see nigger underlined and highlighted, you should have changed your browser behavior before you saw it!" argument, qual-i-tee.
4. it's not the word "nigger" i'm bothered by here, it was the phrasing as a command, and then the placement in place of prominence. I have studied the sociological impact of language, I understand Zorilla's well stated point that there is context and good and bad uses of words and I don't disagree. I'm just saying some restraint wouldn't kill us here, especially with a commanding phrase like that.
5. the article had the literary and gaming merit of iceburg lettuce.

but really, what i'm amused by here is that i said i think it's inappropriate for slashdot to use the phrase "bow,nigger" in a style that is treated differently from other standard text.

in a half-hour, with no extra knowledge, the angst-ridden teens of slashdot were able to learn the following about me: i didn't read the article, i'm uneducated, i have no idea how a web browser works, i can't type (?), i'm offended by literature from other cultures and times, i "pretend bad stuff never happened and try to cover up all hints that it may have", i have "latent and misguided feelings of guilt", i "cringe when reading the dictionary". i'm "immature", "hypersensitive", and "stupid".

Anyway, i'm done here. Continue your masturbatory rants about my inferiority, I shall not be reading them.

Re:appropriate?

[david614]

I'm with you on this. I could hardly believe I saw it either.

Re:appropriate?

[mbbac]

There is nothing wrong with using the word "nigger." It's a word. It's five letters put together in a unique arrangement. Slashdot wasn't using it in a derogatory manner. They simply printed the word while reporting on something that involved its use.

Re:appropriate?

[Anonymous Coward]

The only thing innapropirate here was to link directly to a SEVEN MEGABYTE PDF on the slashdot front page.
Sticks and stones just might break bones, but slashdot will always fuck over people's web site and bandwidth quota....

Re:appropriate?

[Anonymous Coward]

yet another ignorant white man

Re:appropriate?

[mihalis]

Douglas Hofstadter highlighted an important distinction when discussing speech that is pertinent to this.

What he calls the "Use/Mention" distinction is very important - it's racist to use the N word, however if someone else uses it publically, the fact of it being used can be mentioned without this being racist also, consider, for example a (hypothetical) news story :

Porkbarrel B. Votebuyer, the legendary, and legendarily corrupt representative was today relieved of his duties for calling a colleague a "Damn Nigger Lover"

The reader needs to know what he said to understand how he could be fired on the spot.

I can sympathize with the surprise of coming across the word in a headline, but since the link is to a page with that exact headline, and that page is a good faith examination of anonymous racial taunting in an on-line game, I think it's a valid mention of the N word.

Re:appropriate?

[Anonymous Coward]

its six letters.

Re:appropriate?

[Anonymous Coward]

in firefox, please go to tools, then options then fonts and colors and uncheck underline links. Not sure on other browsers, but you will never see "Bow Nigger" Underlined again in this article.

Re:appropriate?

[Anonymous Coward]

Uh, so how should have slashdot have added the link to the "Bow, Nigger" article? I am really amazed you have been offended by this. It would never have occured to me that putting it as a hyperlink would it make it more offensive somehow.

Re:appropriate?

[Idarubicin]

but really, what i'm amused by here is that i said i think it's inappropriate for slashdot to use the phrase "bow,nigger" in a style that is treated differently from other standard text.

...except that it happens to be the title of a written work. It is very much consistent with Slashdot style to link to a written piece using the title of that piece. The phrase

"A seminal work referenced when discussing Coleridge's poetry is The Rime of the Ancient Mariner, a sharply written and gripping piece about an...ancient mariner."

would attract no comment. It is fully compliant with Slashdot style, down to the sloppy writing and misused comma. It's not the phrase "bow, nigger" that is deliberately accentuated. It is the title of a story that is hyperlinked. The appearance is perhaps the same, but the intent and mechanism are decidedly different.

If the editors are going to run a story with the phrase anyway--if I understand your position, you don't object to that...?--then it should be appropriate for them to hyperlink as they always do.

Re:appropriate?

[scowling]

They aren't underlinked and highlighted. It's a link. You are making the choice to use a browser set to underline and highlight links.

If you are offended, it's your fault for choosing how links are displayed.

Re:appropriate?

[rhakka]

but, but, that would be *reasonable*!!!!

and then the daddy of this thread would be wrong. and apparently we can't have that.

Re:appropriate?

[janeil]

Yeah, right, it's just a word. Let's see, how many comments so far have been solely about the use of this word? Sure, just a word.

This statement is used so often, and it is such an incredibly stupid and obviously wrong statement. Words are huge. We all read slashdot for the words. Slightly different words mean vastly different things. Language and words are what give our thoughts, feelings, and dreams a voice.

Peer groups, society, culture and civilization all place a changing value and meaning to words that reflects (hopefully) growing and deeper insights into the common humanity we all share. So-called polite speech will always differ from casual or familiar speech for many reasons. The use of particular words, and their meaning and effect on the reader, is never trivial, and no word is simply letters in a unique arrangement.

I think in this case the word was the title of the author's piece, as well as an integral part of that piece, so I find it appropriate. If I started seeing it in some slashdotter's sig I'd have some problems with that.

Context and usage matter. Words matter. Otherwise, "yasids" would mean "fish", because I say it does. Otherwise, my use of the word "stupid" above wouldn't be offensive.

Re:appropriate?

[LMariachi]

What's misused about that comma?

Re:appropriate?

[Anonymous Coward]

the article was placed to illustrate a point.

What you are suggesting is CENSORSHIP OF THE PRESS (excuse the shouting, but you need to get this).

After all, there are people in the world for whom mentioning the moon landings is offensive...

If the journalism offends then you had best stay indoors, because the real world is many times worse...

Re:appropriate?

[Omestes]

Okay, I'm getting kind of sick of this argument.

So, I'm guessing (from rought demographics) that neither you nor the original poster are actually black, and thus really cannot be offended by said coment ("bow ,nigger"). What you are doing is nothing but a relic of the idiotic PC movement, where upperclass white men decided to become the guardians of good taste (and advocates of a post-modern version of newspeak), and keep all forms of offence from any historically opressed minority group.

I could see the validity of you and the original posters complaints if this was a statment (or command, if you will) that was actually aimed at someone of black decent, or if you, naive from RTFAing, were black and mistakenly thought that /. was commanding you. But being that neither of these are the case, you really have no reason at all to comment.

And by not agreeing with context as being the key to meaning, then you agree that we should censor our language to make minority groups more comfortable, which IMHO is deplorable. If someone can point out genuine offence because of this, I'll shut up, and quietly admit defeat, but being that I really cannot see this, I will not.

Re:appropriate?

[caller_number_six]

Discussing other people's use of racist terminology, and the potential motives behind such use, and the emotional response to that use, and the appropriate reaction to such use, is a GOOD thing. Even if it's only one small aspect of the article in question. Of course Slashdot should have posted that.

I think you're right, but I also think you missed the parent's point.

"Nigger" is an inflammatory word. Slashdot has a certain editorial style/voice, and would probably not use (e.g.) phrases like "shit eating faggot" or "suck this, bitch" on the front page, no matter how true, no matter how appropriate the language was to the story. The choice to put the word "nigger" on the front page implies that it isn't in that same league (i.e. not as "bad"). I'm not going to lose sleep over it, but I think it's a little bit surprising.

Re:appropriate?

[CableModemSniper]

Yeah, instead they send letters by owl. Much faster and more efficient.

Re:appropriate?

[CableModemSniper]

It's the name of the fucking article written by a black man who didn't let some racist moron destroy his fun. Grow up.

Aha, I see we didn't read the blurb OR the piece

Re:appropriate?

[janeil]

This can't be a reply to my post? I said context matters, and at no time did I imply anyone need censor their language. What I said, was words matter. They're not just letters.

...neither you nor the original poster are actually black, and thus really cannot be offended by said coment...

Yep, I'm a white guy. So when I'm around a group of people who use the word in every other sentence, I have no reason to be offended?

As for censorship, my offense is my own issue, and I'll deal with it by leaving those groups out of my life. Free speech is fine by me, I have the choice to listen or not.

...you really have no reason at all to comment.

You're kidding, right? Commenting on slashdot is just killing time, a narcissistic exercise in examining one's thoughts, AFAICT.

Re:appropriate?

[FurryFeet]

I think it's a valid mention of the N word.

I think you meant "of the word 'nigger'".

I mean, really, you make such a great point (no irony intended) and then go and undermine it like that...

Re:appropriate?

[mihalis]

Agreed, I wimped out.

Re:appropriate?

[mink]

I've never seen an owl get /.ed.

A word in the story really offends me...

[Eric(b0mb)Dennis]

I consider myself to be one of the few real Jedi's on this earth, and using of such a sacred word in such a joking manner offends me greatly.

I will inform the proper authorities promptly

I sense a great disturbance in the force...

[Anonymous Coward]

...as if a 1000 freshman English majors decided they were great writers and started posting the first thing that streamed out of their bong-addled consciousness.

Re:I sense a great disturbance in the force...

[violently_ill]

word.

I'm confused

[mattdm]

The "New Games Journalism" is ... blogs?

Re:I'm confused

[Lemmy Caution]

No, it's experiential reporting that addresses gameplay in its full context, including cultural, social, and technical (from a gameplay mechanics sense.) It may be in a blog or in PC GAMER, which, surprise surpise, one of the pieces cited actually was. Or it may be on Insertcredit.com or anywhere else.

It's partially derived from Hunter S. Thompson's "gonzo journalism," but it seems to be both more coherent and more relevant to the subject being addressed.

The formula gaming review

[fahrvergnugen]

I've been wondering lately about the state of gaming journalism. As an art form, videogames have only existed for twenty-five years or so, and really it's hard to call anything before the 8-bit era art (there are arguments that could be made about that, whatever doubts I may have as to their veracity, butthey are beside the point I look to make here). Yet for some reason, this is still the best gaming journalism can do, and its best, it must be said, is really, really pathetic.

Compare gaming criticism to music criticism, or better still to film criticism, and you'll see how badly, glaringly we lack. (I say we because I am including myself in the community ostensibly serviced by these publications) While there are magazines and sites such as Harry Knowles' and Entertainment Weekly in the film world who are just as sensationalistic and producer-fellating as anything in the gaming world, there are also thoughtful, interesting critics such as Roger Ebert, Paul Tatara, or David Denby, who bring a level of depth and insight into the collaborative artwork they contemplate.

Meanwhile, the best reviews available for gaming are arguably a paragraph-long offhanded comment in the latest Penny Arcade newspost. Film and Gaming are both business-driven, collaborative art forms that engage more than one of the audience's senses, generate emotional responses, and entertain for long stretches of time. Given these parallels, why is gaming criticism in a rut?

My first partial answer to that question lies in the multi-part review system. If you've read the gaming press, you know the drill. First up is a blurb of hype from the press packet, then comes a bit of discussion on the plot and the game's development process. Then the graphics are reviewed, and perhaps a score is given on graphics. Then the audio is reviewed, and this is scored as well. Next the controls, and finally the gameplay mechanics. Then it's all summarized in a paragraph or two at the end, and an overall score or grade is given to the entire product. This is the review we've been reading for years, just the way we're used to.

This review sucks.

