A Game Journalist Breakdown - Rant

[Agema]

Fair enough.
But by endings I was also thinking about game play and structure, not just story, which I'm guessing is what you're talking about?

Ah, sorry, I misunderstood what you mean - we could term that the "endgame" rather than the "ending" to reduce confusion?

I agree that players often don't want to be diverted into a mound of rote tedium at what should be the crecendo of the experience. However, at the same time, I'm not sure it's critical for a review either. Where NG+ is a significant additional part of the game (like Starfield where there is a specific game feel, but unlike Skyrim, where it's just mucking around as you please after the endgame boss), I think it's definitely key to a review.

I quite like the idea that if players want to go back in, giving them something to spice things up from their previous run seems okay. After all, those players who want to finish and be done, it doesn't really matter. As another quick note, getting the most powerful stuff in the game too late to have some proper fun with it before the wrap-up, that's annoying.

 

[BrawlMan]

Regarding games industry problems,

View attachment 12281

It linked this video, which further elaborates -



The difficulty in orchestrating a course correction is directly correlated to industry size. While there are some bright spots, it’s nearly impossible to efficiently weed out the dysfunctional management found in nearly every corner of it in their collective mission to feed the glut of consumers and shareholders alike.

Thank you. I love that video.

 

[Dreiko]

Ah, sorry, I misunderstood what you mean - we could term that the "endgame" rather than the "ending" to reduce confusion?

I agree that players often don't want to be diverted into a mound of rote tedium at what should be the crecendo of the experience. However, at the same time, I'm not sure it's critical for a review either. Where NG+ is a significant additional part of the game (like Starfield where there is a specific game feel, but unlike Skyrim, where it's just mucking around as you please after the endgame boss), I think it's definitely key to a review.

I quite like the idea that if players want to go back in, giving them something to spice things up from their previous run seems okay. After all, those players who want to finish and be done, it doesn't really matter. As another quick note, getting the most powerful stuff in the game too late to have some proper fun with it before the wrap-up, that's annoying.

What genres are we analyzing here? Because Jrpg endings in particular (the genre which has the most emphasis on story outside of visual novels) has consistently incredible endings with all the attention in the universe put into them. Metaphor had a bunch of anime cutscenes crammed in and an epilogue and everything, for example. And persona 3 R is just a timeless moment that we all know and love.


Like Skyrim doesn't have an "ending" as much as an end to the main quest and then you get to keep playing. That's not the sort of story-driven game that puts all its eggs on its story, so I wouldn't expect much of it.

 

[Hades]

I always think the ''they're just political activists!'' complaint is pretty silly.

Its only ever used for journalists who might go ''um so racism is bad'', but youtubers who do things like having a complete mental breakdown and screaming about pronouns are mysteriously not included in the list of political activists. Even those that rightfully deem it pathetic don't really use the ''political activists'' line on them.

 

[Dirty Hipsters]

Regarding games industry problems,

View attachment 12281

It linked this video, which further elaborates -



The difficulty in orchestrating a course correction is directly correlated to industry size. While there are some bright spots, it’s nearly impossible to efficiently weed out the dysfunctional management found in nearly every corner of it in their collective mission to feed the glut of consumers and shareholders alike.

1. Lets not normalize answering questions with AI generated drivel.

2. What does any of this (including the video) have to do with the topic of games journalism, which is what we're talking about?

 

[Dreiko]

I always think the ''they're just political activists!'' complaint is pretty silly.

Its only ever used for journalists who might go ''um so racism is bad'', but youtubers who do things like having a complete mental breakdown and screaming about pronouns are mysteriously not included in the list of political activists. Even those that rightfully deem it pathetic don't really use the ''political activists'' line on them.

I broadly agree with you, the one difference however is that youtoubers don't drape themselves with the mantle of authority and prestige that calling oneself a "journalist" confers.

