[Op/Ed] The Great UK Game Journo Meltdown of 2012

[MagGnome]

RPS is such a great site. It's a shame that I don't have the time to keep up with their coverage, as I really enjoy it. I've found so many great games through them that I never would have heard of otherwise.

[Farsight]

Originally Posted by DoctorFinger

game journalism - like all entertainment and product journalism - for the most part isn't really journalism.

This is the key to the discussion for me. Calling most games writers "journalists" is factually incorrect and demeans the word.

Many sites can't even honestly call themselves "critics". If the relationship to the creator is at all a consideration during a review, they're not a critic. They're either a fan, or worse, a mouthpiece.

The problem I have with games writing in its current state is that far too many fans and mouthpieces are calling themselves journalists. I guess it should come as little surprise that many of those writers are also untalented and immature, casting the entire industry in a lesser light.

[Kelegacy]

Yeah, the industry already has an immaturity problem. We need more of an effort to reverse this stigma, but I think we've got a LONG way to go. I love reading GAF and seeing the "journos" called out on a regular basis.

What are the requirements to be a paid game "journalist"? A high school diploma?

[bapenguin]

Originally Posted by Gorvi

I think it's more complex than that, though. It's not always so black and white where a bad game will magically get a shining review. That's far too obvious. It's the scores that generally get inflated. Where a 7.0 becomes an 8.5, an 8 becomes a 9, or even a 6.5 becomes a 7. I've heard and read enough from people in the industry to know that that kind of thing does happen.

The review should support the score. If it doesn't, it's not a good review regardless of score.

[Savok]

Funny, when I point out how rotten the industry is I get abused too. Mind you "it's ok guys, we're just fanboys and mouthpieces anyway" is a new one. I mean really? Your job description is "give free PR to game companies"? That's no the least bit upsetting to you? At least you're not defending Wainwright and screaming misogyny like the rest of the industry I suppose.

Here's an article from one of the only trustworthy names left. Got some interesting info about Wainwright.

On a side note Rev Stu is also looking into her, so she's pretty much fucked in terms of credibility.

[Gorvi]

Originally Posted by bapenguin

The review should support the score. If it doesn't, it's not a good review regardless of score.

Of course, and that's usually reflected as well. Downplaying issues games have or blowing out of proportion the better qualities of games, it's all part of it, not just pushing the score up a point or two.

My whole point for all of this is I just don't trust the major sites, and most of the minor ones (present company excluded, of course, Bap). If I'm really undecided on a game, which is rare these days as it is, I'll turn to user reviews and YouTube. I rely on the general sentiment of the gaming community as a whole, and even then I'll say "fuck it" and grab something if I think I'd enjoy something that's not as popular. I think now more than ever major review sites are more and more irrelevant for the more informed gamers out there, especially for niche games.

[Goronmon]

I will say that this whole situation has reminded me how much I do enjoy CoG. Makes me wonder if I should start contributing more again.

[MagGnome]

Originally Posted by Gorvi

Of course, and that's usually reflected as well. Downplaying issues games have or blowing out of proportion the better qualities of games, it's all part of it, not just pushing the score up a point or two.

My whole point for all of this is I just don't trust the major sites, and most of the minor ones (present company excluded, of course, Bap). If I'm really undecided on a game, which is rare these days as it is, I'll turn to user reviews and YouTube. I rely on the general sentiment of the gaming community as a whole, and even then I'll say "fuck it" and grab something if I think I'd enjoy something that's not as popular. I think now more than ever major review sites are more and more irrelevant for the more informed gamers out there, especially for niche games.

I stopped paying attention to most major game reviews back in the early 00's after several high profile titles were released to big hype, heaps of praise, and ridiculously glowing reviews and high scores (Doom 3 and Black & White, for example), then a few months later many of those same reviewers were disparaging the games and saying that they were overhyped...hype that they helped build. I recall the same thing happening with GTA IV and many other big games over the years. Lots of hype and glowing reviews followed by "Hmm, that game wasn't really the next coming of Jesus like we said".