I believe that gaming as an art form has moved beyond the point where it's appropriate to consider a game on its different components separately, and that we've been beyond the era when this would be considered appropriate since the 16-bit era, the launch of the original Playstation at the latest. For those of you keeping score at home, the Playstation turned nine this year. Yet in those nine years, the best gaming criticism can come up with is still the useless crap one can read at IGN.

1995 also marked the birth of one of the great experiments in gaming journalism, the US release of Next Generation magazine. Originally just an overseas port of stories found in the UK magazine Edge, Next Generation took on a life of its own and tried to ride the line between industry hype (the infamous Blasto cover, the year-early favorable Daikatana review) and honest, serious thought given to gaming as hobby and art. It was one of the first attempts to write about gaming from the same place that Rolling Stone in its heyday wrote about music. At its best, it even approached respectability. It was even one of the first magazines with serious on-line content.

It was also, naturally, a gigantic financial failure. By the end of its run, it had been turned into candy-coated hundred pages of glossy toilet paper, no better than Game Informer. The pioneering website was replaced with the dreaded (and thankfully deceased) Daily Radar, a name still spoken in hushed voices lest the ghost of Dan Egger's career somehow rise to haunt us all.

There have been other experiments in gaming journalism (eg. the short-lived but brilliant PCXL, basically Maxim for nerds), but all have fallen by the wayside. In the end, the bullet-point categorized review stands tall above a field of fallen competition.

And as mentioned previously, it sucks. These categorized

Re:The formula gaming review

[LordLucless]

The glaringly obvious difference between film/music/art and games is fairly obvious - games are interactive. With a movie, a song, or a piece of art, everyone has the same basic material to work with when it comes to interpreting it. Anyone who has seen the movie knows the scene you are referring to when you start discussing it. Compare this to computer games: Unless the game is totally linear, players may encounter the scene in a different order. They can probably also skip scenes of the game. If the game is dependant on initial conditions (RPGs, for example, where you generate your character), there are whole swathes of skills and abilites that each player will not experience on their first run through a game. Thus what we are left with is reviews of the lowest common denominator, reviews which only discuss that which every player will experience in the game - graphics, music, controls, etc.

Re:The formula gaming review

[Lemmy Caution]

I don't buy it. People who care about music and films end up learning which critics they trust, who share the same tastes as them, and listen accordingly. Leonard Maltin and Roger Ebert all have different audiences, and depending on who you are and what your tastes are, you'll listen to one more than another.

That's something that videogame criticism need: trusted reviewers whose tastes you feel mirror your own enough that you'll listen to what they say. Obviously, if you're into FPS, you aren't going to care about the review written by someone who has only played some HL years ago but really likes RTS and RPGs.

Also, if I really like a game's first 4 hours, I think I've gotten my money's worse. If it goes straight to hell after that, well, that's a shame. I think it's highly unlikely that something can drop off that precipitously, though. Again, being able to trust specific reviewers deals with that issue.

Re:The formula gaming review

[LordLucless]

I don't think the grandparent is talking about reviews not giving adequate information - for the most part, it seems they do. I think he's complaining about game reviews being too dry and factual, and not artsy enough. In areas like literature, art, and increasingly, film, criticism seems to be approaching an artform itself (as Oscar Wilde talks about in "The Critic As Artist"). But not so with game reviews, they stick to just rating each component of a game.

Re:America, where just mentioning the word "Nigger

[Anonymous Coward]

I don't understand what's wrong with it at all, since negro is spanish for black. How did it come to be an offensive word in the US?

What did you just say?

[Nintenfreak]

That's OUR word, You don't have any right to use it.

Re:America, where just mentioning the word "Nigger

[grungebox]

By "in Russia" do you mean present-day Russia or "in Soviet Russia"? I think well all know what happens if it's the latter...

Summary: "Blah, blah, blather blather blah"

[Elwood P Dowd]

(See subject.)

(The JKII thing was pretty good though.)

Re:Summary: "Blah, blah, blather blather blah"

[{8_8}]

I run into online gaming trash talkers all the time. I asked one of them why they trash talk like that. He said it wasn't personal, just something he did that got him psyched up or some bs.

Maybe I'm being overly harsh, but I couldn't get myself interested in this article. I read (well, skimmed) it. I got the "intellectual masturbation article" vibe: Writers using big words and abstract ideas to explain their grand unified verbal prurience theory, that sort of thing. Reminds me a bit of Jon Katz, actually. I mentally tuned out 1.5 paragraphs in, right after he talked about lusting after barmaids and "discussing the various challenges facing the geek nation." He might have an interesting perspective or two in there, but it's obscured by overeducated, pretentious English major-style verbiage and geek sentimentality. Stupid big words make head hurt. Me go now.

Re:America, where just mentioning the word "Nigger

[phlegmofdiscontent]

You make a good point. These days, you can hardly label anyone with any word without being labelled racist. You can call them "Negroes" and get called a racist, yet they have the United Negro College Fund. You can call them "Colored People", but there's the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People. Even something innocuous as "Black" will get reactions from some people. Now, we're supposed to use "African-Americans", though a lot of people labelled this way have had roots in this country for far longer than most. Not to mention that "African American" treats Africa like some monolithic culture and somehow diminishes the sheer variety of cultures found there. Not to mention that many recent immigrants from Africa are annoyed by that label. So, really, it does depend on context.

If you're so smart...

[AnotherBlackHat]

Money men didn't get to be money men by making stupid decisions.

If they think that "the quality of writers simply doesn't affect a games magazine sales" maybe it's because the quality of writers simply doesn't affect a games magazine sales.
</devil's advocate>

-- should you believe authority without question?

A Quote

[CrazyWingman]

If Games Journalism is just a job to you, you really shouldn't be doing it. The word should be "vocation".

This quote applies to more than just games journalism. Any of these tossers on /. who have asked, "I'm at A University studying Computer Science - will I get a job?" should be listening up.

People bitch, whine, moan, complain, etc. about how they lost their jobs at the end of the tech bubble, and about how there are no tech jobs available now. I, however, whole-heartedly support the paring down of the industry. In the late 90's, all the news could report on was how much money people were making founding dot-com companies. So, every person out there looking to make a quick buck said, "Hey - I could totally make it selling Vievelflutzers on the Internet." So, millions flocked to Universities, Community Colleges, and Barnes & Noble to get their hands on "Programming for Dummies."

Well, guess what. Programming is not for dummies. It never has been. Programming is a science and an art, and there is no way that you can do it properly without enjoying doing it. You have to enjoy spending hours racking your brain about organizing data structures, communicating with collegues about new ideas, and researching what other people have already done. It's a difficult field, and if you're just there because your buddy told you that you could make millions, you have no choice of making it.

Go figure out what you like doing, and do it. Don't try to do my job half-assed.

Re:A Quote

[tyrantnine]

Well, to continue the tangent...

I agree that programming is absolutely not for dummies. However you make a serious error equating programming with a job in industry. Many people interested in computers, or even computer science, are not interested in programming nor are they cut out for it.

Some time back I went to a company reception that preceded on-campus interviews for a software engineering job. It was amazing to me how many questions directed at the recruiter could be summarized as "how fast can I get out of programming to do something else?".

My university had a very highly rated computer science department. Only a small fraction of my peers really had the talent/interest to become good computer programmers. The rest were wannabe System Administrators, QA/Testers, "Web Designers", etc. Elective courses requiring heavy programming were almost never full.

Re:A Quote

[CrazyWingman]

Ah ha! You are absolutely correct. I did, in fact, make the stupid jump from IT to CS. I can't believe I did it either, because I spend so much time trying to convince people they are different. It's so annoying when people can't understand why even though you know a million things about balanced trees, sorting, bit order, and power consumption; you still have no idea where the font setting for Outlook Express is. :P Thank you for setting my words straight.

I do want to emphasize the problem with programming for dummies, though. I have actually heard people whine about how their "HTML programming skills are no longer needed." Sorry, man, HTML is not a programming language.

I did also want to address sysadmins separately. From my experience, someone who has in-depth knowledge about network configurations (I'm talking star vs. bus topology, true bandwidth, security, protocol advantages/disadvantages, etc. - not ipconfig for windows) is invaluable when you are trying to set up a high-performance, reliable network. But once it's all running, it really only takes one person's time to plug in a new disk drive when one fails. So, if you're looking for work in the sysadmin sector, don't expect companies with in-place systems to come beating down your door.

Sorry for the mixup - thanks for the catch.

Re:A Quote

[magefile]

You have no choice to [survive] make your time!

Re:A Quote

[Anonymous Coward]

If you work for a large company the network never reaches a static state (i.e. "once it's all running"). After the initial install of the network is complete, new servers will need to be installed and connected to the network on a regular basis. Decommisioned servers need to be removed from the network. Servers and storage devices will need to be connected to SAN. Datacenters,existing networks and SANs will need to be expanded. It's an ongoing process that requires a large network support team.

Re:A Quote

[jago25_98]

"Go figure out what you like doing, and do it."

Could you expand on this. Because I can't, believe I never will. It seems people either know or they don't.

Re:A Quote

[janeil]

Wait a second. Why isn't this modded "off topic"? Moderators? Hey moderators, try this: copy the post above and jam it into any of the threads today. Does it fit any better or worse? Could you even remotely guess what thread it was yanked from without the quote?

Not that I don't agree 100%, as I have been an artistic programmer since '78 or so. But still, it's the principle of the thing.

Re:A Quote

[tyrantnine]

I agree with you basic HTML is not "programming". I just assume when talking about a programmer there's a premise of a sane definition. That said I've never once heard a web page designer refer to themselves as a programmer.

However you also conflate programming with CS.

Attributed to Dijkstra, "Computer Science is no more about computers than astronomy is about telescopes"

For a somewhat alternate view from Stroustrup, "In some well-respected computer science departments, you can graduate without having written any code. That ought not be possible. Nobody should graduate with a degree in computer science or computer engineering without having completed a significant programming project. Code is the base of computing and people without a "feel" for code tend to seriously misjudge what skills, tools, and time are needed to build good systems."

My University certainly put the emphasis on theory. While the core reqs did require a good dose of programming, if thats all you ever took (and did nothing more outside of coursework), you would be graduating a programming novice. And many, many did (and still do).

Anyway, thats not to say anyone who's not really into programming doesn't love computers (or CS). Visit any LUG to find some prime examples. However in terms of difficulty, becoming a skilled programmer is a lot more difficult than virtually any other CS-related career.

Re:A Quote

[IncohereD]

I did also want to address sysadmins separately. From my experience, someone who has in-depth knowledge about network configurations (I'm talking star vs. bus topology, true bandwidth, security, protocol advantages/disadvantages, etc. - not ipconfig for windows) is invaluable when you are trying to set up a high-performance, reliable network. But once it's all running, it really only takes one person's time to plug in a new disk drive when one fails.

This is the difference between a network engineer and a sysadmin. We had some Cisco guys in to talk to my Telecom Engineering class 4th year, and they made the interesting point that if you're desigining a network please, please, please don't make it more complicated than it has to be for 15% more performance. Just make it cookie-cutter simple so Joe Sysadmin can add new systems, departments, etc., etc. as simply as possible, without needing knowledge of all the deep issues.

