Game Journalists Uninteresting Vultures?

Next Generation has commentary on an article penned by David Jaffe, creator of God of War. In the article Jaffe charges folks in the game journalism business with being uninteresting hangers-on. He implores journalists to consider themselves journalists first and "part of the games industry" a distant second. The Next-Gen article has some interesting insights on the topic. From the article: "... intimacy with the game industry is a positive, rather than a negative, so long as the line that divides the journalist's function from the game-maker's is understood. The game-maker, in turn, relies heavily on journalism, en masse, on which to base creative decisions. Did every game maker play the last Tomb Raider game? Doubtful. But they all know they don't want to make a game like it. The press feeds the imagination of the creator through a system of warnings and prompts, which are then interpreted and transformed into progress."

Comments

Here here.

[hexghost]

Its about time someone said this. Let me state first my opinion: 99.9% of game journalists are complete fucking fanboys. When I want to see a product review for the latest game, what do i get? Unless the game is completely, obviously broken, I get glowing reviews that are basically rehashed press releases. All the major game sites do this, from gamespy to (of course) anything IGN. Game journalists are basically the equivilent of those stupid movie review catchlines you see from no one you've ever heard of, the kind that say "Funniest movie of the year!" for Gigli, etc.

Game journalists: stop regurgitating the marketing fluff, start writing honest articles, and people might actually care about what you say. Even if it means you don't get your paycheck from the game companies any more.

Games and pop culture

[Red Flayer]

FTA: "Jaffe was keen to point out that, far from his being an elitist point of view, he felt that journos should set themselves apart in order to do a better job of informing the public. There's something too cozy, he believes, in the people who inform the public about the game industry, viewing themselves as part of the game industry."

True. But I think that Jaffe misses a distinction -- there is a gamer culture that the journalists are identifying with, more than just the game industry.

It's kind of like pop culture -- there are those who read Entertainment Weekly, and are interested in what the stars are doing. Then there are the people who read the gossip column, to see if anyone they know is getting mentioned.

The game industry is like the pop culture industry -- lots of people play the games (or watch the movies and the TV shows, and wonder what Tom and Katie are up to), but few people know the individuals who are 'making the scene'.

The problem, like with pop culture, is that only insiders get the real scoop. The bigger problem, as I see it, is that the real scoop isn't even published -- it's the dross, that so many people are familiar with already, that gets the ink. And if you give a bad review (or negative gossip), forget the advance copy of the game the game (the next party invite).

Perhaps Jaffe should also realize that the game journalism industry is very similar to the game industry itself -- if you take risks, you're likely to get burned. Safe reporting and reviews tend tohelp with job/company solvency.

In the end, I'd like to see honest reporting by industry insiders, rather than 'game paparazzi' doing vacuous, cover-art reviews... it's the honest part that's hard to find.

hmm...

[Malleus Dei]

Well, I'm a gamer, and I've been a game reviewer/journalist, and the fact is that you can't write a decent review unless you can play the game you are reviewing really well and unless you have a significant amount of knowledge of the genre and subject(s) involved. Non-gamer journalists generally haven't got even the first clue about gaming and usually write hideously ignorant articles about gaming that either infuriate gamers or make them laugh.

So, since you really need to have a participant doing the journalism, you're going to have some bias and a certain lack of objectivity that you can't do anything about whether you like it or not, because it's going to go with the territory.

Deal with it.

Graphics -- player's bane, reviewer's delight

[Prien715]

I think the largest problem with reviewers is that they all feel compelled to have a graphics catagory and then rate games partially based on it. Remember how much fun Doom 3 was? It got on 8.5 on Gamespot, slightly higher than We Love Katamari Damacy. I recently finished Commandos 3, which was extremely difficult but much more fun/satisfying than Doom 3. Gamespot gave it a 7.7, bemoaning the graphics were horror -- still 2D -- and the camera locked into 800x600.

Game reviewers love graphics because they can post pretty screenshots and seem objective. However, the most important part of games is the subjective fun-factor. It's like judging a theatrical play based on the quality of the costumes and stage design instead of the quality of the actors and the script.