Journalists have a higher degree of expectations placed on them and are held to a higher standard than average laypeople. Youtubers are just some dude with a webcam or a modern phone who has an opinion and shares it. There is no pretense of any sort of "journalism" transpiring so the expectations of an unbiased and apolitical work are also absent from the minds of reasonable audience members. Meanwhile, if someone's a journalist, you'd expect more out of them in terms of objectivity and lack of viewpoint bias.

If the games journalists instead called themselves "games yappers" or "games opiners" or something else less authoritative and more humble (and accurate) they'd not be met with as much criticism as they are now. Though I'm sure they'd still get some.

 

[Hades]

I broadly agree with you, the one difference however is that youtoubers don't drape themselves with the mantle of authority and prestige that calling oneself a "journalist" confers.

Journalists have a higher degree of expectations placed on them and are held to a higher standard than average laypeople. Youtubers are just some dude with a webcam or a modern phone who has an opinion and shares it. There is no pretense of any sort of "journalism" transpiring so the expectations of an unbiased and apolitical work are also absent from the minds of reasonable audience members. Meanwhile, if someone's a journalist, you'd expect more out of them in terms of objectivity and lack of viewpoint bias.

If the games journalists instead called themselves "games yappers" or "games opiners" or something else less authoritative and more humble (and accurate) they'd not be met with as much criticism as they are now. Though I'm sure they'd still get some.

Don't they though? I get what you're saying in that the title of journalist has more prestige than that of journalist, but Youtubers for decades have draped themselves in the mantle of another sort of authority. Plenty are pretty vocal with the faux populi argument of them being the true voice of the gaming community and that they surpassed journalist outlets in reach long ago, which in terms of numbers likely is isn't even untrue.

I also don't think gaming journalist were ever quite considered prestigious enough for the argument that we should expect better to truly hold water.

 

[hanselthecaretaker2]

1. Lets not normalize answering questions with AI generated drivel.

2. What does any of this (including the video) have to do with the topic of games journalism, which is what we're talking about?

1. Was mostly chiming in on this.

2. It’s clearly connected to the issue of games journalism and @BrawlMan is not wrong about “the system” being broken, when most of the bigger players (pubs) in the industry rely on journalists to promote their games regardless of how good or bad they are. Proof is how some outlets aren’t given a review code if there’s reason to believe they’ll have a negative impression, or perhaps they refused to sign something saying they wouldn’t. Everyone knows higher scores = more $. Sometimes it’s for bs trolling reasons, but part of the reason for the dramatic disparity often found in critical vs user reviews is the latter calling out what they believe to be an undeserved score one way or the other.

 

[BrawlMan]

2. It’s clearly connected to the issue of games journalism and @BrawlMan is not wrong about “the system” being broken, when most of the bigger players (pubs) in the industry rely on journalists to promote their games regardless of how good or bad they are. Proof is how some outlets aren’t given a review code if there’s reason to believe they’ll have a negative impression, or perhaps they refused to sign something saying they wouldn’t. Everyone knows higher scores = more $. Sometimes it’s for bs trolling reasons, but part of the reason for the dramatic disparity often found in critical vs user reviews is the latter calling out what they believe to be an undeserved score one way or the other.

Thank you. Especially when an individual reviewer or website gets blacklisted for having their own opinion and calling a legitimate bad game that is actually bad or mediocre. Ask Stephanie James Sterling. Do you know how many times she got blacklisted? Even after she left Destructoid and later the Escapists. Talk to Matt Simmons from YoVideoGames people. He used to have a review blog, and Capcom (of USA) blacklisted him for giving Resident Evil: Darkside Chronicles a 6/10. The game has legit camera problems and relies on too much shaky cam for fake difficulty. What's even more insulting, is that most other big journalist sites didn't get blacklisted when graded the same score or worst. Simmons didn't even get a review copy; he paid $50 new for the game.


EDIT: A one two punch reminder from Dunkey.

​

 

[Dirty Hipsters]

1. Was mostly chiming in on this.

Yes, as it relates to game reviews, which is the topic of the thread and the topic of the post I was responding to.