It's just like the people who designed the phone network are not the ones out there installing new lines, or the guy who designed your house doesn't come over when you need your roof fixed, or a sun room added on.

As we get better University programs for all of this (and the magic of computers fades), the distinctions will become more does.clear. I still remember how I had the highest mark in my computer animation class in high school despite having no art skill to speak of. Just because I knew how to use the damn computer. Now everyone does...just check out the photoshop jobs arty teenagers are pulling on livejournal and what not.

There's "game journalism"?

[Animats]

When "Lucky, the magazine about shopping" first came out, the comment was "You mean there are magazines that aren't about shopping?" Game magazines started at that level and went down from there.

At the bottom is GameSpy, which is now a malware distributor.

"Next Generation" was worth reading, in its day.

Re:There's "game journalism"?

[KD5YPT]

Um... the gamespy thingy is rated as an Adware, not a malware.
There's a large difference.

Adware's only purpose is to deliver ad. It might be classified as Spyware if it tries to record your online surfing habit and deliver targetted ads.

Malware, on the other hand, have malicious attempt to compromise your machine, steal your password and various other.

Re:There's "game journalism"?

[{tele}machus_*1]

Please. Gamespy Arcade itself displays ads when you use it, and it does not force your computer to visit ad websites or send personal information against your will or without your knowledge. You can also pay for the software, which allows you to disable the ads completely.

You might not like Gamespy, but there's no need to overreact.

Re:There's "game journalism"?

[Animats]

If Pest Patrol thinks it's bad, I'm not going to argue with them.

From the GameSpy EULA:

• "B). IGN/GameSpy Advertising. The IGN/GameSpy Sites and Services rely on advertisers to help fund the services that we offer to our members. In order to continue our service, you agree that the IGN/GameSpy Sites and Services may display advertisements and promotions of all kinds in and with the services."

• Our Sites and Services provide you with opportunities to link to, or otherwise use, sites and services offered through our third-party service providers, including email. Your use of these third-party services is subject to terms posted by these third-party service providers. We have no control over any third-party site or service and we are not responsible for any changes to any third-party service or for the contents thereof, including, without limitation, any links that may be contained in or accessible through such third-party service. These links are provided solely as a convenience to our visitors. Such third-party linked sites are not under IGN/GameSpy control and IGN/GameSpy is not responsible for and does not endorse their content. You will need to make your own independent judgment regarding your interaction with these third-party sites or services. Our inclusion of advertisements for, or links to, a third-party site or service does not constitute an endorsement. By opting into third-party offers, you will be subject to terms posted by these third-parties. Opting into these offers signifies your agreement to those additional terms of the respective third parties."

Re:America, where just mentioning the word "Nigger

[dastardly_villain]

I'm Black, and I could careless what you call me. Just have the constitution to know that ignorance and anger exists everywhere. If people react rufely, thats their problem it's a more of a reflection about how they feel about themselves than anything. It's not your problem to worry about what "label" to use to refer to an ethnic group.

What did you just call me?

[Anonymous Coward]

Jim: What did you just call me?
Huck Griffin: I thought that was your name.
Jim: That is our word. You have no right to use it.
Huck Griffin: Geez, I'm sorry. I didn't know.
[pause]
Huck Griffin: So, could you pass me the oar, 'n-word Jim'?
Jim: Yes. Thank you.

What isn't journalism?

[addie]

This isn't journalism. It's blogging.

I'm not sure I understand the point you're trying to make. Journalism entails the publishing of facts and opinions to a wide audience. Blogging does the same thing. Just because the "journalist" is trained and being paid in no way makes that piece of writing any more valuable than the amateur blogger. Writing is writing, and the source should not matter, only the quality of the content and the effect it has on the audience.

The "Bow, Nigger" article is fabulous. It does a good job of providing some insight into the game, is funny at the same time, and also tackles some of the more pressing issues in online gaming (cheating, harrassment, etc). By labelling it as "blogging" and refusing to call it "journalism" by your standards, are you trying to devalue it? Would you not go and see an indie band because they burned their CD's at home, and aren't played on the radio? Are they not still considered musicians?

I'm tired of people being so down on blogging. Writing is writing, and it makes no difference whatsoever in what forum it's being presented. Please start judging it by its quality, and not its source. That's what art is all about.

Re:What isn't journalism?

[Anonymous Coward]

What, no link to your blog?

Re:What isn't journalism?

[Anonymous Coward]

took to long to say nothing very profound. but on the upside, reading it reminds me of why I don't find multiplayer online gaming enjoyable and quickly quashed all desire I had to buy _any_ computer game, probably at least for a few months.

Re:What isn't journalism?

[teh_dg]

The difference is quite distinct, or rather it should be - but often isnt.

Journalism should always be completely objective, while a blog is nearly always subjective. This doesnt have to mean being "down" on blogging, the same applies to an editorial or (especially) a column article, which is often not-dissimilar to a blog in actual content. The primary difference tends to be that a column, and especially an editorial, almost always has some reasonable justification why the author's voice should be widely heard and respected. Anyone can write a blog, and hence blogging generally will be looked down upon, despite the known and respected existence of some excellent blogs written by people with all the credentials required for an editorial of a respected publication. There is also suggestion that journalists have a code of practice and they can be held to account, which is part of the reason they can be considered professional.

Re:What isn't journalism?

[Enry]

Journalism should always be completely objective

What I think you mean to say is:

Journalism should always try to be as objective as possible.

Being objective makes you more credible. More credible = more reliable = more viewers = more money.

Too bad these days scandal/sex/war/terror = more money.

Re:What isn't journalism?

[pla]

Journalism entails the publishing of facts and opinions to a wide audience. Blogging does the same thing.

Er, no.

SOME blogging - A very tiny minority, counts as "news" (Darh Jamail, for example). A bit more common (but still rare, in the grand scheme of things), due mostly to physical location or just plain luck, count as "almost news" (Raed/Salam Pax, for example - Not really news, but his location made even his daily observations relevant to the rest of the world).

But the vast majority of it? Absolute, useless drivel. Angsty teens writing about how unfair the world seems, or bad poetry, or banal commentary on meaningless daily minutiae, or even all of the above. I'd rather watch Fox than such crap.

And of course, we can't forget the gamer blogs. "I beat my old high score", "I hate cheaters in online games", "Some meany called me a nigger in a game chat". Whatever. Just play the game and STFU. The rest of the world doesn't care. Yeah, I enjoy video games... They let me empty my mind after a long day at work. But if it starts pissing me off, rather than relaxing me - Hey, look, a power button!


NOT news. Drivel. No matter how you spin it, someone talking about their daily events (short of near-miraculous luck) simply does not matter. One more boring person living through a typical day in their meaningless life.


Okay, now all you blogger mods can send this post to karma-hell. Have fun.

Re:What isn't journalism?

[Anonymous Coward]

SOME blogging - A very tiny minority, counts as "news" (Darh Jamail, for example). A bit more common (but still rare, in the grand scheme of things), due mostly to physical location or just plain luck, count as "almost news" (Raed/Salam Pax, for example - Not really news, but his location made even his daily observations relevant to the rest of the world).

Congratulations! You have just identified the difference between what journalists and historians call "primary sources" and "secondary sources".

Whatever. Just play the game and STFU. The rest of the world doesn't care.

Actually, the fact that Mr. "Kotaku" wrote an article about these things and Mr. "Zonk" posted it on the front page of slashdot is enough by itself to indicate that at least two members of the rest of the world do care.

Re:What isn't journalism?

[neura]

The only thing "insightful" about this post was the insight given to us about the poster's inability to read the subject matter he's posting about before posting.

Oh, and his keen ability to generalize and stereotype groups of people/things that consist of some of the most non-stereotypical individuals. Not saying that even the majority of the members of the group he's referringn to do not fit his stereotypes, but to dismiss the entire group when even the minority makes up what I consider to be an extremely large number of people.... that's extremely disingenuous.

Re:What isn't journalism?

[Capt'n Hector]

"Score:-1, Insightful"

I can only say, "WTF"? How does an insightful comment get a -1?

Heh. If I took this seriously, I might feel somewhat concerned by the logic behind that.

Overall, though, I find it more *amusing* that one person's "insightful" equals another's "flamebait" or "troll". I can understand reduntant, or overrated, but flamebait and troll seem mutually exclusive from any positive mods whatsoever.

Strange world we live in. Well... No, just strange people in it. ;-)

-- pla's Slashdot Journal

Oh, the irony.

Re:What isn't journalism?

[Thangodin]

If you want real objectivity, go read a lab report.

Journalism conveys not only the raw facts, but the experience of being there, and the opinions of those on the scene. Some journalists try to stick to the facts, but the reality is that "fact based" reporting can be turned into the most subjective and biased thing you can possibly read, simply by the way that certain facts can be emphasisized or de-emphasized. As the old saying goes, "Lies, damned lies, and statistics!" If you think journalism is objective, you may be in for some rather harsh disappointments.

Hemingway was a brilliant journalist, but I doubt the man could be objective to save his life. He could, however, tell you what it was like to walk down that street in Paris, or attend that bullfight in Madrid, in a way that would make you feel as if you'd been there.

You can give me a rundown of the features of the game, and you know what? There are probably twenty games out there with the same features. That doesn't tell you what it's like to play the game. You can make almost the same game with the same feature set, controls, etc, and it can still be either a turkey or a fantastic game, but the difference between the two is in how it all comes together. The most important remarks in a game article are usually in the last line or two, where the writer says "great game" or "worth a look" or "avoid unless you need sleep." That's where the sale is usually made or lost. These are subjective judgements. All reviews are.

Good production values won't save a turkey, and there have been some amazing games made of spit and paper mache. The details tell you nothing--they're usually there to be spun by some shill in a marketing department. I liked the article. It was well written, and it described what it was like to play the game. If even 10% of the crap out there really did that, I'd be a happy man.

Re:What isn't journalism?

[Anonymous Coward]

Congratulations! You and the mods who rated you "insightful" just proved that many readers of the web don't care about news and would just as soon read about people -- useless drivel though it may be.

Re:What isn't journalism?

[fondue]

"Yeah, I enjoy video games... They let me empty my mind after a long day at work. But if it starts pissing me off, rather than relaxing me - Hey, look, a power button!"

It's difficult to see how *any* form of writing, short of chew-proof books with big cardboard pages and colourful pictures, can manage to limbo under the bar you've set there.

Re:What isn't journalism?

[Anonymous Coward]

Journalism should always be completely objective

Tom Wolfe's The New Journalism blurred that line, although Wolfe, HST and others were never really journalists in the original sense anyway.

Re:What isn't journalism?

[realityfighter]

I remember the day when we would argue that journalism has an inherent responsibility to the public discourse. This is the reason we need objectivity - the press has so much power that to be otherwise would be an abuse of the press' position. It's an old-fashioned position to take, but a good one.

This is the difference, to me. When I read something totally offensive in a blog, something damaging to the subject, something so opinionated as to be fictional, I think, fine. That's your opinion and you're entitled to it. But the newspaper represents me, my friends, my family, my neighbors, my city. I have a right to tell the newspaper if they print libel, fiction, or hate speech as news. They also have a duty to listen to me. At least, in theory they do.

Your blog can be impeccably credible, but it doesn't represent anyone but you. Therefore, applying the word "journalism" is a bit of a stretch.

