Gaming Journalists Make No Damn Sense

[Fat Hippo]

And yes, YouTuber's often aren't much better because you have to be a "personality". You probably pay more attention to them then me, but aside from something like IGN's Daily Fix, I bet you couldn't find another gaming "news" channel that's just the news and not a personality infront of it pushing their views and opinion into it.

I'm of the mind that I like my news filtered. I just want the facts. I want to get in, get what I need and get out without someone forcing their views down my throat when I'm trying to figure out what the hell I should wear outside today.

I know for a fact that outlets like VG247 or Kotaku think embedding their "voice", which usually means their political ideology, into their articles makes them more interesting. And for their audiences they're courting, it does. I think that becomes a problem when someone writes or makes a video to counter them on something they put out there, where things get nasty real quick and they (often times both sides) start defending their point of view as the ONLY point of a view.

That's something I personally have a problem with in today's gaming media, and all media in general really.

I feel like it's something that at least portions of the media have realized in the last few years, and there has been a stronger seperation of "news" in contrast to "editorials" or "opinion pieces". Granted that's just my gut feeling, maybe it's only my perception. But it would be a sensible reaction on their part, as I think many readers have grown more sensitive and probably less trusting in their consumption of various media sources. In theory, it could make sense to present an article that contains both new information, and some opinions about it, but the lines begin to get real blurry if you do so. Instead, news sites will e.g. have an article introducing simply the facts, as unbiased as the source will allow, and in the sidebars seperate articles commenting on the information in a more subjective manner. It's much cleaner that way.

Personally, I get a bit sour when people talk of "the media" as a whole, whether in regards to gaming or otherwise, when accusing them of various faults, because the quality of media is just as diverse as anything else. Both between the sources, and sometimes even within. But having an opinion piece that is "stupid" from the perspective of yours truly is not inherently indicative of bad journalism. It simply means that the source in question is letting a voice speak I have strong disageements with. Whether or not I agree with it, it is my own duty as a critical reader to reflect on what parts of it I agree with.

And that is something I wish readers and writers of games content would take to heart, not that I need to tell you anything, as from what you've been writing you guys are really on the right track here, and that's commendable. I absolutely think there is room for social commentary and critique in video games and video games writing, but we need to get away from the toxicity that has plagued us these last years, on all sides of the equation.

 

[Nick Calandra]

I feel like it's something that at least portions of the media have realized in the last few years, and there has been a stronger seperation of "news" in contrast to "editorials" or "opinion pieces". Granted that's just my gut feeling, maybe it's only my perception. But it would be a sensible reaction on their part, as I think many readers have grown more sensitive and probably less trusting in their consumption of various media sources. In theory, it could make sense to present an article that contains both new information, and some opinions about it, but the lines begin to get real blurry if you do so. Instead, news sites will e.g. have an article introducing simply the facts, as unbiased as the source will allow, and in the sidebars seperate articles commenting on the information in a more subjective manner. It's much cleaner that way.

Personally, I get a bit sour when people talk of "the media" as a whole, whether in regards to gaming or otherwise, when accusing them of various faults, because the quality of media is just as diverse as anything else. Both between the sources, and sometimes even within. But having an opinion piece that is "stupid" from the perspective of yours truly is not inherently indicative of bad journalism. It simply means that the source in question is letting a voice speak I have strong disageements with. Whether or not I agree with it, it is my own duty as a critical reader to reflect on what parts of it I agree with.

And that is something I wish readers and writers of games content would take to heart, not that I need to tell you anything, as from what you've been writing you guys are really on the right track here, and that's commendable. I absolutely think there is room for social commentary and critique in video games and video games writing, but we need to get away from the toxicity that has plagued us these last years, on all sides of the equation.

Oh yea, as long as it's separated I personally have no problem with it and welcome it. I love reading different takes on things, even if I disagree with it or find some if downright silly. People get ridiculously mad about a lot of this stuff and it's just ridiculous to me.

I keep reiterating it, but I think a lot of it comes down to how these writers are presenting themselves on social media. They're my colleagues in spirit, but man, anytime I've interacted with them, and this even extends to people that formerly worked here, they act very self-righteous and judgmental to the point that if you think at all differently than them, you're against them and a bad person.

