Corruption in games journalism (READ OP BEFORE POSTING!)

[Thorn14]

I know Bethesda is extremely popular and I'm not going to win friends by saying this, but their games getting universal acclaim and 'game of the year awards' despite consistently being buggy pieces of crap that their playerbase has to code patches for in order to work properly has always seemed to me like somebody is on the take. I'm not saying the games deserve BAD scores, but it seems like the reviewers don't even bother taking points off.

Well fans are trying to embargo Polygon for giving the game a horrible horrible score of 7.5. Makes me wonder how many of the people who reviewed it actually thought it was that good and how many are trying to avoid the wrath of fans.

Okay, doing my best to avoid making this about #GG but 2 reasons why I believe you are mistaken there.

1) I have seen another review that gave it an even lower score. It was not brought up because the complaints were about the graphics and animations and other things. Not because "The character is sexy so I took away points."

2) Destiny, a much much much much much more popular game and hyped to hell and with likely just as much of a diehard fanbase got MURDERED in the reviews with little fanfare from fans. In fact people went "Yep. Probably right."

So I don't think it has to do with "They gave a bad score YOU SUCK" like say....back during the 8.8 scandal.

Remember those fun times?

Well, I played Skyrim and Dark Souls basically simultaneously, so I was acutely aware as I read reviews that one game was being judged very critically, and the other was being given an 'oh, you!' good natured slap on the back and a perfect score. It's good to know that at least one reviewer gave them a reasonable score though.

Did ANYONE mention how...BROKEN Skyrim on the PS3 was? Like, not "Oh it runs poorly on the PS3" YOU COULD NOT FREAKING PLAY SKYRIM ON THE PS3.

Also OP: I appreciate this thread. While the majority of us may disagree on GG, its great to get back to the core of things and avoid the shitflinging and name calling and such and just get back to talking about what matters.

 

[Agkistro]

Did ANYONE mention how...BROKEN Skyrim on the PS3 was?

They sure as shit didn't mention it in the reviews I read or I wouldn't have bought it. Any time I've brought this up to a fan, (I had to start the game over from scratch 50 hours in) they say "That's what you get for buying it on a console". I should have known that their console products are unplayable pieces of garbage? OK, so shouldn't the reviewers have told me?

 

[Thorn14]

Did ANYONE mention how...BROKEN Skyrim on the PS3 was?

They sure as shit didn't mention it in the reviews I read or I wouldn't have bought it. Any time I've brought this up to a fan, (I had to start the game over from scratch 50 hours in) they say "That's what you get for buying it on a console". I should have known that their console products are unplayable pieces of garbage? OK, so shouldn't the reviewers have told me?

Bethesda probably outright didn't even give review copies of the PS3 version or said "Please review the 360 or PC version."

And not one journalist probably went "Huh, thats suspect"

Nope "ALRIGHT BOSS THANKS FOR THE FREE GAME AND FREE FLIGHT TO PLAY YOUR GAME $$"

 

[Josh123914]

Did ANYONE mention how...BROKEN Skyrim on the PS3 was?

They sure as shit didn't mention it in the reviews I read or I wouldn't have bought it. Any time I've brought this up to a fan, (I had to start the game over from scratch 50 hours in) they say "That's what you get for buying it on a console". I should have known that their console products are unplayable pieces of garbage? OK, so shouldn't the reviewers have told me?

I must be either incredibly lucky or just narcoleptic but I've clocked in over 200 hours on Skyrim for PS3 and the only bugs I've encountered are some of the quests in my log not being completed, the backwards flying dragons, and after getting past level 70 an infinite loading screen.

Going by THAT, I can only assume I got off lucky considering Bethesda barely got Dragonborn and Dawnguard working on the thing. I understand they had an exclusivity deal with MS, but after the deal was up they still struggled with the port.

 

[Something Amyss]

I would like to start off with an example, but sadly I don't have anything...well one, but it's a really old one. The Kane and Lynch controversy where a man got fired for giving a game he didn't like a 6/10. To me that sounds like corruption in journalism. You admit that you don't like a game, you lose your job.

I thought the original was a 2/10. *goes to google*

My bad.

In any case, I don't particularly find GiantBomb a better source for news and reviews. I think that should be some of the takeaway.

I'll tell you what annoy me, advertisements disguised as articles. I view that to be unethical and a bit corrupt.

If an article is a sponsored or paid article, I want to know before I start reading it.

Or they could just call it an advertisement like they used to.

The Shadow of Mordor PR company's egregious contracts on Youtube.

This should bring up an interesting discussion anyway. Are youTubers considered the press? Should they be? I don't know who all got copies, even.

 

[Revnak_v1legacy]

>wants to talk about ethics in reporting
>demands elimination of most recent major lapse in reporting ethics out of boredom

By what possible definition does writing opinion pieces you don't like qualify as a "lapse in reporting ethics"?

So...you also want to ignore what the OP was asking for, and also want to throw in a straw man?

Okay. Well, Ert, hope these guys don't totally derail your thread. Good luck, I'll wait to see if anyone actually comments on what you were asking about.