Re:What isn't journalism?

[aricusmaximus]

Professional journalism can give the appearance of being objective, but if you believe it is, then I've got a bridge to sell you. There is *always* bias.

Your emphasis on professionalism is retarded. All that professional means is someone was paid to write their articles. Sometimes they may be fact checked and sometimes they reviewed by a an editorial board, but the notion that being a professional automatically means a reporter has some sort of "objectivity" is laughable.

Everyone and every institution has an axe to grind, whether they admit it or not. Take a look around and pick your viewpoint, but Project Censored and Manufacturing Consent might be a good start.

As for lack of respectability, off the top of my head I can think of at least three widely read, respected blogs: DailyKos, Instapundit, Joel On Software.

99.99% of the blogs out there won't achieve the respect or visibility of some mainstream publications, but then again you could say the same thing for 95% of the newspapers out there.

Re:What isn't journalism?

[pla]

Oh, the irony.

You should probably learn what that word means before trying to use it again.

I never claimed my (very few... 2?) Slashdot journal entries (which, in fairness, you could call a sort of blog) count as "news".

Note the key difference there.


And relating back to my initial point... The word you wanted? If I claimed my /. journal as newsworthy, you could use "hypocrisy". But I didn't, so... Feel free to go pound sand.


BTW, you should probably look at a calendar. What day did 12/08 fall on, this year? When did it last fall on a Sunday?

Re:What isn't journalism?

[dvdeug]

NOT news. Drivel. No matter how you spin it, someone talking about their daily events (short of near-miraculous luck) simply does not matter. One more boring person living through a typical day in their meaningless life.

And you spend your typical days in your meaningless life here. How pathetic. It may not be news, but the people at the other end are real people living out lives that may be very important to them and those around them.

Your arrogant condesention is evil; the attitude that they're merely boring people with meaningless lives drives cruel dictators and savage serial killers and contemptous assholes, none of whom ever make the world the live in a better place.

Re:What isn't journalism?

[pla]

Your arrogant condesention is evil; the attitude that they're merely boring people with meaningless lives

You'd call me arrogant for that view? I don't post the details of my daily dietary habits for the world to read.

And I also don't have to read them from others. Another big difference there - I don't consider bloggers a nuissance, since I can readily pretend they don't exist.


But it seems that every single response to my initial comment missed the point. Regardless of the entertainment value of blogs, I merely asserted that they do not, in the vast majority, count as even remotely resembling "news". And so far, not one response to me has done the least to argue an alternative stance - Just personal attacks, irrelevant commentary, and apparently defensive misinterpretations of my words.


It may not be news, but the people at the other end are real people living out lives that may be very important to them and those around them.

You just described my entire point, yet missed it completely! If you blog, good for you. If you read blogs because, for some reason, you find them entertaining, good for you. I don't grudge you either of those points. BUT, if you read a blog by someone who has no more access to information on newsworthy events than you or I do, and take that person's opinion as "news", well, I'll call you on that one. "It may not be news". Nothing more.


the people at the other end are real people living out lives that may be very important to them and those around them.

Well, good for them and their lives and their friends/readers. But do you see that the extent of such "importance" doesn't extend beyond their immediate friends and family? Sure, my mother might want to know that I had a healthy breakfast. Do you care that I had a healthy breakfast? Do you care that I can beat the original Metroid in something that must come close to a time record? Do you care that we got a teensy bit of snow here ("here" not any place of particular interest at the moment) last night, not enough to play in but enough to make going to work a pain? No, you don't. Because it has absolutely no relevance to you or your life, nor does it to the vast majority of people (even my own close friends would find it, at most, a curious diversion to read, certainly not useful information). "Wow, pla had cold pizza for breakfast? Has this gone out over Reuters yet??? Stop the presses!"

And therein lies the difference. My dietary habits do not count as news. Your dietary habits do not count as news. The dietary habits of some poor bastard trapped in Fallujah with no food or running water SITUATIONALLY might count as news. The fact that the Red Crescent has petitioned the US Military to restore running water and start supplying food to those left alive, THAT counts as news (but not my mention of it - See the difference?) - Which you would get that news from a real source, not from an angsty teen in Peoria, not from Me, not even from the person trapped in Fallujah (though he/she may have heard about it, you could get it from a more direct source).


Finally, as for my posting here on Slashdot (which for a reason I do not quite understant, most respondants to me seem to take as some sort of evidence of hypocrisy on this subject)... I post here for the same reason I would chat with someone at the office or in the library or in line at the grocery store - Just something to do, pass the time, "shoot the shit". I don't consider my Slashdot posts as a form of news, nor do I consider them as having some mythical literary merit, nor do I expect most people to even care about them. If someone finds my words informative or entertaining, cool; but I have to expectation of that, and don't really care if people find my words utterly boring.

Re:What isn't journalism?

[dvdeug]

You just described my entire point, yet missed it completely!

You may have intended to write that blogs aren't news, but that's not what you wrote.

If you blog, good for you. If you read blogs because, for some reason, you find them entertaining, good for you. I don't grudge you either of those points.

Originally...
But the vast majority of it? Absolute, useless drivel. Angsty teens writing about how unfair the world seems, or bad poetry, or banal commentary on meaningless daily minutiae, or even all of the above. I'd rather watch Fox than such crap.

[...] Whatever. Just play the game and STFU.

You mean, good for you, in shut the fuck up sense?

the context of slashdot

[Anonymous Coward]

rich white people who dont get it using a word they dont understand and making arguments they are ignorant of about issues they dont comprehend.

Re:the context of slashdot

[Anonymous Coward]

How can you be ignorant of an argument you just made? Try to be a little less stupid when you're up on your morally 'superior' pedestal.

Did you know?

[Anonymous Coward]

In the early drafts of Star Wars, the Darth Vader character was called Nigger Daddy. Lucas did eventually realize it was a little insensitive and thought it gave too much of the upcoming plot away. Nigger Daddy became N Diddy, and eventually the Darth Vader that we know and love.

sham meritocracy

[Anonymous Coward]

when your industry stops judging people based on gender, skin color, hobbies, age, and SAT scores, then come talk to me about 'merit'

Change your browser settings

[Anonymous Coward]

Set your browser to not highlight and underline links.

Fixed!

You could learn a little something...

[Anonymous Coward]

From Jay & Silent Bob:

"You know, maybe one night me and Lunch Box are out we're mackin' some chick and shit, and she's, like, "Ooh, I want to suck youse guys' dicks off," and she's, like, "What your names?" And I'm, like, "Jay and Silent Bob." Reco'nize. And she's like, "Oh, I've read on the Internet that fuckin' youse guys are a couple of little fuckin' jerkoffs." And then she goes and sucks two other guys' dicks off instead. Well, FUCK that."

Yeah...will you be saying "Words can't hurt me when that happens to YOU?!"

Re:America, where just mentioning the word "Nigger

[realdpk]

I always enjoy when someone calls a black guy "African American" even when it's clear they're not American in any way.

I know this is sad, but I even remember a Cosby Show episode where they did that, about some leader of another country.

Is this really necessary?

[Anonymous Coward]

Essentially, it seems like the author feels uncomfortable writing traditional game reviews, and rather than fine-tune his approach, he'd rather meander off in a radical direction to feel 'innovative' and 'fresh'.

Sure, some of his thoughts are agreeable -- the games journalism industry is rather stagnant right now. But! It's NOT because of the formula; that has been developed, tweaked and matured over many years. It's absurd to throw it out in favour of a wacky, unproven writing style that -- while entertaining -- doesn't get much 'meat' across.

Here I'll point to some legendary game review writers such as Jonathan Nash and Zy Nicholson. These guys had it spot on -- punchy, funny copy, asides aplenty, but incredible detail, depth and ability to make you 'feel' the game (as this article suggests).

They didn't achieve this through radical changes -- just superb quality writing. Suggesting we discard a profession that has grown steadily and absorbed so many ideas over the years, and replace it with something untested, is crazy. It's much like the push to atonality in early 1900s music; felt good, but where are we now? Not listening to Stockhausen, that's for sure...

(As Slashdot readers we're going to have a totally different perspective to the vast majority of game mag buyers, as we're into tech, computers and geeky stuff, and like our news and reviews up to the minute.)

Re:Is this really necessary?

[BremXJones]

"Here I'll point to some legendary game review writers such as Jonathan Nash [theweekly.co.uk] and Zy Nicholson. These guys had it spot on -- punchy, funny copy, asides aplenty, but incredible detail, depth and ability to make you 'feel' the game (as this article suggests)." As writer of the Manifesto, I consider Nash and Nicholson dear comrades in arms. Brilliant games writers and it's a genuine sin that they aren't writing about the form currently. As writer of the manifesto, I also clearly stated that this was in addition to pre-existing forms of games journalism instead of as replacement of. Bow Nigger and its followers are great pieces of writing on Games. But they're not really reviews. And that's okay. Not all pieces of worthwhile writing on games have to be reviews. The Manifesto has a few revivals online since I wrote it (in fact, isn't this the second or third time it's appeared on Slashdot Games? Not that I don't appreciate the hits. It was written to be read) but still the idea that it's a YEAR ZERO!!! thing seems oddly persistent. Just a different approach. Anyone writing about games should consider trying it. KG

Re:Is this really necessary?

[BremXJones]

I should probably have previewed that, yeah?

****

"Here I'll point to some legendary game review writers such as Jonathan Nash [theweekly.co.uk] and Zy Nicholson. These guys had it spot on -- punchy, funny copy, asides aplenty, but incredible detail, depth and ability to make you 'feel' the game (as this article suggests)."

As writer of the Manifesto, I consider Nash and Nicholson dear comrades in arms. Brilliant games writers and it's a genuine sin that they aren't writing about the form currently.

As writer of the manifesto, I also clearly stated that this was in addition to pre-existing forms of games journalism instead of as replacement of.

Bow Nigger and its followers are great pieces of writing on Games. But they're not really reviews. And that's okay. Not all pieces of worthwhile writing on games have to be reviews.

The Manifesto has a few revivals online since I wrote it (in fact, isn't this the second or third time it's appeared on Slashdot Games? Not that I don't appreciate the hits. It was written to be read) but still the idea that it's a YEAR ZERO!!! thing seems oddly persistent.

Just a different approach. Anyone writing about games should consider trying it.

KG

Re:Is this really necessary?

[Anonymous Coward]

Thanks for the reply. I thought you might be aware of J Nash and co., seeing as you're in Bath (oooh, wild guess: Future? :-) )

Re:Is this really necessary?

[violently_ill]

"dear comrades in arms"?! are you frickin' kidding me?

would someone please punch this guy in the gonads?

Re:Is this really necessary?

[BremXJones]

Of course I'm kidding. He's a mate. I can call him whatever the fuck I like.

KG

Re:It's in the browser's password cache

[Anonymous Coward]

Sorry, buddy, this is the gaming journalism article. You want "Password Security Not Easy," one article down on your left. Can't miss it.

White Privledge

[crashfrog]

Yes, it does.

For instance, at work, if some money goes missing from the drawer, I'm not the first person they suspect.

People don't lock their car doors when I walk down the sidewalk. When I drive a nice car, I don't get pulled over on suspicion of having stolen it, or on suspicion of nothing at all.

