Editorial RPG Codex Editorial: Where Journalism Goes to Write Itself

[Infinitron]

Zewp http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=80445957&postcount=24



Obsidian's "boycott" of the Codex was only in effect during New Vegas' development.

 

[tuluse]

Previews sometimes suck. Usually, even. A few months ago, just after Aliens: Colonial Marines came out (after having gotten pretty decent previews a few months before that, thanks to a deceptive demo), I asked my boss if we could stop doing previews. We all had a long discussion, and we decided against it, because it'd do a disservice to our readers to not provide them with the information that we get from those conferences. The solution, at least for us, is to be as honest and as candid as possible about what we're seeing and hearing, and to ignore the demos that suck or feel like a waste of time.

This asks the question, what is the point of a preview? If all you're doing is telling us what you saw, why can't we just watch an actual video of what you saw? What is the point of having a person there?

The answer is that the publishers/developers are using your credibility to make their advertisement seem like it's something else.

Now, I understand a website needs to make money, and not doing previews would essentially just be throwing money away as readers to to other sites to get them. However, making it sound like it's some kind of service to your readers you are proud to provide makes you sound either disingenuous or that you've stuck your head in the sand and pretending there is nothing wrong with reporting on advertisements.

Oh man I just realized the full irony of Jason's stance.

His problem with Grunker's article was that he had a narrow view of the whole process and thus wasn't able to give an accurate picture of what happens. That is exactly what a game preview is. Grunker's article is essentially a gamescom jounalism preview.

By writing a preview, any preview at all, you are by definition getting a narrow view of the game and cannot get an accurate picture of the game as a whole, and are commit the exact same "error" that Grunker commit in his article. Why is ok in one situation, but not the other?

 

[Zewp]

It's ironic that Jschreier also thinks Kotaku regularly does things to 'piss off the gaming industry.' They're boot-lickers just like 90% of other outlets. The only time Kotaku runs articles that criticize aspects of the gaming industry is when those articles do not run the risk of seriously pissing someone off. Such as Trendy Entertainment, which is a small indie studio that can't really do anything meaningful or harmful in response.

Where are the articles taking EA, Ubisoft or Activision to task for absolutely horrendous, anti-consumer business practices that they've been employing for the past few years? For screwing customers over just that little bit more every year? Oh wait no, those guys are industry giants, best lick their boots to ensure we don't inspire their ire.

Face it Jason, as much as you like to believe different, Kotaku is part of the unholy trio; Gamespot, IGN and Kotaku. These three publications stand as a testimony to everything that is wrong with games journalism. They're not exclusively responsible for the sad state it's in, but they're arguably the worst offenders.

 

[Menckenstein]

Fanboys with press passes getting paid to fanboy.

derp.

 

[Zewp]

Zewp http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=80445957&postcount=24



Obsidian's "boycott" of the Codex was only in effect during New Vegas' development.

Oh, damn. My apologies. I thought it was still in effect.

 

[Infinitron]

Zewp http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=80445957&postcount=24



Obsidian's "boycott" of the Codex was only in effect during New Vegas' development.

Oh, damn. My apologies. I thought it was still in effect.

That's understandable, since all the Obsidian employees with accounts here (with the exception of Anthony Davis) never came back after they left in 2009. Actually, Anthony only came back when he left Obsidian.

You can see right where it began in his posting history:

 

[Cosmo]

...

Wow...

And if i may add, you'd be surprised to see how those issues are also prevalent in all forms of modern journalism unfortunately...

 

[abnaxus]

This thread has become fucking boring.

 

[Grunker]

This thread has become fucking boring.

I am sorry I am not able to provide drama, but that was never my reason for registering on the Codex

 

[felipepepe]

It's ironic that Jschreier also thinks Kotaku regularly does things to 'piss off the gaming industry.' They're boot-lickers just like 90% of other outlets. The only time Kotaku runs articles that criticize aspects of the gaming industry is when those articles do not run the risk of seriously pissing someone off. Such as Trendy Entertainment, which is a small indie studio that can't really do anything meaningful or harmful in response.

Where are the articles taking EA, Ubisoft or Activision to task for absolutely horrendous, anti-consumer business practices that they've been employing for the past few years? For screwing customers over just that little bit more every year? Oh wait no, those guys are industry giants, best lick their boots to ensure we don't inspire their ire.

Indeed... Most common target are jRPGs and japanese developers that already don't give a fuck about Kotaku or US sales... Kotaku make countless articles about "the death of jRPGs", about why Japanese games are in decline, ask every western about why they don't like modern japanese games and all that... but NEVER do anything close to that with their western bros.

Let's talk about how that Japanese developer doesn't know about Steam (how silly!), but let's never question widespread idiotic beliefs people keep saying, like "turn-based games were made only due technological limitations". There's not a single "aren't you bored of FPS?", "do we need another Call of Duty?","should Fallout 3 really be an FPS?", "aren't multi-platform releases are destroying PC games?", "isn't Halo's Cortana extremely misogynist?", "Are cinematic games really a step-forward?" or anything remotely critical of AAA games and the status quo...

 

[Gragt]

This thread has become fucking boring.

I am sorry I am not able to provide drama, but that was never my reason for registering on the Codex

Drama for the Drama Throne!

 

[evdk]

This thread has become fucking boring.