The former CM from here who I'll leave unnamed tried to paint me as a "conservative" just because I disagreed with him on some things and live in the Midwest...and that was his very first judgment of me after interacting with him for less than a week.

People are often on Twitter to find things to read, and then when you're building your personality around this stuff, people can no longer separate the author from their work and you automatically go in with a bias towards that work because you know who wrote it. That and people love drama anyways, so it's just fuel for the fire.

 

[Worgen]

I do. I mentioned it in the first post before this one and the second one. Albeit, they are usually independent commentators, analysis, or reviewers on YT. And event then, I avoid certain individual YouTubers like Angry Joe, NoBullshit, ReviewTechUSA (which stopped reviewing tech around 2014 and became another loudmouth that acts like he knows everything), and others I can't think of at the moment. RTUSA encouraged the harassment of a Nintendo fan, just because Yoshiller, the fan in this case, happened to war a Yoshi hat during a news interview at E3 2014. Because of that, I unsubscribed and wanted nothing to do with RTUSA right then and there.

I go out of my way to avoid major sites because they are the worst kinda of BAD. Boring, Annoying, Dumb.

As for your actual articles, they're okay, but most I have no interest in reading. At least you guys actually bother to write legit articles, regardless if I agree with you certain stances or not


You know what, we learned a little about this guy in my junior year in high school in literature class. Some of it's coming back to me. Thank you.


If you like DmC, I have no problem with it. My problem is a lot of journalists were trying abandon the classic DMC as if they were archaic or "behind the times". When DmC has aged worse in story, characters, and tone (the game reeks of 2012/13 in terms of following trends). The gameplay is better than DMC2, but that is not much of an achievement. DmC was just a lesser version of DMC4 & Bayonetta. I like the DE version of DmC (PS4 & XONE), but that is because they fixed a lot of the bad gameplay design from the vanilla release. Actual lock-on, bringing back the trickster dash as angel evade, God Must Die mode, Hardcore mode which makes enemies more agressive and does not lift demons helpless in the air, and fixing the whole your weapon bounces of the enemy if they're not the matching color. Color coded enemeis are a lazy design, and shows the combat was severly limiting in the original release. Now DmC is better than most Western style hack n slash/brawler action games & Ninja Gaiden 3 , but can't whole a candle to the original DMCs nor Bayonetta. Not to mention, DmC was supposed erase classic DMC, before all that backfired, because Capcom could not understand its own core audience. A lot of problems were going on with Japanese corporations in this time period. Trying to appeal to the Western crowd, while abandoing what made them special or unique in the first place, while trying to suck up to the COD/GTA/Gears crowd. The crowd who could not give a rats as no matter much Capcom and certain others had tried.

As for articles pushing gays, that is not exactly what I meant. I just meant politics in general regardless if your left or right. I noticed that there were cases of journalists (not just gaming either) calling certain groups or all people being anti-gay/racists/anti-women or whatever due to some loud assholes, yet throwing a label under everyone. That I do have problems with. Like I said before, these articles are have the with me or against me attitude or are sucking up to their corporate overlords. And honestly, don't feel like digging up any these of articles again, because they are not worth my time nor frustration. I am all for being inclusive when it comes to gaming, so I figured out to do things my own way a long time ago. Actually giving people legit info about games whether and helping them as best they can about what they're looking. I can't do everything, but I do the best I can. If not, I link them or show them something with more info or trustworthy than me.

I just don't have a patience nor care anymore for a majority of these mainstream articles. If it's easy as you described, go for it. I am sure as hell not gonna stop you.

At least you dislike nobullshit, since holy crap is he a dumbass who's claim to fame is just trying to shit on the sjw boogieman.

I don't recall seeing anyone trying to abandon the classic DMC games with the release of DmC and I tend to follow gaming sites pretty regularly. But again, I don't care about DMC, I found the plot to be fun from what I played of it, but the gameplay just felt stiff, especially after playing the buttery smooth Bayonetta 2, then I got distracted by other games and never went back. DMC 5 was good, but no Bayonetta 2.

It's funny how in your paragraph about not wanting politics to be pushed, you actively push your own politics by saying "sucking up to their corporate overlords." Everything is political, it just takes one person saying they don't like or what something to exist and boom, suddenly something is politically controversial. But we tend to notice politics we don't agree with more then those we do.