When I do get hired for a job, there's no sneaking suspcion on my or anyone else's part that the color of my skin, and not the legitimacy or quality of my experience, was the deciding factor.

Not to mention the amazing perks I'm likely to get should I find myself in the criminal justice system; for instance, a considerably lesser likelyhood of getting the death penalty, or of serving any time at all, especially for drugs.

See, that's what "white privledge" means - all those things that are so great, yet so transparent that you forget that not everyone benefits from them. These are things that you shouldn't have to be white to have, I agree. But to simply dismiss the leigions of minorities who lack these privledges every day, on the basis of some hypothetical reverse discrimination that I doubt has actually ever occured for you, isn't quite racist - it's just stupid.

Re:White Privledge

[Anonymous Coward]

Dont forget these. Getting less college aid because i'm not in an inner city or a person of color. Not getting a job because i'm not the right color to fill their quota. Getting ripped on because of slavery. I never owned a slave, and neither has anyone in the last 5 generations of my family. I'm sure I could keep going on if I cared to.

Re:White Privledge

[Fig, formerly A.C.]

First off, I apologize for my sloppy spelling in my previous post.For instance, at work, if some money goes missing from the drawer, I'm not the first person they suspect.

Funny, I've worked in places where that has happened, and I've never seen the instantaneous blame game you describe. I'm also sure the discrimination laws had nothing to do with the lack of blame.

People don't lock their car doors when I walk down the sidewalk. When I drive a nice car, I don't get pulled over on suspicion of having stolen it, or on suspicion of nothing at all.

I don't think that has anything to do with the person, more likely it's the location. You just don't see a lot of carjackings or minorites walking down the street in safe suburbia, and if I did see a black guy walking down the street in my neighborhood (NOT safe suburbia) I don't think I would panic and lock my doors. On the flip side, I know where carjackings are more likely to occur and I do lock my doors when I go there. That's common sense. Maybe you're going to tell me that carjackings happen everywhere equally and are not reported in suburbia. Somehow I doubt that is the case.

When I do get hired for a job, there's no sneaking suspcion on my or anyone else's part that the color of my skin, and not the legitimacy or quality of my experience, was the deciding factor.

That's exactly my point, you see. The stupid affirmative action legislation is what fosters this feeling, this doubt. We KNOW it is law that people are not necessarily hired based on their merits, that skin color can get you a job. That was one of the bitches in my post, remember.

Not to mention the amazing perks I'm likely to get should I find myself in the criminal justice system; for instance, a considerably lesser likelyhood of getting the death penalty, or of serving any time at all, especially for drugs.

Bullcrap, I call it correlation, not causation. The statistics you see flaunted about are meaningless because of the way the study was performed and the conclusion was drwn? More blacks get the death penalty. More crime is commited in poor areas (you see, they're POOR, if they were rich, there's less motivation and more risk to steal). Instances of crime from ALL races goes up in poor areas, but wealth is not distributed evenly so some people will be overrepresented in those areas. Again, common sense. Where are the statistics for relative DP sentences per capita by race and identical charge in the justics system? THOSE would be more meaningful- but you never see them bantered about. I wonder why...

See, that's what "white privledge" means - all those things that are so great, yet so transparent that you forget that not everyone benefits from them. These are things that you shouldn't have to be white to have, I agree. But to simply dismiss the leigions of minorities who lack these privledges every day, on the basis of some hypothetical reverse discrimination that I doubt has actually ever occured for you, isn't quite racist - it's just stupid.

Yes, we have so many perks... Not to repeat what you've already heard, but where is Mrs. White USA? The United White College Fund? White Coaches Association? White Entertainment Network? Funny, I don't think they exist. Caucasians don't have the same privileges, and once again that was the point of my post. Segregation was horrible, but it is over and it is now time to get some sanity back into the system.

And yes, I've been the victim of "some hypothetical reverse discrimination". Before I saw how the system worked, I was in a pleasant denial state, and I shared your (understandably) naive views 100%.

Re:White Privledge

[crashfrog]

Funny, I've worked in places where that has happened, and I've never seen the instantaneous blame game you describe.

So, naturally, it doesn't happen anywhere?

I'm glad your work experience has been so postive. Plenty of other people's experiences have not been.

The stupid affirmative action legislation is what fosters this feeling, this doubt.

Unfortunately getting rid of affirmative action is like deciding that you hate cancer so much you're going to stop taking chemotherapy. The solution here is to eliminate discrimination against minorities, not eliminate the only method we've devised so far to counteract it. It's still the case that, in studies, the majority of employers are more interested in resumes with "normal"-sounding (i.e. white-sounding) names than those with ethnic names, even if everything else about the resumes is identical. Discrimination is still very real, and we're not going to eliminate it by declaring it no longer exists.

Bullcrap, I call it correlation, not causation.

Really? I call it simple deduction from the fact that most drug offenders are white while most convictions for drugs are against black people.

Instances of crime from ALL races goes up in poor areas, but wealth is not distributed evenly so some people will be overrepresented in those areas.

In particular, the wealth is not as evenly distributed to black people. Congratulations. You've successfully refuted racism in the criminal justice system by recourse to racism in the workplace. Not sure what you expected to accomplish with that.

THOSE would be more meaningful- but you never see them bantered about.

Do your own homework. But if you're too lazy to do you you might try Psychol Sci. 2004 Oct;15(10):674-9. The influence of Afrocentric facial features in criminal sentencing.

Not to repeat what you've already heard, but where is Mrs. White USA?

The panopoly of attractive white leading ladies in film and tv. Only very recently can you have a black leading female without it being a movie about black females.

The United White College Fund?

It's called "almost every other scholarship opportunity."

White Coaches Association?

Your local school board.

White Entertainment Network?

All the other channels.

Funny, I don't think they exist.

You're like those college freshmen that ask "well, where are all the men's studies classes?"

They're all the other courses. That's the point.

Re:White Privledge

[Fig, formerly A.C.]

Excellent discourse. Shall we continue?

So, naturally, it doesn't happen anywhere? I'm glad your work experience has been so postive. Plenty of other people's experiences have not been.

Not that it doesn't happen ANYWHERE, but it doesn't happen EVERYWHERE. That means in at least some situations, it doesn't happen and trying to legislate equality just adds to the rift. Now instead of getting accused of a crime for no reason, the person in question is getting questioned about their merit to be there in the first place. This is an improvement? Seems like it is simply adding more racial tension to me.

Unfortunately getting rid of affirmative action is like deciding that you hate cancer so much you're going to stop taking chemotherapy.

Having affirmative action is like taking cyanide so you don't have to deal with the cancer! It is not fixing the problem (death) to kill yourself, much like you can't end discrimination by discriminating. It just doesn't work. As far as the employers being more interesting in hiring "white sounding" names, I can tell you firsthand why that is. It's because of the culture that get's carried into the workplace. I'm sorry, but if someone applies for a job and they are speaking ebonics, with their pants around their knees, and a comb stuck in their hair they are really not casting a good image. If enough people from one group cling to that "culture", it's going to influence the perception of that whole group. When you seek employment, you HAVE to conform to your employers standards if you want the job. I have to, you have to, everyone has to. Note that this is not a black only issue, despite my example. A resume from BillyBob McCoy or Seabass Hatfield brings it's own, potentially negative, connotations to mind. The upshot is that a few bad apples can ruin it for any group, no matter how honest and hard working. Unfortuantely, I think making laws to pretect the questionable behavior only reinforces the opinion against the group.

I call it simple deduction from the fact that most drug offenders are white while most convictions for drugs are against black people.

Sources? Actually, it's irrelevant, because drug offenders generally don't get the death penalty so that was a straw man arguement. What are the stats for assault/murder or other capital crimes? How does that break down?

You've successfully refuted racism in the criminal justice system by recourse to racism in the workplace. Not sure what you expected to accomplish with that.

The inequality in the workplace stems from a different reason, and once again has nothing to do with race. It's more of a culture issue than a race issue. My point was (and I'll be very specific now) that more blacks are sentenced than whites because more blacks live in poor areas. The skewed numbers in the justice system are NOT a measure of injustice, they are a reflection of the fact that the wealth is not distributed evenly. A failure of economics is not a failure of the judicial system.

But if you're too lazy to do you you might try Psychol Sci. 2004 Oct;15(10):674-9. The influence of Afrocentric facial features in criminal sentencing.

What does that study show? Nothing. Between races, sentencing was on par. Within each racial category, people with certain sets of features get harsher sentences. Though the online text I found did not explicitly cite the specifics of "Afrocentric" facial features, I want to point out that it still doesn't prove anything about racism. Beady eyes, buck teeth, pretty much any feature humans can sport that is not considered attractive can have the same effect, pretty people get more money for the same job and get treated better in public. If the "Afrocentric" features are considered unattractive to many people, then your cause isn't racism anymore, is it? I'm not saying it's right to have a beauty bias, but jumping at shadows and blaming it on racism is not the solution either. Also, juries are juries of peers. There are blacks on jurie

Re:White Privledge

[crashfrog]

It is not fixing the problem (death) to kill yourself, much like you can't end discrimination by discriminating. It just doesn't work.

Says you. Could you back that up?

I'm sorry, but if someone applies for a job and they are speaking ebonics, with their pants around their knees, and a comb stuck in their hair they are really not casting a good image.

Ah, right. And you can measure the quality of their speech, the size of their waistband, and the contents of their hairdo, all from the sound of their name? Wow, that's an impressive feat.

An impressive feat of racist stereotyping, that is.

What does that study show?

That the more African you look, the harsher your sentence tends to be. But if that's not enough for you (as though any evidence could convince you), how about:

Behav Sci Law. 2002;20(1-2):191-210. Death row inmate characteristics, adjustment, and confinement: a critical review of the literature.

"Our analysis shows that death row inmates are overwhelmingly male and disproportionately Southern. Racial representation remains controversial."

or

Law Hum Behav. 2000 Jun;24(3):337-58. Discrimination and instructional comprehension: guided discretion, racial bias, and the death penalty.

"Results indicated that instructional comprehension was poor overall and that, although Black defendants were treated only slightly more punitively than White defendants in general, discriminatory effects were concentrated among participants whose comprehension was poorest."

or

Am J Orthopsychiatry. 1975 Jul;45(4):658-68. Rape, race, and the death penalty in Georgia.

"Following the 1972 Supreme Court decision on capital punishment, the Georgia legislature enacted a death penalty statute that attempts to avoid constitutional objections by establishing discretionary death sentencing for 361 rape cases in Georgia, comparing legal and nonlegal variables. Results indicate that blacks convicted of raping whites were disproportionately sentenced to death."

My point was (and I'll be very specific now) that more blacks are sentenced than whites because more blacks live in poor areas.

Yes, thank you, I understood your point. And you don't think that that's discriminatory? You don't think that's indicative of inherent racial biases in how we distribute wealth in this country?

What, you think black people are just dumber or lazy or something?

A failure of economics is not a failure of the judicial system.

But we're talking about racism, and racism is racism, no matter where it occurs. And unfortunately racism over here, in this situation, means that we have to counter it with racism over there, in a derivative situation. Because of a racist economy, or a racist public school, we have to balance that with a reverse-racist policy about who gets into college. Makes perfect sense to me, but then, I'm not suffused with anger about them damn mey-norities takin' my juuub!

