The Evolution of Games Journalism

[Darth_Payn]

Ah, that '90's panel brought a nostalgic smile to my face. As for the '00's, I'd know for sure that's Yahtzee if he swore more. Also, I don't know when in that decade game journalism got so negative, a trend Kotaku proudly carries on.

neo /v/ is roody-poo and sena is best grill, ron paul 1945, remember the 666 gorillion, implying it happened, oy yidding vey

Oh, dear. Did this person have a stroke? Should we call for help?

 

[Zetatrain]

Either that was Yahtzee I just saw there, or the Nostalgia Critic started reviewing video games. C'mon, I can't be the only one who sees it...

Yeah, I thought that as well.

...

Saying a game is racist isn't automatically wrong, racism is hardly an uncommon thing.

No, but you gotta admit that a lot of times video games are called racist for rather silly or ridiculous reasons. Anyone remember when Resident Evil 5 was called racist?

 

[Sabrestar]

the first panel confuses me as I don't know what that's based off (i'm 19, too young to really know about 90's journalism)

I would humbly suggest heading over to YouTube and seeing if you can find a few episodes of GamePro TV. JD Roth, Brennan Howard, loud obnoxious voice-overs, terrible jokes, brightly coloured geometric shapes... it is the essence of 90s gaming coverage. And when you do, imagine a pre-teen or young teen watching this and thinking "this is the coolest thing EVER!"

 

[hentropy]

I think it's games that have changed more than the journalists. I get the point of the comic, but check out what he was reviewing: Sonic the Hedgehog. Blue hedgehog races through wacky environments to collect rings. Pretty much all the games around it were the same thing. Now every other game is some sort of realistic shooter, whether it be military shooter or GTAV, and when you try to imitate reality you're going to start to be held to reality's standards. It's the reason why all these military shooters look at least a tad racist- it's all about shooting brown people, and them trying to mix up the brown people every now and then, or just throw in the Russians in a dumb attempt to balance it out. In GTA, it's which woman is going to suffer a horrible death next. When you try and make a realistic female the star or major character of your game, the onus is on you, the game developer, to actually put some thought into it rather than copy and pasting a bunch of female stereotypes. You could say the same with military shooters and copy-pasted machismo stereotypes.

So if all people want is to make "awesome" games again, then maybe they should start making wacky games about talking animals in LSD landscapes again.

 

[theyellowmeteor]

So game journalism got incrementally better. In the '00 they started to separate the wheat from the chaff, so to speak, and ten years later, they're giving reasons why they think that the game you're enjoying isn't good. This comic made me think of Campster's 'Keep Your Politics Out of My Video Games' video, as a response.

 

[ShakerSilver]

The 20s will be "That game you don't like is smart."

More like "That game you like is too hard so it's bad."

 

[An Ceannaire]

Saying a game is racist isn't automatically wrong, racism is hardly an uncommon thing.

I think the problem us moreso that some "analysts" can see racism, sexism, etc in almost anything.

 

[Makabriel]

Today I learned that "inverted commas" is a commonly-accepted way of saying "quotation marks" outside the US.

P.S. Thanks

Yeah, I was really confused there for a minute as well. Is that what all the hip kids are calling it these days?

Here in the UK, they've always been called inverted commas.

So when you waggle two fingers from each hand in the air you call it "Air Inverted Commas"?

Just doesn't roll off the tongue like "Air Quotes"

 

[Efrath]

The 20s will be "That game you don't like is smart."

More like "That game you like is too hard so it's bad."

Basically. A problem with journalism is that, just like with the gamin industry, there's a rush to get out reviews and news out before others to make sure that you get as many readers as possible. Which of course means journalists tend to have to just play a small portion of the game and review it based on that to be able to get out a review as fast as possible.

 

[Imp_Emissary]

Saying a game is racist isn't automatically wrong, racism is hardly an uncommon thing.

Right. Jim Sterling has done a Jimquisition about how you can still enjoy problematic culture. Acknowledging problems with what you love doesn't mean you have to stop enjoying them.

I like the comic, but I think people will take the wrong lessons from it. As I see it, it's the process of gamers and game culture growing up.

At first it's all unquestioning optimism, then when you grow up a bit and start to see flaws you react far too negatively. Then later on you start to strike a balance where you can recognize and discuss the flaws with what you enjoy while still enjoying it, and heck, even deriving value out of discussing those flaws.

Many of my favourite authors were racists and misogynists, but I still love the work. And far from ruining the works, it has led to some enlightening and amusing discussions.

This. THIS is what should be taken away from the comic.

People often complain about games journalism not being "real journalism". Well, to be "real journalism" it means that they have to "be real".

By that, I mean if they think/feel something about a game/the gaming community, they have to tell the public about it.

These things could be positive, negative, or a bit of both.