You are the one who is affirming that these articles exist and are common. I'm making the argument that while they might be around, I sincerely doubt there are as many as you claim there are. Its like when all the anti-sjw youtubers started claming that the sjw menace was crying about a line in the Doom Eternal trailer and it turned out there were a couple of twitters that mentioned the line "demon can be an offensive term, refer to them as mortally challenged" was weird.

 

[BrawlMan]

It's funny how in your paragraph about not wanting politics to be pushed, you actively push your own politics by saying "sucking up to their corporate overlords." Everything is political, it just takes one person saying they don't like or what something to exist and boom, suddenly something is politically controversial. But we tend to notice politics we don't agree with more then those we do.

I'm not pushing my politics, that is just what I know and how I honestly feel. Look, not every single

Its like when all the anti-sjw youtubers started claming that the sjw menace was crying about a line in the Doom Eternal trailer and it turned out there were a couple of twitters that mentioned the line "demon can be an offensive term, refer to them as mortally challenged" was weird.

.

You are the one who is affirming that these articles exist and are common. I'm making the argument that while they might be around, I sincerely doubt there are as many as you claim there are. Its like when all the anti-sjw youtubers started claming that the sjw menace was crying about a line in the Doom Eternal trailer and it turned out there were a couple of twitters that mentioned the line "demon can be an offensive term, refer to them as mortally challenged" was weird.

major gaming sites does this, but there are big problems going in gaming journalism. Hell, look at the first part of the Dunkey video I showed you. Whether you agree or disagree on this subject, I don't care at this point.

I don't recall seeing anyone trying to abandon the classic DMC games with the release of DmC and I tend to follow gaming sites pretty regularly. But again, I don't care about DMC, I found the plot to be fun from what I played of it, but the gameplay just felt stiff, especially after playing the buttery smooth Bayonetta 2, then I got distracted by other games and never went back. DMC 5 was good, but no Bayonetta 2.

Check again. Check any videos on the DmC DE version from IGN or Gamespot for the underdog/misunderstood narrative.

Here's some articles blaming fans for DmC's failure or upset that 5 did not take some or enough of DmC's feature: https://www.mcvuk.com/business-news/capcom-almost-halves-dmc-sales-expectations/110372/

Devil May Cry 5 preview | Devilishly stylish, stylishly familiar

The Completionists mocking/claiming/portraying that all DMC fans only hated the reboot just for Dante's hair. When it was more than just that.

The gameplay for DMC is only stiff if you are playing DMC1(first of it's kind), 2 (bad all around), and 4 with Nero (who only stiff compared to his incarnation in 5). DmC Dante may seem to play buttery smooth compared DMC1 Dante,, but is stiff compared to DMC3/4/5 Dante or Bayonetta. Especially if we're talking about Dante in 5. I know you prefer Bayonetta 2 over 5, and there is nothing wrong with that. I love both, but prefer 5 slightly over Bayo2. Bayo2 does have better bonus features and modes. We've discussed this before.

You are the one who is affirming that these articles exist and are common. I'm making the argument that while they might be around, I sincerely doubt there are as many as you claim there are. Its like when all the anti-sjw youtubers started claming that the sjw menace was crying about a line in the Doom Eternal trailer and it turned out there were a couple of twitters that mentioned the line "demon can be an offensive term, refer to them as mortally challenged" was weird.

All I said there are alot of crap articles in the mainstream. And unlike those idotic fans who claimed SJWs were destroying everything, I am not constantly freaking out at every single thing posted. Plus, the whole SJW vs. Anti-SJW was a load of crock that had done nothing, but make everyone miserable over nothing. That is where the the with me or against me attitudes really started to shine. Or the whole dumb situation with the schemer that is Anita Sarkeesian. She did not deserve the rape or death threats, but she was by no means innocent. Especially when her money troubles came up.

 

[Worgen]

I'm not pushing my politics, that is just what I know and how I honestly feel. Look, not every single



major gaming sites does this, but there are big problems going in gaming journalism. Hell, look at the first part of the Dunkey video I showed you. Whether you agree or disagree on this subject, I don't care at this point.



Check again. Check any videos on the DmC DE version from IGN or Gamespot for the underdog/misunderstood narrative.