2. It’s clearly connected to the issue of games journalism and @BrawlMan is not wrong about “the system” being broken, when most of the bigger players (pubs) in the industry rely on journalists to promote their games regardless of how good or bad they are. Proof is how some outlets aren’t given a review code if there’s reason to believe they’ll have a negative impression, or perhaps they refused to sign something saying they wouldn’t. Everyone knows higher scores = more $. Sometimes it’s for bs trolling reasons, but part of the reason for the dramatic disparity often found in critical vs user reviews is the latter calling out what they believe to be an undeserved score one way or the other.

Ok, and how would giving game reviewers 1 month+ to review games fix any of these issues? That's what BrawlMan's idea was, that's what I was responding to.

 

[Dreiko]

Don't they though? I get what you're saying in that the title of journalist has more prestige than that of journalist, but Youtubers for decades have draped themselves in the mantle of another sort of authority. Plenty are pretty vocal with the faux populi argument of them being the true voice of the gaming community and that they surpassed journalist outlets in reach long ago, which in terms of numbers likely is isn't even untrue.

I also don't think gaming journalist were ever quite considered prestigious enough for the argument that we should expect better to truly hold water.

Oh I think that's pretty accurate though. Not that they're the voice of the people as much as that they hold generally average opinions. I guess how true that statement feels to you depends on how high of a regard you hold the average person. I tend to hold them in generally very low regard hence the shoe fits.

Thing is, as low as my view on the average is, games journalists manage to be a couple orders of magnitude worse than even that in all metrics, with alarming consistency, which I think is noteworthy and fair to bring up.

And I agree that they weren't ever considered as such high regard, which makes the contrast all the more glaring. You have someone you never respected act all pretentious and bedazzle themselves with haughty titles, of course such a thing would be annoying as all hell.



It's like someone operating a dirty water hotdog stand and calling themselves the emperor of food. No bro, we all can cook better than that and we're not even in the cooking business, we're just eaters with a hobby of casually cooking a couple times a week. Your hot dog stand doesn't make you special, even if it has big important words plastered all over it. And the fact that you can't tell that reheating storebought hotdogs isn't really cooking is if anything an indication of the problem we have with you.

 

[BrawlMan]

I guess how true that statement feels to you depends on how high of a regard you hold the average person. I tend to hold them in generally very low regard hence the shoe fits.

Thing is, as low as my view on the average is, games journalists manage to be a couple orders of magnitude worse than even that in all metrics, with alarming consistency, which I think is noteworthy and fair to bring up.

Like I said before, not much of a difference anymore.

Only by comparison. I 'm not exactly a fan of their bullshit and antics either. Depending on who or whom we are talking about.

A lot of gaming Youtube reviewers or Twtich streamers/whatever they call themselves aren't much better than the professional gaming journalist nowadays. They're either have their heads up their asses or when they get really popular, they start taking these weird stances, illogical takes, and dumb hills to die on. Or get upset at people making gaming choices they disagree with, even when nothing or no one is actually harmed. It's gotten to the point where they became no better or just as bad as the game journalists they wanted to avoid being and mocked. Especially when they start making things up, dig into intellectual dishonesty, and adding to discourse. Don't even get me started when they get called out or caught being an asshole. They'll either delete their twitter post(s), then gaslight their audience, or remove their YouTube video or set it to private.

It's like someone operating a dirty water hotdog stand and calling themselves the emperor of food. No bro, we all can cook better than that and we're not even in the cooking business, we're just eaters with a hobby of casually cooking a couple times a week. Your hot dog stand doesn't make you special, even if it has big important words plastered all over it. And the fact that you can't tell that reheating storebought hotdogs isn't really cooking is if anything an indication of the problem we have with you.

Congratulations, there are plenty of YouTubers/Twitch streamers with the exact same toxic, up their own ass, attitude no different from the professional critics you described and have a lower opinion about.