As far as the specialized white categories, I think "because they already exist" is a pretty uninformed response.

What's uninformed is the question. But I guess I have to spell it out for you. The reason BET exists is because all the other channels, historically, have been for white people. Of course, you watch them, and think "this isn't white tv, it's mainstream tv." But it only looks that way to you because you're white, and that's getting back to my point about white priviledge - the reason you can't detect these biases is because they're transparent to you.

Now much of that is changing. And I don't think it'll be too long before there isn't a need for BET, or for the NAACP, because the mainstream insititutions will have successfully eliminated their racist biases.

But until then these black-centric organizations have a legitimate purpose. You confuse corellation with causality, and blame the victims, when you accuse the NAACP of fostering racism, when it's racism that they were formed in response to.

Ob Penny Arcade

[xleeko]

The percieved anonymity of the internet has allowed cowards and ignorant fucks all over the world to show their true colors.

At which point we insert reference to the Greater Internet Fuckwad Theory :-)

Games getting no further coverage?

[Anonymous Coward]

The author notes that games are hyped and drenched in coverage, and then dropped -- mentioning Deus Ex. Well, that's inevitable with entertaining, but ultimately very thin, games.

If you take stuff like the NES Mario series, they've been able to live again on other consoles thanks to their outstanding longevity and quality. Same with Zelda. Same with Mario 64, now on the DS and supremely creative and playable as ever.

How many people are that interested in Grand Turismo 1, Tekken 1 and other games that were given ridiculous hype at the time? Zilch. So to answer the author, truly GREAT games get covered again in later lives, or in the-making-of articles (as seen in N64, now NGC magazine).

Re:Games getting no further coverage?

[Anonymous Coward]

Ummm... For it's time Gran Turismo was about as pinnacle as you could get on a console. Anyone with a game shark pro knows that you can edit pretty much everything about the game. The level of detail was unheard of in a console racing sim. And while Im not a huge Tekken fan by any means, it did do great things for 3D fighting games. By the time Tekken 3 rolled around they finally had produced a minor masterpiece, and now 5 is looking rather promising as a balanced tournament-worthy fighter.

Are you trying to flame or just blind to the fact that every genre has something to contribute to the oever-all advancement and well-being of games and gaming in general? I seriously can't tell.

Re:Games getting no further coverage?

[rhavyn]

Umm ... if your point about Mario and Zelda is that people really liked them and so they still get attention and sequels ... how is that different from Gran Turismo and Tekken? I mean, there are a lot of people who are excited about GT4 and Tekken 5. There are people who aren't. Same goes for Mario and Zelda games. Seems like you should maybe pick different examples.

Re:Games getting no further coverage?

[Anonymous Coward]

Because while people are really keen to play Mario 64 again, hence why Nintendo have relaunched it (with some frills) on the DS, hardly anybody wants to play Tekken 1 again. It'd be laughed at if it was a PSP launch game.

And this is the point. Truly brilliant games last years and remain utterly playable, whereas mediocre stuff is instantly surpassed by its sequels and forgotten.

Hardly anybody wants to play Tekken 1 while Tekken 3 and 4 are about. Conversely, loads of people DO still want to play Mario 64 while Sunshine etc. is about. Truly wonderful games LAST.

Re:America, where just mentioning the word "Nigger

[kryogen1x]

Well technically, Russia had "indentured servants", rather than slaves. Euphemism anyone?

Can you not read?

[Anonymous Coward]

absent of context

What part of "A seminal work referenced when discussing the style is Bow, Nigger, a sharply written and gripping piece about a duel in Jedi Outcast" did you miss, exactly?

You, sir...

[JNighthawk]

are a fucking idiot. Learn to type. He's not whining about anything you fucking moron. God, I don't even think there's enough insults to cover the bounds of your stupidity.

(Now, before you mod me a troll, remember, I'm only saying what everyone else was thinking.)

in los angeles,

[Anonymous Coward]

here in L.A. you can get into whole heaps of trouble by calling a person from mexican heritage a latino/na. People from mexican backgrounds (the majority in southern california) want to be called chicano but if you call someone from say el salvador a chicano they'll get offended because chicano basically means mexican and many el salvadorians (or most south americans for that matter) seem to hate mexicans. Although your safest bet would be to call them Latino, you still run the risk of offending many mexicans.

Insert Credit and Mizuguchi.biz

[BitwizeGHC]

Insert Credit is one game site I hit up consistently. They frequently look at Japanese releases and what's going to be coming here stateside. Katamari Damacy is one of those bizarre, fiendishly successful titles which showed up on IC's radar first in the Western gaming-news scene.

The other site that really interests me is Tetsuya Mizuguchi's personal blog. It is like a glimpse into the life and mind of a game designer -- not just any designer mind you but the genius behind Rez. So hearing what he has to say on games and the Japanese techno-culture is interesting if only for the context it lends.

Re:Insert Credit and Mizuguchi.biz

[HarveyBirdman]

Katamari Damacy

I love that game. I'm playing it along side GTA:San Andreas which leads to me trying to do weird things, like wanting to jack the cars in Katamari or trying to roll everything up into a big ball in GTA.

Re:Insert Credit and Mizuguchi.biz

[WWWWolf]

Yep, Insert Credit pretty much rules. And while we are at it, let's not forget their own commentary on the state of videogame journalism. Very insightful.

For those that don't get the reference...

[JNighthawk]

This is from Family Guy. This is from memory, so it might be off a bit:

Jim: What did you just say? That's OUR word! You don't have any right to use it!
Peter: I'm sorry! I thought that was your name!
A few seconds pass.
Peter: Can you please pass the oar, N-Word Jim?
Jim: Certainly.

Mod Parent up!

[itistoday]

Excellent post, I can't understand the large amount of negativity towards these two articles, they are very well written and truly give you a different perspective on the game that one cannot find in any game magazine.

Re:Mod Parent up!

[BremXJones]

" truly give you a different perspective on the game that one cannot find in any game magazine." Er... both articles were both printed in British magazine PC GAMER. KG

Re:America, where just mentioning the word "Nigger

[melted]

It's the same thing. They were exploited and they couldn't just leave and find a better life. They were "attached" to the person (pomeschik) who exploited them, and sold and bought like property.

Re:America, where just mentioning the word "Nigger

[Anonymous Coward]

Just have the constitution to know that ignorance and anger exists everywhere.

Visit Canada sometime. Still exists, but you'll be shocked by the difference.

Why is this even necessary?

[ViolentGreen]

Why can't we just all be "Americans"?

Re:Why is this even necessary?

[Anonymous Coward]

Cuz some of us are Canadian, dammit! :-)

Re:Why is this even necessary?

[Anonymous Coward]

Because you might just be an american resident holding foreign citizenship? so, not being a naturalized american you would be offended that the person you're talking to does not acknowledge said fact.

Re:Why is this even necessary?

[ViolentGreen]

Because you might just be an american resident holding foreign citizenship? so, not being a naturalized american you would be offended that the person you're talking to does not acknowledge said fact.

You are missing the point. The point isn't the nationality (though all the organizations mentioned in the ggp post are American orginazitions and this subthread is talking about American culture.) The point is about the apparent necessity to classify people by appearance and or race.

Re:Why is this even necessary?

[Anonymous Coward]

yes but since apparently WE are talking about american people in general you completely missed MY point. idiot.

Re:Why is this even necessary?

[Lemmy Caution]

The article "Bow Nigger," however, was partially about racism. So describing the race of the people involved is completely appropriate.

"African-American" is a quirky term, of course, because it's sort of a fusion-word for a some dark-skinned people of African descent who happen to be citizens of a certain country, and the culture of those individuals whose ancestors were brought into this country by slavery. It's both an ethnicity partially defined by race and a race-category constrained by nationality.

As far as complaining about "needing to classify people," well, those classifications have occurred for hundreds of years, and entire communities and cultures were constructed around those classifications. To think that you can blank out all that history by wishful thinking is, well, wishful thinking. Of course, race is a fiction: there's more genetic variation within so-called "races" than between them. But nationality is also a fiction of sorts "made true" by history, by armies and governments.

Re:Why is this even necessary?

[Anonymous Coward]

Even the Iraqis? After all, they're still being run from Washington...

Re:America, where just mentioning the word "Nigger

[Anonymous Coward]

Not to mention that many recent immigrants from Africa are annoyed by that label.

The guy in my neighboring cube is from South Africa (of the white variety), and complains that he can't claim status as an "African American".

I think the terms black, white, etc., are pretty decent. They convey the meaning in a very matter of fact way without making a big deal about it. If you hear someone say "African American", then it sounds like you're trying to tip-toe around and you're too careful about people's feelings. Some people are black, some are white, some are brown, red (but oddly not purple or green - conspiracy?). Complexion is actually a multi-dimensional analog value.

Gamespy

[HarveyBirdman]

Well, gamespy was the only site I could find that gave Jak 2 a negative review. I wish to God I had listened to the lone dissenting voice in that case. I got about 55% through the game, and just walked away from it. I realized that some programmer or another over at Naughty Dog HATES the customers, and put in some of the most vindictive restart points in the history of platformers. Sending me back 20 minutes in the game isn't a fun challenge, folks. It's annoying. And don't get me started on having to slog through the aircar traffic jam where just farting the the general direction one of the bad guys got you surrounded by and endless supply of guards with guns blazing.

The problem.

[Anonymous Coward]

None of these people described by this article to be involved in "new games journalism" are making any money off of it.

If we are to thus take your analogy to its logical extension, then, the conclusion would seem to be that you can always do what you love, but you will not necessarily be able to do it for a living.

Re:The problem.

[Anonymous Coward]

The whole point of the manifesto is that Bow Nigger was sold to an actual magazine for real spending money.

I know, because I spent it.

Re:The problem.

[BremXJones]

To stress AB's anonymous coward post, both stories linked were sold to magazines.

The manifesto wasn't, because it was a blog post. If I knew it would have been read by as many people as it had, perhaps I'd have - oh, I don't know - proofread it.

KG

Re:The problem.

[Anonymous Coward]

Actually I really am an Anonymous Coward, I broke into AB's house and stole the money, but it's a perfectly understandable misconception.

Which "entertainment" medium has better reviews?

[CageyWolf]

Okay, book reviews are generally better than about any other kind I know of. But movie or television reviews aren't (IMHO). They generally sum things up in a manner similar to most game reviews -- are we supposed to expect something better?

Re:America, where just mentioning the word "Nigger

[Anonymous Coward]

Everyone is X of Y decent.

That is, if you are "black" you may be American of African decent.

Anything else promotes racism and hate. If you are a first generation American who comes from Africa *maybe* you can use the term African-American. Otherwise you are an American of African decent. Simple.

PS... Ever see the so called "African-Americans" od CBC Survivor whilst in Africa. Starved like every other American on the show.

In addition to rather than replacing

[Anonymous Coward]

To all those who criticse the idea of New Games Journalism, I point you to this paragrah in the article which you clearly failed to read.

