Zachary Amaranth said:
veloper said:
I've got something even better for you that is even in line with your previous car analogy: take car journalism.
Now there's an industry where the media depends completely on the vendor.
Well, except that's false. And even if it wasn't, there are numerous consumer watchdog groups and publications, not to mention regulation and laws regarding auto manufacture, standards, and even warranty.
That example fell apart fast.
I was talking about car journalism, so there's no point in you bringing up laws and regulations and all kinds of unrelated stuff.
You've never read a car mag and considered where most of the test cars and ad revenues come from?
If you have, you should have realised that car journalism is at the very least as compromised as game journalism is. If you had dug deeper you would have found out about all the courting that goes on behind the scenes. These guys are practically in bed with the manufacturers and it's no big secret either.
Sure, electronics and hardware is another example of compromised journalism and so is any magazine where they get both their test products and ad revenues from the same people trying to sell the stuff. Don't bite the hand that feeds you.
Every consumer who finally pulls his head out of the sand and begins to recognize the problem for what it is, would have made it worth it.
If there's a finite number of consumers, yes. Is there a finite number of consumers?
You don't think they're infinite in numbers, so is your line going anywhere?
Jim is sending exactly the wrong message, when he says we shouldn't blame the consumer for this.
When does he actually say it? Perhaps you could timestamp it for me.
Try 3:43
The industry will only change if the audience change their behaviour. If enough people keep falling for crap, nothing will change.
And yet, even with the cop-out of "buyer beware," people are still falling for it. Hell, despite the idea that people will wise up, you can see each new release filled with commenters from the same people who tip their hats to the new constitution.
Maybe we're not trying hard enough. Just because a message doesn't reach people, doesn't mean it's wrong.
Jim should have put the blame squarely on us and emphasized this in his video. It would not only have been much more amusing that way, trolling the Escapist, it would also have been more educational.
No, it would have just been trolling. And it would have been inane. Which, admittedly, would be funny, but that doesn't validate it in itself.
Promoting self-blame for buying into the misinformation is good, because such introspection is the starting point of change. Blaming the other party with their opposing interests, never works and can only be counter-productive.
Sweet. Remind me how other major industries have collapsed from this. Like...Cars. Or really, consumer products in general.
I'm not asking for a collapse of an entire industry. There's alot of shit out there, but NOT everything is shit, in part because there's still enough critical buyers left.
So the game that mr. consumer pre-ordered turns out to terrible? He should have done better research then.
Some people need to recognize the shit for what is and look for other, more reliable sources.
Which operates under the assumption that there are any. Which is part of the reason the argument breaks apart.
It's good that you've come to realise that game journalism is bad in general, but now you're just overreacting.
If all we cared for was Gamespot and IGN and the like, then that's all we would have got, but there's enough demand for other sources of information that independent reviewers can thrive.
On top of that, not every compromised mag is as bad as Gamespot, firing a reviewer for the first negative review that might displease a big publisher. Destructoid atleast I trust to have some integrity.
Buyer beware clearly needs to be repeated more often.
Yes, empty, meaningly mantras should be chanted while nothing changes.
I mean, "buyer beware" has been the state of the industry for years now, and quality control has gotten worse. That belies your whole premise. It's a very libertarian concept, but libertarians have never particularly been good with reality.
You can leave your politics at home today, because this has nothing to do with libertarianism or any political ideology.
Buyer beware is just good advice. Don't pre-order if you don't want to risk disappointment. Watch uploaded gameplay footage first before buying. Etcetera.
Also consider that the quality of games is highly subjective, so even if the game mags were 100% independent, it would still be adviseable to look for reviewers with compatible views instead of going with the first printed score you find. I may for instance not even care that the gfx of a game doesn't look quite as pretty as in the trailer, but a gfx-whore might. Judging the actual gameplay of a game is even more subjective.
So there's just no getting around doing some research even in a perfect world, unless you're willing to risk disappointment.
