What Mainstream Media Think of Gaming

John Callaham writes "Video and PC games are a multi-billion dollar entertainment industry. So why don't they get the attention of movies or TV? FiringSquad interviews several members of the mainstream media, including reporters from Time, USA Today, Entertainment Weekly and more, to find the answers and see how journalism will cover games in the future." From the article: "I guess all I'd add is that gaming journalism is at a very interesting place right now. There are still a lot of people who are suspicious of games, and who don't understand their appeal, and there's an opportunity for people who write about games, if they do it well enough, to bridge that gap, and make games interesting to people who don't get them yet."

Comments

Because it needs 5-10 more years

[suv4x4]

Video and PC games are a multi-billion dollar entertainment industry. So why don't they get the attention of movies or TV?

First, who the heck concluded it doesn't get enough attention. I'd say it gets enough attention, notice the E3 coverage on Internet... And there we get to the point.

TV and Movies have been here for over 70 years, part of our culture. If something is on TV, "it gets enough attention".. Aparently TV is shown on TV, and movies are shown on TV and cinemas as well.

We're used to considering what's on TV "important". The fact that thousands of online media followed who sneezes at E3, is a lot less important.

Conclusion: we just need some more time so that Internet truly becomes a respected mainstream media to non-techies, where "important" stuff can happen. Gaming is the same. Give it more time, let the gamers grow some more.

Re:Can't Wait Until the Boomers Retire

[0racle]

You might want to give up that teenage angst one day, there's nothing to 'get' about video games. The answer to why games aren't covered the same way as TV or movies is quite simple. They aren't TV shows or movies. Shocking isn't it? There is no big star to know the intimate details of or be called this seconds sexiest man or woman. You don't go out for an evening to sit back and watch a movie, or spend a quiet night at home watching something. You don't have to do anything to enjoy a movie or TV show and the reviewer of them had the same experience that you did. It's not like that with a game, unless the game was so poorly done as to give the player no control over either the characters or the outcome of events.

Re:Can't Wait Until the Boomers Retire

[rholliday]

Bullshit. "Boomers" get video games just fine. They're just like any other non-sports game, just they involve a TV. If you get card games, if you get board games, you get video games. The fact that it is apparently acceptable to spend upwards of $600 and spend hours playing video games, that one is a little harder to stand. I don't play Monopoly because it takes too long to play. I can't imagine spending hours playing the same video game. The whole anti-social aspect of games (no, online doesn't count) is also confusing - half the point behind games is to be sociable with other people.

Way to prove his point. Card game and board games have little to do with most video games, beyond the fact that you need your brain to play.

As for the social aspect, how is playing video games (online or otherwise) any less social than staring at the TV, or going to the movies, or playing cards, for that matter? Four of my friends around the poker table is just as social as those same four around the XBox.