Doom 3, for example, got one of the highest scores given by PC Gamer at that time. Now the game isn't bad or anything, but it's certainly not among the highest tier of PC games, which is where their review put it at release. :/

[Ravenlock]

Originally Posted by MagGnome

Doom 3, for example, got one of the highest scores given by PC Gamer at that time. Now the game isn't bad or anything, but it's certainly not among the highest tier of PC games, which is where their review put it at release. :/

I agree that phenomenon is frustrating, but critics (like anybody else) are susceptible to excitement over "the new" superseding their ability to be objective.

It happens with films, too. When Titanic came out it was the Best Thing Since Sliced Bread because it was huge and majestic and wow look at that ship. It isn't remembered nearly so fondly now. Avatar, same deal.

It doesn't happen as *often* with movies, maybe, because games are still able to show us something substantially technically better than we've ever seen before, while movies rarely make those jumps. But it does happen.

It's doubly confusing with games because games are reviewed partly as products, not just art, and with products that phenomenon is the rule, not the exception. The New iPhone is amazing and will change your life, until the next one shows up, and then this one will become a worthless piece of shit. The perceived value of a product goes down over time as newer, "better" products appear. Games shouldn't have to suffer that IMO, but I think they do.

[tacitus]

One thing to remember about "professional" game reviewers - and its worse now than it has ever been - is they have to play and review very quickly. Even without the ancillary hype machine and the PR pressure its very hard to have long and deep thoughts on a subject when your "final report" is due immediately.

[muddi900]

Originally Posted by Farsight

This is the key to the discussion for me. Calling most games writers "journalists" is factually incorrect and demeans the word.

Many sites can't even honestly call themselves "critics". If the relationship to the creator is at all a consideration during a review, they're not a critic. They're either a fan, or worse, a mouthpiece.

The problem I have with games writing in its current state is that far too many fans and mouthpieces are calling themselves journalists. I guess it should come as little surprise that many of those writers are also untalented and immature, casting the entire industry in a lesser light.

The problem is that any attempt at actual criticism and dissection of games leads to accusations of pretense. Reason most reviews are 'This game is awesome broseph!' and 'This is shit' because that's what gamers want.

[Doogie2K]

Florence himself speaks out, and actually goes out of his way to defend Lauren Wainwright, implying that her employer was driving the libel suit bus, not her.

He also mentioned going to bat for her on Twitter while angry nerds said vile things to her, which...yeah, ask me how surprised I am by that little development. Angry nerds are rapidly becoming my least favourite Internet people.

[Savok]

More from Kain, with bonus Jessica Chobot making a fool of herself.

[Savok]

In other related news, now taking bets on when poor Geoff loses it completely. 2:1 on suicide, 4:1 he simply goes on a shooting spree. 3:2 it's both.

[Urizen]

Originally Posted by Savok

In other related news, now taking bets on when poor Geoff loses it completely. 2:1 on suicide, 4:1 he simply goes on a shooting spree. 3:2 it's both.

Lady ends that video with, "We came. We Dew'd. We kicked its butt."

Caesar will be happy being remembered.

[Krispy]

Originally Posted by Savok

In other related news, now taking bets on when poor Geoff loses it completely. 2:1 on suicide, 4:1 he simply goes on a shooting spree. 3:2 it's both.

Savok, this is the best post you have ever made. I am laughing my ass off.

[Ghostbear]

The look on Geoff's face is the look of a man that knows he is whoring.

Poor bastard.

[Savok]

Originally Posted by Urizen

Lady ends that video with, "We came. We Dew'd. We kicked its butt."

Caesar will be happy being remembered.

Watch her closely and you'll notice that she still hasn't been paid enough to actually drink the stuff.

Regret's a powerful thing.

[Ravenlock]

Oh, Geoff.

Oh, no.

[MagGnome]

I hadn't noticed that she doesn't actually drink the stuff (whatever that is) until Savok pointed it out. Ha!

Geoff...wow, just wow.