Re:The Escapist

[Turn-X Alphonse]

If you're a writer may I ask why you're all so out of touch with the gamers themselvs? I started reading from issue one but now I find the news letters to be hardly worth reading. The Escapist seems to have lost it's way and now seems like a theme restraunt magazine at best.

I used to think Penny Arcade was out of touch but the magazine just seems 100 times worse. If you want to do a comment on girl gamers then do an article a week, not a whole issue of it. Most of us are sick of girl gamers whining over not being equal when we couldn't careless of their gender. There is jerks in the community, we all know this but we have to put up with them, so why should they whine about it?

The last article I read due to intrest and not sheer boredom from it was the one about people "wandering" looking for a new game to get hooked on. It most of been like a month ago now and it's getting to the point where I'm going to kill the news letter and just skip any stories on slashdot involving it.

If you guys want people like me (the 20 year old market who have time to play but don't find much worth playing any more), then I suggest you stop making theme weeks and start putting up some real decent content. Stop with the "Games arn't games any more" articles or the "games should be more this way" or the ever whored "games companies should/n't do X/Y/Z" and post some proper decent content.

We started out with guys talking about their expriences and memories. How games used to be and how they are now, comparing each point and saying pretty much "I miss game X, but I can still play it and hey the latest version isn't so bad". While it wasn't great it brought back memories which made the magazine worth reading. Little quirks like the old text adventures and the arcade scene.

Now it's gone to everyone whining about everything they think "needs to be fixed". So I'm whining that the magazine needs to be fixed. Other wise you'll end up losing the market of "real gamers" and just be left with the whiney majority who are only reading for the latest WoW story untill the minority (who tend to run the elite places people desire to be) consider The Escapist a poor joke and it becomes a bad joke among the community.

Re:The Escapist

[rathehun]

This is the internet. Turn off styles. Use a Greasemonkey script. Works as well.

Honestly. You guys still live in the false dichotomy of viewer/provider that print has established.

No different than ESPN

[mactari]

From Jaffe's blog:
I want game journalism- at least 50% of it- to be more like music or film journalism of old. I want it to challenge us and tear our s#!t [mactari's edit] apart and analyze it and- when we do a good job- champion it and bring the message to the masses. ...

Now sure, some of that has to do with what the public will actually pay for (it's not like NEXT GEN magazine- one of my faves of all time- was a chart topper). But doesn't some of it also have to do with the mentality of the folks who write for these magazines IF indeed they are not respecting their OWN industry enough to claim JOURNALISM as their industry?

Has Jaffe gone completely mad? Does he really think video game journalists are any different from the talking heads (and mouths on radio) of ESPN?

The issue is that both "journalism" outlets are really just thinly veiled, sometimes unofficially sanctioned extensions of the respective entertainment industries. Each is, unfortunately, intertwined commercially with the product they're "reporting" on. Just as ESPN Radio's SportsCenter updates are often 20-30% (by time) commercials for games that are being shown on, you guessed it, ESPN or ABC (both owned by Disney), video gaming sites pimp games that they themselves are selling. Heck, at least one arguably large site pimps their store's (that should have you worried enough as is, that a 'news' site sells games) sales as news alongside their 'true' news stories.

Let the buyer beware -- good reviews mean better relations with major gaming houses means easier copy, more codes, more exclusives, and better sales for both players. It's a fact of life, I'm afraid. Jaffe wonders why there are so many previews; that's easy. They're "reviews" without any conventional requirement for objective judgement. You can play up South Park for the N64 as a game with lots of potential even when it stinks to high heaven -- it's still in development, after all. Previews are excuses for incestuous gaming industry lovefests, and everyone's a winner, developers (Out, out, Ballmer!), gaming rag editors, authors, & owners, and even readers.

Readers, that is, except for those like Jaffe that might truly want to see someone with both the personal and commercial cahones to call out the proverbial spade. Where are the old oldmanmurray.com folk when you need em?