"Well, I'm not suggesting we do a Pol-Pot and year-zero everything we've ever done. The main body of games journalism will remain the same. Reviews that don't serve their basic consumer-informing purpose are worse than useless. Previews - one of the most despicable words in the lexicon, randomly - are still going to appear. What I'm suggesting is in addition to rather than replacing the old order - though I'd suggest a greater stringency when producing work that's in these more established traditions. Just be good, y'know."

Re:Just Asking Slashdot...

[JaxGator75]

The answer is:

You're Both Losers

/resplendent!!!

Re:America, where just mentioning the word "Nigger

[daemonc]

Did you know that in Russia they still call the African dark skinned people "Negroes"?

In Soviet Russia, negroes call YOU!!! ... or something like that?

Re:America, where just mentioning the word "Nigger

[Anonymous Coward]

These days, you can hardly label anyone with any word

Yes how unfortunate, you can no longer collectivize groups of people with the approval of others. Now you have to endure the massive hardship which is peer disapproval when you say something stupid. Oh, if only we could return to a world when collectivizing was acceptable! You are so right.

What pathetic feeb is "bothered" by strangers?

[Anonymous Coward]

What bothers me is the idea the person is expessing, for instance if they're implying I'm a less "valid" person than he/she or someone else is... It's the whole feeling of someone else indicating to you that they feel you are "below" them in some manner, and the feeling that someone else is hostile towards you when you don't feel you deserve it.

What a sad, pathetic individual you must be to have the words and phrases of complete strangers "bother" you. Why on earth would you conceivably care? Are you so clinging and needy that you actually need the "validation" of J. Random Yahoo? Is your life so devoid of meaning that an unkind word from a complete stranger causes you actiual mental anguish? Why allow the disparaging words of unseen electronic personas to have any effect on your emotional state whatsoever? As Richard Feynman once said, "What do you care what other people think?"

Be a man, not a wimpering "victim" in thrall to the cult of "self esteem." No wonder the Islamofascists think we're a soft and decadant nation of lotus-eating eloi.

- Crow T. Trollbot

Re:What pathetic feeb is "bothered" by strangers?

[necro2607]

It's a little different from "J. Random Yahoo" when it's someone you see every day or very often (such as a classmate in school, or a family member).

Why do I care what other people think? Because they're just that: other people. People with feelings and thoughts similar to my own. People who are part of my community, my culture, and the same world in which I live.

Disregarding what other people say only increases the excessively apparent amount of disenfranchisement and alienation people experience in regards to the people around them. Acting like other peoples' opinions are completely meaningless is a selfish, childish position to hold and the fact that you hold it with such strength makes it fairly ironic that you try to criticize me, calling me "sad" or "pathetic".

Most of us learn around the age of two or three to respect the thoughts/feelings of others. Looks like you didn't though. Here's some advice: don't take your cynical antisocial angst out upon the people around you. If you don't care about what anyone else thinks, they won't care about what you think, either. And don't even suggest that you don't care about that. You depend on other people just as much as anyone else.

Re:What pathetic feeb is "bothered" by strangers?

[The One and Only]

Disregarding what other people say only increases the excessively apparent amount of disenfranchisement and alienation people experience in regards to the people around them.

And we shouldn't alienate racists? We should accept racism?

Acting like other peoples' opinions are completely meaningless is a selfish, childish position to hold and the fact that you hold it with such strength makes it fairly ironic that you try to criticize me, calling me "sad" or "pathetic".

Perhaps it is selfish, in the sense that it's selfish to refuse to subject yourself to the feelings of others. If someone expresses racist views, is that really someone whose views and opinions you should take seriously?

Most of us learn around the age of two or three to respect the thoughts/feelings of others.

That's because two and three year olds need to be controlled by others at all times. Adults have freedom, children can't. I can see why you have problems if you insist on always respecting the thoughts and feelings of others. Racist thoughts and feelings deserve no respect.

Re:What pathetic feeb is "bothered" by strangers?

[necro2607]

"Racist thoughts and feelings deserve no respect."

The thing is, those thoughts need to be acknowledged and understood, and [you/whoever] don't seem to be grasping that important fact.

Re:What pathetic feeb is "bothered" by strangers?

[The One and Only]

The thing is, those thoughts need to be acknowledged and understood, and [you/whoever] don't seem to be grasping that important fact.

We have to acknowledge that they exist, but we don't have to respect them like you're suggesting. We don't have to take them seriously enough to be offended by them. It might be worth someone's time (certainly not mine) to study how a potentially useful and productive human being turns into a racist piece of shit, but that's about the extent of it.

And we don't have to respect people (such as racists) as human beings when they regularly refuse to act like human beings.

It told me what I need to know

[WotanKhan]

" mean sure Bow, Nigger was an interesting read, but it didn't actually tell me anything useful about the game"

Besides being a gripping read, Bow, Nigger conveyed to me exactly the information that would help me make a good choice buying this game. Specifically, I buy a game if I think that it will have a long life on my hard drive, and that means multiplayer. Through the course of the interesting narrative, the author touched on the mechanics of the game and the quality of the effects. But, more importantly, he conveyed the intangibles that are absent in any standard game review I've seen before. After reading the story I felt a sense of how the game actually plays, as well as a sense of its online community.

I'm searching now, in another window, for a copy of JKII on ebay, since I passed over this title when it was released.

Re:It told me what I need to know

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm searching now, in another window, for a copy of JKII on ebay, since I passed over this title when it was released.

I assume by JKII you mean Jedi Knight II?

Gamestop currently has it for $9.99

They might even have a cheaper used one in their preowned stuff.

Re:It told me what I need to know

[pnuema]

The sequel to the game you are looking for is Jedi Academy, and IMHO is a better game. In addition to the standard lightsaber, you have the choice of dual lightsabers or the double bladed saber used by Darth Maul. JA was so good that I went out and bought Jedi Knight II: Jedi Outcast after the fact, just so I could duel sabers again in the single player. Both games worth every penny if you ask me. I played JA through 4 times, and will probably play it again.

Re:Just Asking Slashdot...

[Anonymous Coward]

Classism, not racism. It would be racism only if your levels were approximately equal.

A bit too convenient?

[Anonymous Coward]

Uhm, is it just me or does the Jedi Outcast duel seem more like creative writing than an accurate account of events?

The elements are just perfect in order to create the impact the writer desires - so perfect, in fact, that there's nothing missing. The idiotic screen name of the other person, the phrasing, the duel, and the "barely triumphing over racism with 1 health point left, to be applauded by the audience afterwards". Honest? Uhuh.

Re:A bit too convenient?

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm not bright enough to make that shit up.

Re:A bit too convenient?

[urbaer]

The idiotic screen name of the other person

When I've written about online encounters (and even real life ones on occasion) I generally change the names to protect the innocent (myself... I don't want StupidGuy to come looking for me). So I really wouldn't take this as a reason for disbelief.

Even if it does stretch the truth a little... it's possible that something like this could happen. The value of the piece is that it delivers a concept of what the game is like from an emotional point of view rather than a 'five out of ten' approach. And if the piece honestly reflects the writers feelings, isn't that better than a stale Gamespy review?

Re:A bit too convenient?

[Anonymous Coward]

The idiotic screen name of the other person

Couple of things:

1. I didn't specify the screenname of the other person at all. I called him 'wanker', which is a derogatory term used in the UK. Like 'asshole'.

2. Play ten games. Lose nine of them and win the last. Choose one to report on. Convenient enough?

Rather that biases are obvious

[SuperKendall]

I think it's not so much that these guys are talking about "the way it is", as the biases are very obvious in both contexts - on both the Daily Show, and Penny Arcade, you know where the authors are coming from and so you can take that point of mental origin into account when reading what they have to say.

With a supposed "unbiased" source of news or game reviews, it's harder to know which way the books have been cooked, so to speak - and thus the information you derive from that source can be off because you are not able to account for the bias that is really there.

Re:America, where just mentioning the word "Nigger

[gobbo]

Yeah, we're polite while we're saying racist things, eh?

When I first got to Ontario I couldn't believe that I was actually seeing little black sambo lawn ornaments. I mean, WTF?

Segregation and racist epithets up here generally are designed for those who were here first. When the architects of Apartheid wanted prior art, they came to Canada and looked at the reservation system.

wtf

[Anonymous Coward]

fascist != racist

Re:wtf

[Anonymous Coward]

!= does not equal (=) does not equal!

Re:wtf

[violently_ill]

thanks for clearing that up, jackass.

Re:wtf

[violently_ill]

by the way, that was directed at the anonymous coward who was trying to clear the good name of fascism by disassociating it with racism.

Re:America, where just mentioning the word "Nigger

[oberondarksoul]

This happened to the athlete, Kriss Akabusi. After winning a race in the USA, he was interviewed by a news reporter:

"So, Kriss, what does this mean to you as an African-American?"
"I'm not American, I'm British"
"Yes, but as a British African-American ..."
"I'm not African. I'm not American. I'm British."

I'm a fucking hero. A real one.

[Anonymous Coward]

"I'm a fucking hero. A real one."
No you're a fucking fat ass. Get out of the chair your ass is affixed to and try getting some work done. Then, and only then, can you call yourself a hero.

"A little something personal about myself: I don't sweat. Never have. Not under normal, sat-at-the-computer, circumstances anyway. Obviously, physical exertion makes me sweat, running, jumping, swimming etc. But not just sat in a chair..."

Obviously, because you're a fat ass. "... I felt a trickle of wet run down from under my right armpit."

Re:I'm a fucking hero. A real one.

[Anonymous Coward]

You're just mad because you got beat in a JKII duel. Hey man, it's only a game!

I wish...

[emilng]

I had mod points.

pwn3d

[Anonymous Coward]

Nice.

Well the State article is a laugh...

[pocopoco]

>The second traditional reason is that they're mostly - and
>there's exceptions, clearly - hugely better written.

Did anyone else find this sentence hilarious? This guy's writing is terrible. If I were editing I'd delete half his sentences as utterly useless and have to clean up shitty sentences like the one quoted above. "mostly...hugely," my god. It's clear he is used to writing as much as possible no matter how bad it makes his writing. Makes sense for someone involved in journalism, I suppose. I'm glad internet reviews don't pull shit like that as much.

Re:Well the State article is a laugh...

[my moustache]

Well, you're one-fourth correct.

This essay should be edited and cleaned up, just as all traditional published writing is edited and cleaned up. The result would be something along the lines of,

"The second reason is that they are generally - and there are exceptions - much more well written."

What you seem to miss is the idea that this particular author is trying to convey an idea that he has had about the state of gaming journalism. Whether you agree with that conclusion is one thing, but to simply attack the writing because the guy posted his raw draft with an assortment of technical errors is pointless.

Of course, you're not out there coming up with ideas and sharing them with whoever will listen. You're making fun of someone else for having an interesting idea and trying to share it with you.

Re:Well the State article is a laugh...

[violently_ill]

are you even paying attention? this is a group of people calling themselves the "new games journalists". he's more than justified in pointing out their complete ineptitude with the english language.

Re:Well the State article is a laugh...

[my moustache]

Right...the new games journalists. Not the new games grammar instructors.

Re:America, where just mentioning the word "Nigger

[Anonymous Coward]

Interstingly, the fact that "nigger" is a yokel corruption of the French "Negro" (meaning black) probably demonstrates more about the person using the word than the person it's directed at...