Oh yes, other people are derailing the thread, not you, the guy who actually brought the subject up in the first place.

I'm going to chime in on the Skyrim thing here. It really is disappointing the game's horribly glitchy nature is largely ignored while other games are torn apart for such problems. If Obsidian's name is on the box, expect it to get torn apart for every glitch or unbalanced mechanic (man, X skill tree is so strong/redundant in Alpha Protocol!), while Bethesda games being a glitchy mess or having horribly broken and exploitable mechanics is just thought to be part of the fun. It irks me a bit.

 

[gandhi the peacemake]

I'll tell you what annoy me, advertisements disguised as articles. I view that to be unethical and a bit corrupt.

If an article is a sponsored or paid article, I want to know before I start reading it.

What's even worse are articles disguised as advertisements. Though I suppose that's not so much an "journalism ethics" thing as it is just... well, plain hack writing. Articles on The Escapist written and titled by one Ross Lincoln are probably the most irritating offenders, though there are certainly others who also toe the line between sensationalism and journalism. I suppose the only reason I latch onto him personally is because his were the first I noticed.

Stuff like
- "DC Finally One-Ups Marvel" ( http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/138059-DC-Announces-Wonder-Woman-Green-Lantern-6-Other-Films-Through-2020 ) when the article has nothing to do with anyone one-upping anyone,
- or "The First Sin City 2 Trailer Solves Hollywood's Aging Problem" ( http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/132734-The-First-Sin-City-2-Trailer-Solves-Hollywoods-Aging-Problem ) when it's just about how "special effects techniques have finally achieved what decades of ... special effects never could,"
- or "Note to Future Politicians: Being A Geek Can Only Hurt You If You Let It" ( http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/133454-Note-To-Future-Politicians-Being-A-Geek-Can-Only-Hurt-You-If-You-Let-It ) when it's really just a piece on a Florida Congressman whose cosplay antics were used as ammo against him and his responses to them,
- or "Robert Downey Jr. To Be In Cap 3, MCU To Get CRAZY" ( http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/138022-Marvel-Signs-Robert-Downey-Jr-For-Captain-America-3 ) which was about RDJ being re-signed by Marvel and that the rumored MCU story going forward would be Civil War.

"CRAZY" or not, those are hardly appropriate titles.

But those aren't exactly the kind of nail-biting, career-ending breaches of journalistic conduct you'd look for, are they? I don't think so. I don't think anybody else would think so. It's just... lower-tier, is all.

 

[Dagda Mor]

Games don't really have much journalism. The Escapist sometimes posts real journalism, like announcing plans for a sequel to something, what Bobby Kotick's salary is, etc. But beyond stuff like that, games don't really have journalism. They have reviews, but those are opinion pieces, and in any other sphere of entertainment, reviewers can do whatever they damn well please--reviews can be bad or misleading, but they can't really be 'corrupt'.

Of course, that's all how it would be if things actually worked how they were supposed to. In gaming, people look at reviews as if they're supposed to be some sort of buyer's guide, an unbiased service to the consumer. They aren't, but publishers and marketing departments are more than happy to exploit this notion--after all, why wouldn't they? Gamers already treat reviews as marketing. The problem of 'corruption' stems from a flawed set of expectations, and it's on the consumers to start actually treating reviews as critique, which will take power away from 'corrupt' reviewers--those who take money to give good reviews--and give more power to reviewers who actually have an interesting voice and something to say. Placing responsibility on reviewers and publishers to be less 'corrupt' won't work, because you're essentially telling them not to do their jobs.

 

[Happiness Assassin]

One that has made the rounds on the mega-thread is the Alistair Pinsof story from last year:

http://blogjob.com/oneangrygamer/2014/10/gamergate-destructoid-corruption-and-ruined-careers/

In essence, a journalist comes out with a story saying that someone is using a crowdfunding site to receive money for a life saving surgery, but in actuality it is being used for another surgery, of the not life-saving variety. This upsets certain groups and it comes out that the person who was misappropriating the funds is basically suicidal. The writer admits he fucked up by including some details best left out and apologizes for publicly to her, against the wishes of the owner of Destructoid, who just wants him to lay low.

This is where ethics discussion comes into play: Neiro (Destructoid owner) consults many different people on how best to deal with Allistair in Game Journo Pro mailing list. There are a lot of people calling for him to be fired. Which is what happens, he is fired. Normally this wouldn't be a problem as he was employed in Florida, an at-will employment state (basically you can be fired for any reason, save a select few like discrimination). But according to Allistair, he soon found himself blacklisted by the entire industry. Nobody would talk to him at all. There is a lot of evidence showing that he has been blacklisted from the industry and that some people are trying to keep him from seeking employment, which is VERY illegal in Florida, as that constitutes collusion to keep someone unemployed.

Here is his version of events.

https://twitter.com/megaspacepanda/status/524263468946690048

Niero responds, detailed here:

http://blogjob.com/oneangrygamer/2014/10/gamergate-nowhere-on-my-site-does-it-say-we-are-journalists-says-destructoid-owner/