Here's some articles blaming fans for DmC's failure or upset that 5 did not take some or enough of DmC's feature: https://www.mcvuk.com/business-news/capcom-almost-halves-dmc-sales-expectations/110372/

Devil May Cry 5 preview | Devilishly stylish, stylishly familiar

The Completionists mocking/claiming/portraying that all DMC fans only hated the reboot just for Dante's hair. When it was more than just that.

The gameplay for DMC is only stiff if you are playing DMC1(first of it's kind), 2 (bad all around), and 4 with Nero (who only stiff compared to his incarnation in 5). DmC Dante may seem to play buttery smooth compared DMC1 Dante,, but is stiff compared to DMC3/4/5 Dante or Bayonetta. Especially if we're talking about Dante in 5. I know you prefer Bayonetta 2 over 5, and there is nothing wrong with that. I love both, but prefer 5 slightly over Bayo2. Bayo2 does have better bonus features and modes. We've discussed this before.



All I said there are alot of crap articles in the mainstream. And unlike those idotic fans who claimed SJWs were destroying everything, I am not constantly freaking out at every single thing posted. Plus, the whole SJW vs. Anti-SJW was a load of crock that had done nothing, but make everyone miserable over nothing. That is where the the with me or against me attitudes really started to shine. Or the whole dumb situation with the schemer that is Anita Sarkeesian. She did not deserve the rape or death threats, but she was by no means innocent. Especially when her money troubles came up.

You might not be pushing your politics but its still there and noticeable. You could have gotten rid of it by changing a few words, like changing 'corporate overlords' to 'the publisher.' But, you didn't, you wanted that specific line, so really, you were pushing your politics.

Not sure what you are saying here, I also don't see a link to a dunkey vid, but I know his stuff so I wouldn't really take any of his vids super seriously.

I don't bother with IGN, I looked around gamespot though and couldn't find anything really talking about what you were mentioning.

Ok, the mcvuk article is dumb. Although I have no idea who they are, either the site (never heard of it before) or the writer since its just listed as staff.

Can you choose a different game? I really don't care about DMC, how about Mass Effect 3? I thought that one was fine, not the best but also not the worst thing in the world.

Ok, first, I'm not going to give that vid any consideration since they seem to have a really strong bias already. I did some quick searching and the only places I found that talked about it were ones that I wouldn't trust, such as kotakuinaction, since they are so anti Anita they are worthless as a source. I watched most of her vids and generally she wasn't wrong, she did exaggerate in places in some of the later ones and that was when I stopped caring.

 

[votemarvel]

Which by the way has ALWAYS been my argument AGAINST easy modes in normally challenging games like Sekiro or Souls or whatever. If the developers design for a specific challenge, do not undermine that challenge by letting players circumvent that challenge with an easy mode you can toggle.

Because the temptation is there always. Ya'll can say you don't wouldn't mind Souls having an easy mode because it wouldn't affect the way you play. And it is easy to say that on a forum. But when you are on your 50th death against Gwen, and easy mode is a click away, you are a liar if you say you wouldn't be tempted.

Like in the article, the writer was frustrated, and gave into the temptation and swapped to easy mode. Yes they beat the fight, but they gained only disappointment from how much easier it was. Thus this writer faced the thing every Souls-like fan has ever said on the topic of difficulty. Overcoming the full challenge is what will grant you satisfaction, not dumbing down the encounter just to get over the hump.

Anyway let me hear your thoughts.

Surely resisting the temptation of switching to easy would be just as rewarding as beating that enemy in the end?

If people are willing to switch down to easy because they can't beat an enemy that easily, then perhaps they aren't enjoying the default difficulty as much as they claim. Could it be that they think they are enjoying it because they have no other choice in that title?

It's a little weird to me that so many people think there should be no exclusives so everyone gets to play and enjoy games but when it comes to actually playing them then it becomes "git gud" or don't play.

When it comes to the games journalists not being good at a genre or perhaps being bad at gaming in general, I value their opinion as well and often more so. For example people who are fans of and/or good at first person shooters will quite often gloss over points of irritation in a game because to them it doesn't affect the overall experience. Not being afan of first person games in general (though there are those I enjoy) those flaws they ignore can ruin the experience for me.

Personally I avoid games like Dark Souls because I know I wouldn't enjoy them. I used to enjoy the challenge of punishing difficulty but these days I game to unwind after a day at work, Dark Souls wouldn't help me do that.

 

[Adam Jensen]

So then what would you call Kotaku's investigations into various game dev's crunch cultures and exposing of employee abuse?