An example of political correctness gone mad: an Australian cricketer was recently penalized for racial villification after calling an opponent a "black bastard". This implies that its OK to cast aspersions on someone's parentage as long as you don't draw attention to their dark complexion as you do it. WTF? I would have thought "bastard" was the operative insult.

Another curious point, Australian aborigines* tend to refer to themselves as "blackfellas", and Europeans as "whitefellas"; neither is 100% accurate going by a colour chart, but true enough relatively speaking for nobody to take offence. Perhaps a life of true hardship (like dying of measles, as the aboriginies still do in remote communities) makes you focus on the important things, rather than getting upset over a word.

Frankly, I see this as the result of the politically correct crowd's inability to understand the difference between thoughtlessness and malice; getting uptight about the former merely trivializes that latter, and diverts attention from issues of real importance.

(Disclaimer: yeah, I'm as anglo-celtic as they come. But funnily, the only people who have ever accused me of racism are other PC anglos who have never set foot beyond the cafe strips of major cities. I have been called a "white prick", but that was by a Lebanese guy who was nearly as fair-skinned as me, so I did the obvious: I laughed.)

*Only in the outback. This isn't true for urban aborigines, who refer to themselves as "Koori", and white folk as a word beginning with "C" and ending with "T" that rhymes with "punt"; racism isn't the sole domain of majorities. However, "Koori" is the word used by tribes from the east coast, a Pitjinjarra from the north would probably smash your face for calling him that.

Re:Just Asking Slashdot...

[Anonymous Coward]

no..he's just quite clearly a total tosser, and wanting to talk to him/her should be considered a sign of mental aberration.. What are the odds he/she was bullied at school? Or indeed is still being bullied at school, given the time they've got to play the game ?

Seriously though, I bet the makers of online games LOVE this kind of arsehole.. People who rise to this sort of shite are people will keep playing [INSERT ONLINE_GAME_X] in the hope of beating the shit out of him at some point... Unless, of course, this behaviour is annoying enough, and prevalent enough to make you stop bothering.

For MMORPG's, time really IS money..

Re:America, where just mentioning the word "Nigger

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm replying to my own post, but I thought something needed clarification.

"I have been called a "white prick", but that was by a Lebanese guy who was nearly as fair-skinned as me, so I did the obvious: I laughed."

I should mention that the most visible subculture among young Lebanese, particularly in Sydney and Melbourne, is the track-suited, tricked-out rice-burner* driving "gangsta" wannabes, who parrot black American culture while sharing none of it's roots; these guys think Ali G. is a role model, not a piss-take. It was one of these clowns that tried to insult me (and failed miserably).

*Is this racist? Can you call a disparaging remark about a car racist? Do cars even have races...er, you know what I mean...

Choose your own reply...

[Anonymous Coward]

"I consider myself to be one of the few real Jedi's on this earth...[snip]...I will inform the proper authorities promptly"

Reply 1:
The proper authorities already know, and are on their way to your place right now with a butterfly net and wrap-around jacket.

Reply 2:
If you really were a Jedi, YOU would be the proper authority...

Well, you know what Master Yoda thinks about this:

[dabigpaybackski]

"When racist wanker you are, swift justice you will have."

Re:Just Asking Slashdot...

[Lemmy Caution]

No more than you should sue someone who kills you in a PVP game for murder. However, if the *player* in a PVP game says, "I'm going to kill YOU, Mister Player who lives at ," then I think you could take legal remedy.

Fantasy is often about racial conflict - it may be a way we can talk about and address racial conflict in a safer way, through analogy (I think Tolkein's racial essentialism is a big problem, for example.) It's totally appropriate to "play that out," as long as the translation is distant enough... if an elf referred to an orc using language associated with white racism against black people, I'd think a line had been crossed. The Drakthrone case is perfectly acceptable, and rather interesting.

All you can do?

[caller_number_six]

All you can really do is stop playing or frag the h*ll out of them.

No, you can do more. You can reply with something like,

"Nigger?"... How old are you? You come across as either a child or a fucking idiot.

You'd be surprised how many people in a game will chime in and back you up, but who didn't bother to say anything about it. Well, okay, maybe you wouldn't be surprised, but I sometimes am.

Then frag the hell out of them.

Re:All you can do?

[rjelks]

You're quite right. It's gotten so prevalent in the games that I'm not as shocked as I used to be, but I should. Things like that shouldn't be left alone.

nigger

[Anonymous Coward]

but is he gay?

how to start an intellectual revolution

[violently_ill]

how to start an "intellectual" revolution:

1) pick some asinine subject, such as game journalism.
2) write about this subject as if it is the most important subject ever examined by anyone in the history of the world. use lots of obscure vocabulary to camoflauge your lack of substance. if you do not have a thesaurus, you can always just make up words by taking old words and adding latin prefices and suffices, such as neo-, meta-, and intra-.
3) get all your buddies to do the same.
4) start referencing each other's work as "seminal", "groundbreaking", etc.
5) give your revolution a name. it doesn't matter what you call it, as long it emphasizes NEWNESS. the people that came before you are the old way. you are the new enlightenment. you are breaking out of the shackles your predecessors have placed on you.
6) give your group of intellectuals a name, such as the "frankfurt school" or the "new games journalists".
7) accessorize your garb with a pipe, beret, or bow tie.
8) this is the most important step. target naive young intellectuals who have yet to develop strong critical thinking skills. impress them with your fancy-pants vocabulary and high-stepping style. indoctrinate them into your cult. they will worship you.
9) post it to slashdot.

Re:how to start an intellectual revolution

[urbaer]

Ah... so the revolution will be slashdotted? Good to know.

really awful writing

[violently_ill]

did anybody else notice that these "new games journalists" were just writing about their game experiences as if they were really happening? how is that a revolution in journalism?

i also noticed several examples of poor writing style, including sentence clutter and the abundant use of passive voice.

Bow, Nigger is written by a noob

[Anonymous Coward]

What a noob. Cheating in jk2 is nearly impossible. Scripting does not do shit, any good player could easily beat someone who uses a backstab macro.

Out of every FPS game i've ever played online, jk2 was the hardest to cheat on. There were a few bugs where you could crash clients, but to be a jedi master took more skill and strategy than any game i've ever played. Scripts were no replacement.

PP Duels were ownage. For those of you who remember DOMO-KUN and the Communist clan, word up.

It's not journalism, and it's not that new.

[Anonymous Coward]

I wouldn't call it that, anyway. It's just writing about experiences in games. Not something to get all riled up about, as some of you seem to be. I expect we'll be seeing more and more of it as the appeal of gaming expands, games occupy more and more of the lives of the people who play them, and people (and writers) take gaming more seriously.

And while the "Bow, Nigger" piece is excellent--perhaps the best known of its type--it's worth noting that some folks have doing this kind of work for years and in some pretty prominent places. (There are even some web sites that specialize in them; how long before we see a magazine the specializes in "the literature of games"?)

One early example was a well-known piece called "A Rape in Cyberspace"(http://www.juliandibbell.com/texts/bun gle.html), which appeared in the Village Voice in 1998.

Others that come to mind:

http://www.robotstreetgang.com/2002_03_26_robotstr eetgang_archive.html

http://www.salon.com/tech/feature/2004/03/31/game_ violence/index_np.html

Enjoy.

The even newer New Game Journalism is...

[Zhe Mappel]

...the utter, complete overthrow of traditional publishing authority represented by user-driven review sites. I'm talking about gems like mobygames.com or even, say, epinions.com, which are themselves just groupings of the kind of everyday opinion that has gone on for years in message boards and on Usenet. Rather than read Kieron Gillen wank off about "money men" who don't properly appreciate their little on-staff genuises offering up the latest fresh batch of adjectives to Bungie, go read the reviews of people who are more interested in the fun (or lack thereof) they had playing. It's easy: trust the individual, not the institutional voice.

The paradigm for this might be the indispensible Internet movie database (imdb.com). Here everyone reviews. No, not everyone's opinion will matter to you, but somewhere in the mix you'll find the voices that you do rate, do follow. And beyond their utilitarian value, these sites are fascinating extended conversations, much like Slashdot.

There is specialized knowledge in every field, and there might be a very small handful of professional game journalists somewhere whose knowledge is useful in reviewing a game. If you find members of that tiny fraternity, read them. I've neither cared for the insights nor the style of a single reviewer in a gaming magazine to notice any names; there don't seem to be any gaming Roger Eberts or Anthony Lanes (probably because if you can write as well as either man, you aren't going to work for Ziff Davis describing the latest Madden sequel, are you?). In fact, the free subscription to Electronic Gaming Monthly that I found (through cheapassgamer.com, if anyone else wishes one) has only delivered such a noisy piece of hysterically-written shit that each month it goes into the recycling, unread.

Do we need full-time reviewers to sit about churning out more hype-laden press releases in disguise? Why, when we can quite readily find gamers who have delivered their opinions free of the taint of sponsorship and ad-revenue--gamers whose opinions are far more immediate, un-mediated by corporate duty or stylistic one-upmanship, and arguably more worthwhile than the stuff you have to pay for.

British games magazines

[BenjyD]

You have to remember that this guy is writing in the context of the British games magazine market. The style of writing in many of the magazines is a cross between Viz, FHM and the Sun ('Adult' cartoons with fart and dick jokes, Playboy with more articles and tabloid crap for non-Brits).
Given that background, I can see why he would want to spark a revolution in games writing.

Pwned...

[Mr. Flibble]

Great article - one has to wonder what "wanker" was like on the other end... I suspect he was just like this:

http://www.pwned.nl/

Re:America, where just mentioning the word "Nigger

[Anonymous Coward]

Well, not only it is normal to call people of Negroid race http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Negroid Negroes in Russia. It is outright offensive and unacceptable to call them "Black" or "African". African-American does not even translate. It is like to call a person from The Netherlands a "Europian-Dutch". If there is a need for some reason to emphasize the race of a person rather than the name or national or institutional association, then there are perfectly well defined race definitions, Negroid included. It is used throughout the world, just like meters and litres.

Some people would not listen to reason, unless it's Snow Crash kind of "Reason". Some smart people came up with metric system you know. 9/10th of the world use it now for obvious reasons. Then 1/10th does not give a shit and thing fall out of skies (or better yet - never fall where they are supposed to).
I am prouded to be an American but sometimes I am as dumbfounded as the rest of the world.

Is meter more offensive than foot?

How many meters are in 1 kilometer? 1000. How many feet in one mile? Oh I rememebr this one: 5,280.

Ok, now how many centimeters in 1 kilometer? 100,000, because you know, "centi" is one hundred, duhh... How many inches in a mile? Arghhh... TGIG (Thank God It's Google) ... 63,360. Now, try it without computer.

Things do not need to make sense to be acceptable or unacceptable if people brains are damaged.

What should I teach my kid? Negroes or African-Americans? Meter or foot? The answer is of course both. What is the speed of new Boeing 7E7 Dreamliner in LPFN (leagues per fortnight)? Should I teach this too? Just in case?

Re:America, where just mentioning the word "Nigger

[mink]

You can see those "sambo" lawn statues all over the USA as well.

Re:America, where just mentioning the word "Nigger

[gobbo]

You can see those "sambo" lawn statues all over the USA as well.

Wow. Just... wow.