I am sorry I am not able to provide drama, but that was never my reason for registering on the Codex

So your nefarious plan has been to hit it big by taking advantage of this magazine's prestigious reputation all along!
Now that you have your foot in the door of gaming journalism, rubbing shoulders with Ubisoft bigwigs and Kotaku writers we're not good enough for you anymore to provide entertainment?
Ban Grunker.

 

[dnf]

There's not a single "aren't you bored of FPS?", "do we need another Call of Duty?","should Fallout 3 really be an FPS?", "aren't multi-platform releases are destroying PC games?", "isn't Halo's Cortana extremely misogynist?", "Are cinematic games really a step-forward?" or anything remotely critical of AAA games and the status quo...

Edit: there is also the common tatic of writing a editorial discussing design flaws in 10/10 games(score given by them) some 5 or 6 months later. So if we say that they write shitty glowing reviews, they can point out to one of the editorials(without damaging metacritic score that is)

 

[Grunker]

there is also the common tatic of writing a editorial discussing design flaws in 10/10 games(score given by them) some 5 or 6 months later.

Yeah, that's an oldie but goldie on many sites.

Or showering a game in "game of forever design brilliance" when it comes out and dismissing it as an outdated games filled with problems down the line (like how many are treating Oblivion and Fallout 3 now).

 

[Lancehead]

Oh man I just realized the full irony of Jason's stance.

His problem with Grunker's article was that he had a narrow view of the whole process and thus wasn't able to give an accurate picture of what happens. That is exactly what a game preview is. Grunker's article is essentially a gamescom jounalism preview.

By writing a preview, any preview at all, you are by definition getting a narrow view of the game and cannot get an accurate picture of the game as a whole, and are commit the exact same "error" that Grunker commit in his article. Why is ok in one situation, but not the other?

The article is more of an instance of confirmation of what was long suspected and presumed.

 

[Harg Harfardarssen]

there is also the common tatic of writing a editorial discussing design flaws in 10/10 games(score given by them) some 5 or 6 months later.

Yeah, that's an oldie but goldie on many sites.

Or showering a game in "game of forever design brilliance" when it comes out and dismissing it as an outdated games filled with problems down the line (like how many are treating Oblivion and Fallout 3 now).

I've always seen this as less a product of a lack journalistic integrity than the kind of critical failure borne of the a deep seated desire for games to be taken seriously as art and the unacknowledged doubt that it ever can be. They want these games to be great so badly that they delude themselves into believing they actually are. To silence the niggling voices of doubt whispering "have I dedicated my life to nothing more than games for children and the emotionally retarded?", whenever a game is released with large amounts of content and superficial complexity, some will inevitably latch on to it as proof that games have finally demonstrated their maturity as an art form without fully thinking it through. So they jump into bed with the game, and mistake their joy at finally finding "vindication" with the game's quality. See e.g., Seth Schiesel's pieces in the NY times.*

Six months later, when the post-coital glow of ego gratification has worn off and the game sits there, the warts of juvenilia and cliche starkly apparent in the cold light of the (perhaps slightly convolutedly) metaphorical dawn, they will feel the need to savage it. Not for its flaws, but for letting them down by failing to live up to their delusions.

So really more of a critical failure than an ethical one. Annoying yes, but not as bad as the subtle corruption inherent in a press corp that uses "our industry" to refer to the games industry rather than journalism.

*except for the one about Nier, that's actually 100% correct.

 

[SCO]

Resuming mr jschreier : most people here have been feed bullshit until it was coming out of their ears since the 90's so are not particularly impressed by your stool.

 

[Pika-Cthulhu]

Resuming mr jschreier : most people here have been feed bullshit until it was coming out of their ears since the 90's so are not particularly impressed by your stool.

Nostalgia goggles?

The new shit doesnt compare to the old shit

 

[TwinkieGorilla]

Christ's sake.

Dude. Easy. Don't take the fucking lord's name in vain, HHR.

 

[Drowed]

Avellone's sake.

Dude. Easy. Don't take the fucking lord's name in vain, HHR.

Fixed.

 

[Gurkog]

Perhaps his reaction was an effort to drum up some easy good PR for Kotaku by goading Grunker into making erroneous claims. He would then show edited chat logs in a blog post to boost visibility of his ability to spin a negative truth on the doomsayer. With a click bait title it might drum up enough views that he can post it proudly on his resume for a position at a prestigious publishing house. That is the whole point of 'games journalism' isn't it?

 

[crawlkill]

this week on the Codex, we see how far nerds will go talking about talking about talking

 

[evdk]

Always everywhere, we see how far people will go talking about talking about talking

Welcome to the Internet, enjoy your stay.

 

[Sam Ecorners]

there is also the common tatic of writing a editorial discussing design flaws in 10/10 games(score given by them) some 5 or 6 months later. So if we say that they write shitty glowing reviews, they can point out to one of the editorials(without damaging metacritic score that is)

AKA The Rybicki Maneuver

 

[mindx2]

Perhaps his reaction was an effort to drum up some easy good PR for Kotaku by goading Grunker into making erroneous claims. He would then show edited chat logs in a blog post to boost visibility of his ability to spin a negative truth on the doomsayer. With a click bait title it might drum up enough views that he can post it proudly on his resume for a position at a prestigious publishing house. That is the whole point of 'games journalism' isn't it?

Yeah, I'm waiting for the Kotaku article to show up any day now. Can't wait to see the spin and how ignorant Grunker is about "real" journalists and their best practices...