Inside Rockstar Games' Culture Of Crunch

In the final year of development on Red Dead Redemption 2, the upcoming Western game, the top directors decided to add black bars to the top and bottom of every non-interactive cutscene in hopes of making those scenes feel more cinematic, like an old-school cowboy film. Everyone agreed it was...

kotaku.com

That is an extremely rare case. The vast majority of video game articles on the internet is abysmal.

 

[BrawlMan]

You might not be pushing your politics but its still there and noticeable. You could have gotten rid of it by changing a few words, like changing 'corporate overlords' to 'the publisher.' But, you didn't, you wanted that specific line, so really, you were pushing your politics

You're splitting hairs. I have my biases, but it does not make all of shady things going on any less true. Most of mainstream journalist act like sh!t. I am not pushing my politics. If you like mainstream journalism, go for it, Don't care and stopping you.

Not sure what you are saying here, I also don't see a link to a dunkey vid, but I know his stuff so I wouldn't really take any of his vids super seriously.

The link with Dunkey is on the second page of the thread. While Dunkey is a comedy reviewer, he's actually honest and gets his points across better than most of these so called professionals. So don't disregard his views, just because he inserts comedy in to his video. I don't agree with Dunkey all the time nor reviewers or critics I actually like, but they get their points across without intentionally going out of their way piss others off and throw accusations.

I don't bother with IGN, I looked around gamespot though and couldn't find anything really talking about what you were mentioning.

Video starts at 3:03. Them undermining classic DMC saying it did not set the world on fire proves my point. Claiming DmC had a clever story I hugely disagree with. The story was a worst retelling of DMC3, and did more for the gaming industry than the reboot ever did. DmC did not do much in the grand scheme of things. It did not innovate, no one else took elements (mostly minor or done better) from it other than Capcom themselves with 5. The only thing DmC had going for it was quick pacing in the levels and the soundtrack. Though DMC always had great music. As for IGN, that is your problem. That is great thing you said about IGN, "Don't bother with them". I agree with you there.

Check most of the preview articles or opinion pieces for DmC before the game came out. Them encouraging Ninja Theory to act like assh@les to the DMC fan base was not helping matters. Jim Sterling was guilty of this too, but at least he admitted wasn't acting better than he believed. You can find the stuff on your own. Not wasting my time going back to all that crap between DmC's announcement in 2010 and 2013. Not worth it.

That is an extremely rare case. The vast majority of video game articles on the internet is abysmal.

Damn straight.

 

[votemarvel]

I have to disagree. Most articles are good. They just don't share the opinions that some people want to read.

There's a lot of opinions in games journalism that I don't agree with but you know what, I still enjoy reading them. Some people just want to complain though.

I follow PC Gamer magazine on Facebook. They do an article on Epic games they are a paid shill and obviously taking a back hander. They do an article on Steam and all is good, though there is a still a decent amount of comments following the line of "what would your Epic paymasters say about this."

Too many people have become so set in their mindset that if they read something they don't agree with, it's not just an option they disagree with it is 'objectively bad.'

 

[BrawlMan]

Too many people have become so set in their mindset that if they read something they don't agree with, it's not just an option they disagree with it is 'objectively bad.'

I agree with you. My problem is when articles go way off topic or just use a game/film/tv show to spout on their own political ideology to put down others that think differently or disagree with them. There are articles that have this problem too. It ain't just always the audience. I've seen plenty of things or read I disagree and enjoy as well, but from gaming articles, I do not get that as much from other media.

 

[Worgen]

You're splitting hairs. I have my biases, but it does not make all of shady things going on any less true. Most of mainstream journalist act like sh!t. I am not pushing my politics. If you like mainstream journalism, go for it, Don't care and stopping you.


The link with Dunkey is on the second page of the thread. While Dunkey is a comedy reviewer, he's actually honest and gets his points across better than most of these so called professionals. So don't disregard his views, just because he inserts comedy in to his video. I don't agree with Dunkey all the time nor reviewers or critics I actually like, but they get their points across without intentionally going out of their way piss others off and throw accusations.


Video starts at 3:03. Them undermining classic DMC saying it did not set the world on fire proves my point. Claiming DmC had a clever story I hugely disagree with. The story was a worst retelling of DMC3, and did more for the gaming industry than the reboot ever did. DmC did not do much in the grand scheme of things. It did not innovate, no one else took elements (mostly minor or done better) from it other than Capcom themselves with 5. The only thing DmC had going for it was quick pacing in the levels and the soundtrack. Though DMC always had great music. As for IGN, that is your problem. That is great thing you said about IGN, "Don't bother with them". I agree with you there.

Check most of the preview articles or opinion pieces for DmC before the game came out. Them encouraging Ninja Theory to act like assh@les to the DMC fan base was not helping matters. Jim Sterling was guilty of this too, but at least he admitted wasn't acting better than he believed. You can find the stuff on your own. Not wasting my time going back to all that crap between DmC's announcement in 2010 and 2013. Not worth it.

My point is that you seem to think you are above politics, but you aren't.

The funny thing is that he kinda contradicts what you in his second vid and shows that being a games journalist is a losing proposition since things are fucked.

You do realize hes literally talking about the story of DmC, and hes right too. The story while decent, didn't set the world on fire like the gameplay did and DMC did try to have a more involved and interesting story. I can't say how well it succeeded, I didn't beat it, but my friends who love the series both really liked it, so I'm going to assume it worked. As for IGN, I can't speak about them since I don't go to their site since I don't like the layout, its as simple as that, maybe they changed it since I last saw it, but I have enough game sites I regularly check, I don't need another one.

Then it doesn't count since I don't care about DMC. I end up having to do enough looking up of things for internet debates, if you want something to count, you have to bring it yourself, since like the gamestop review before, which you feel is insulting and I think you are seeing something there that isn't. So you have to point it out.

 

[Houseman]

You might not be pushing your politics but its still there and noticeable. You could have gotten rid of it by changing a few words, like changing 'corporate overlords' to 'the publisher.' But, you didn't, you wanted that specific line, so really, you were pushing your politics.

If the difference between "pushing your politics" and "not pushing your politics" is changing one phrase, then how political is it, really? How much 'politics' can a single phrase "inject" into a sentence, if the meaning stays the same? What's the difference between "corporate overlords" and "the publisher" that makes one political and not the other?

 

[Worgen]

If the difference between "pushing your politics" and "not pushing your politics" is changing one phrase, then how political is it, really? How much 'politics' can a single phrase "inject" into a sentence, if the meaning stays the same? What's the difference between "corporate overlords" and "the publisher" that makes one political and not the other?

That't the thing when someone says something is "pushing a political ideology." It could be one or two words that changes it from rather apolitical to political. Like the difference between "corporate overlords" and "publisher" is that one is loaded language and the other simply describes something. Publishers are publishers, they publish things like games and such. Corporate overlords is a phrase specifically designed to evoke the image of a dystopian corporate run future or present where we are all gods in the machine with no voices who are chained to desks and enslaved for the almighty dollar.

 

[Houseman]

Corporate overlords is a phrase specifically designed to evoke the image of a dystopian corporate run future or present where we are all gods in the machine with no voices who are chained to desks and enslaved for the almighty dollar.

Couldn't that just be what you got out of that phrase, as opposed to what BrawlMan was trying to convey?
If BrawlMan wasn't trying to invoke that image, could you still say he was "being political", or is it possible to "be political" on accident?

In other words, if other people view your words as being political, against the author's intent, does that mean that the original author of those words is also being political, or is the audience to blame for "inserting politics" where none existed? Like Nick said below, could it just be that the audience overthinks it?

 

[Nick Calandra]

That't the thing when someone says something is "pushing a political ideology." It could be one or two words that changes it from rather apolitical to political. Like the difference between "corporate overlords" and "publisher" is that one is loaded language and the other simply describes something. Publishers are publishers, they publish things like games and such. Corporate overlords is a phrase specifically designed to evoke the image of a dystopian corporate run future or present where we are all gods in the machine with no voices who are chained to desks and enslaved for the almighty dollar.

I agree, but sometimes I might say something like "corporate overlord" with sarcasm intended and not actually pushing a political ideology. I think sometimes people just overthink this stuff.

I also think when people say they don't want "politics" they usually mean, please don't tell me how to think. And I do agree with OP there's quite a bit of this happening, I mean, if you're following a lot of gaming news, which it seems like OP does, then you know the sites that do this, I don't even need to name them.

I don't think people mind discussing political topics in games, I mean look at all the deep dives on Bioshock, which was a very political game. People like politics in games, but when it becomes a form of straight up propaganda, I think that's where most have issue and a lot of people just don't know how to voice that without saying, "keep politics out" to which other people respond with "everything is political".

Those two statements are annoying as hell haha.

 

[BrawlMan]

My point is that you seem to think you are above politics, but you aren't.

I never implied that. I don't mind discussing politics, I just don't deal with going off base with their reviews insulting their, supposedly, target audience.

You do realize hes literally talking about the story of DmC, and hes right too. The story while decent, didn't set the world on fire like the gameplay did and DMC did try to have a more involved and interesting story. I can't say how well it succeeded, I didn't beat it, but my friends who love the series both really liked it, so I'm going to assume it worked. As for IGN, I can't speak about them since I don't go to their site since I don't like the layout, its as simple as that, maybe they changed it since I last saw it, but I have enough game sites I regularly check, I don't need another one.

You and your friends opinions. Not everyone else's. It worked for some people, yes. But if it was a knock out success, we would not be having this discussion. DMC5 would not exist and DmC 2 would been out by now. Sales were underwhelming, because most of the casual audience did not care for it, and the hardcore audience hated it. The problem with DmC story is that it takes itself too seriously and acting like it's saying something important. When it's not. Dante is a bigger douche in the "I don't care, too cool for school' attitude. The DE edition sold even less, in spite of many improvements. All falling on death ears. DMC4 Special Edition sold more than DmC. DmC may not be the worst game, but is defintely getting less relevant each year and falls in to the weird voids of reboot no one was asking for. Lost to time. There are awesome combo videos of course, but that is only the most dedicated.

Then it doesn't count since I don't care about DMC.

As for IGN, I can't speak about them since I don't go to their site since I don't like the layout, its as simple as that, maybe they changed it since I last saw it, but I have enough game sites I regularly check, I don't need another one.

More power to you.

You not caring about DMC does not change damn thing. Nor does it make it a lesser example. You keep blowing off or undermining the examples I do bring up.

 

[Worgen]

Couldn't that just be what you got out of that phrase, as opposed to what BrawlMan was trying to convey?
If BrawlMan wasn't trying to invoke that image, could you still say he was "being political", or is it possible to "be political" on accident?

In other words, if other people view your words as being political, against the author's intent, does that mean that the original author of those words is also being political, or is the audience to blame for "inserting politics" where none existed? Like Nick said below, could it just be that the audience overthinks it?

That's the thing, you could be entirely correct and he didn't mean that at all, but it would then be strange wording to use. The thing about things being political, is they might not be political to the speaker, generally for something to be seen as political, someone has to disagree with it on some kind of deeper level.

I agree, but sometimes I might say something like "corporate overlord" with sarcasm intended and not actually pushing a political ideology. I think sometimes people just overthink this stuff.

I also think when people say they don't want "politics" they usually mean, please don't tell me how to think. And I do agree with OP there's quite a bit of this happening, I mean, if you're following a lot of gaming news, which it seems like OP does, then you know the sites that do this, I don't even need to name them.

I don't think people mind discussing political topics in games, I mean look at all the deep dives on Bioshock, which was a very political game. People like politics in games, but when it becomes a form of straight up propaganda, I think that's where most have issue and a lot of people just don't know how to voice that without saying, "keep politics out" to which other people respond with "everything is political".

Those two statements are annoying as hell haha.

You are right also, but from the context clues about what he was saying it didn't feel like he was trying to be sarcastic, I got the feeling he was an anti-corporatist. I may be wrong, only he can tell you his beliefs, but that's what it seemed like to me. Doesn't help that sarcasm can be really hard to detect in text, really unless they go really sarcastic, its easy to miss and just assume they are being genuine.

I think when someone says they don't want "politics", in something they are more talking about they don't want politics they don't really agree with. Generally we don't notice the politics we do agree with that much, or we don't care about them enough to argue against them. I do agree there is some of that "don't tell me how to think" in there but I think that is again, mainly just because someone sees something they don't agree with. Like I tend to regularly go to kotaku and I generally don't see much of a political bias there, I mean there is some, the site seems to be more then willing to champion women and minority main characters and such. But part of the reason I don't really notice it is because in general, I am in favor of that sort of thing, so it's not jumping out at me like if it was, for instance, a video by sargon or nobullshit. Since with those two, I am expecting to disagree with them so I am specifically looking for things that I will disagree with. If you are looking for something you will find it, even if its not there, you have to learn to look past your bias and determine if it is truly there or if you imagined it.

People like politics in games when they agree with it or its vague enough to ignore when they don't. I can't think of many games where the politics becomes just propaganda, I guess some ww2 games where the nazis are a bit too smart and effective to match how kinda incompetent they really were, and even then you pretty much just spend the whole time splattering them, or totally ignoring the holocaust, which is its own weird thing.

Sterling has a great vid about the politics of dark souls that actually illustrates my point about everything being political.

 

[Nick Calandra]

That's the thing, you could be entirely correct and he didn't mean that at all, but it would then be strange wording to use. The thing about things being political, is they might not be political to the speaker, generally for something to be seen as political, someone has to disagree with it on some kind of deeper level.



You are right also, but from the context clues about what he was saying it didn't feel like he was trying to be sarcastic, I got the feeling he was an anti-corporatist. I may be wrong, only he can tell you his beliefs, but that's what it seemed like to me. Doesn't help that sarcasm can be really hard to detect in text, really unless they go really sarcastic, its easy to miss and just assume they are being genuine.

I think when someone says they don't want "politics", in something they are more talking about they don't want politics they don't really agree with. Generally we don't notice the politics we do agree with that much, or we don't care about them enough to argue against them. I do agree there is some of that "don't tell me how to think" in there but I think that is again, mainly just because someone sees something they don't agree with. Like I tend to regularly go to kotaku and I generally don't see much of a political bias there, I mean there is some, the site seems to be more then willing to champion women and minority main characters and such. But part of the reason I don't really notice it is because in general, I am in favor of that sort of thing, so it's not jumping out at me like if it was, for instance, a video by sargon or nobullshit. Since with those two, I am expecting to disagree with them so I am specifically looking for things that I will disagree with. If you are looking for something you will find it, even if its not there, you have to learn to look past your bias and determine if it is truly there or if you imagined it.

People like politics in games when they agree with it or its vague enough to ignore when they don't. I can't think of many games where the politics becomes just propaganda, I guess some ww2 games where the nazis are a bit too smart and effective to match how kinda incompetent they really were, and even then you pretty much just spend the whole time splattering them, or totally ignoring the holocaust, which is its own weird thing.

Sterling has a great vid about the politics of dark souls that actually illustrates my point about everything being political.

Yea, I agree with pretty much everything you said, though, aside from loud people online, I think most would be OK with politics that challenge them in their media, and that's on either side of the spectrum, as long as it's got proper context and it's presented in an interesting and engaging way.

I think a lot of members of the media get their bad rap from doing the same thing as the people they detest in regards to politics though, if they don't agree with it, they don't like it, and then they constantly generalize people and group them into any number of terms nowadays. Just like OP did in saying all journalists suck or whatever, ya know?

On Twitter, we wouldn't even be having this debate lol.

 

[The Rogue Wolf]

People like politics in games, but when it becomes a form of straight up propaganda, I think that's where most have issue and a lot of people just don't know how to voice that without saying, "keep politics out" to which other people respond with "everything is political".

This is one thing that has seriously annoyed me: Gamers have been whining for years "video games are art just like any other medium; they deserve respect", but the instant people start examining games from a political angle- y'know, like has been done for every other medium since time immemorial- those very same gamers whine "it's just a video game; don't take it so seriously". It's a classic case of wanting to have their cake and eat it too, and it exposes the fact that those gamers just want to stop being called "children" for playing games but don't want any actual adult criticism of their hobby.

 

[Houseman]

That's the thing, you could be entirely correct and he didn't mean that at all, but it would then be strange wording to use. The thing about things being political, is they might not be political to the speaker, generally for something to be seen as political, someone has to disagree with it on some kind of deeper level.

So it's not necessarily "you're being political", it could be "I think what you said is political"?

If so, I wouldn't be so quick to accuse others of "being political" or "pushing politics" if it could be just as possible that it's all just in my head.

I think when someone says they don't want "politics", in something they are more talking about they don't want politics they don't really agree with.

That seems like you're generalizing everyone who says "I don't want politics..." as having double standards. That isn't very nice.