To continue with a recent example;
When Jim Sterling talked about how he loves Dynasty Warriors.
When he called out people for harassment.
And when he talked about the power the community has when they work together, and get mad.

We can all still love games, but unconditional love is for pets and children.
[sub](By that I mean we can unconditionally love our pets/children, not that unconditional love can only come from them.)[/sub]
We have to be able to talk about the imperfections in our games. Because no game is perfect.

[sub]Except for [insert your favorite game here]. That one is perfect.[/sub]
;p

 

[Shadow-Phoenix]

man do I miss the 90's back when playing on whatever you wanted didn't require you to be mentally burned at the stake.

I miss whenever I heard news of anything gaming related that it was mostly positive and not lick bait while siding with one platform.

Oh and being allowed to have opinions.

 

[wAriot]

People often complain about games journalism not being "real journalism". Well, to be "real journalism" it means that they have to "be real".

People often complain about games journalism not being "real journalism", because many "game journalists" aren't actual journalists, just some guys and girls that write more or less well and, from time to time, play video games.

 

[Imp_Emissary]

People often complain about games journalism not being "real journalism". Well, to be "real journalism" it means that they have to "be real".

People often complain about games journalism not being "real journalism", because many "game journalists" aren't actual journalists, just some guys and girls that write more or less well and, from time to time, play video games.

Isn't that, and telling us things we should know/otherwise wouldn't know all that is needed to be a games journalist?

If not, then what else is needed?

Or if you're going off the definition;
"a person engaged in journalism; especially : a writer or editor for a news medium."
Then I still don't see what's missing.

 

[Yuuki]

Should swap "racist" with "sexist and misogynist", since people seem to pick on that a hell of a lot more and launch into colossal "discussions" which never get anywhere.

 

[The Material Sheep]

Games journalism is only going to grow, when it stops being a collection of blogs more concerned with pushing a political agenda, and starts merely reporting gaming news with a clearly understood barrier between the news and editorial.

The 90's was insincere and more marketing than journalism.

The 00's was the first steps in honest criticism and accountability for games themselves, but the news aspect of the medium was still shallow.

The 10's has thus far been a lot of blogs and agendas co-opting the medium as a platform for their various political views. So while there is more coverage now, and it's more critical of the industry (Which is always a good thing), it's increasingly becoming an issue that 90% of our coverage comes from what are little better the internet bloggers with very little journalistic integrity. Misrepresenting opposing views, not checking in with resources, attacking developers in incredibly shallow and ill informed ways and just generally showing contempt for the public they are suppose to be providing a service for.

Gaming journalism is still in its infancy and while we have gotten closer to critical analysis and objective news reporting, it's still got an albatross around it's neck. We traded excessive unethical marketing masquerading as journalism for glorified bloggers being considered journalists. Improving but still problematic.

 

[sethisjimmy]

I don't really get this comic. The point is a bit muddled to me. It kinda seems like it's implying 90's games journalism was good for pandering and handing out 10's all over the place. Then it seems to criticize modern games journalism for considering social issues, but haven't the writers of this comic done the same thing? Several times?

Isn't it better to be conscious and critical of social issues and sometimes be wrong than to be ignorant all the time?

Or maybe it's implying games journalism has just gone from bad to bad? What's the message? It almost seems to be subtly implying that if you like a game it's a bad thing to be told/admit it has flaws, whether social or technically. Sure it's never nice to realize a game you love is problematic, but do we really want to be pandered to and ignore all criticisms of said game? Would we really rather blindly ignore all criticisms of our favorite games than see them improve through understanding their problems?

 

[Eternal_Lament]

I don't really get this comic. The point is a bit muddled to me. It kinda seems like it's implying 90's games journalism was good for pandering and handing out 10's all over the place. Then it seems to criticize modern games journalism for considering social issues, but haven't the writers of this comic done the same thing? Several times?

Isn't it better to be conscious and critical of social issues and sometimes be wrong than to be ignorant all the time?

Or maybe it's implying games journalism has just gone from bad to bad? What's the message? It almost seems to be subtly implying that if you like a game it's a bad thing to be told/admit it has flaws, whether social or technically. Sure it's never nice to realize a game you love is problematic, but do we really want to be pandered to and ignore all criticisms of said game? Would we really rather blindly ignore all criticisms of our favourite games than see them improve through understanding their problems?

The joke is that once one journalist starts on a given path, ALL journalists must follow suit. That really excitable and young critic that honestly loves the medium? Everyone must over-hype every game, even if said game is shit, if they want continued support from the publishers. That cynical critic that sees no need to give hand outs to games and would rather reveal how the game fails in several regards? Everyone must be as critical and feel the need to shit on a game, even if the game is actually pretty good, just to have cred with the angry consumer crowd. That one critic who wishes to examine the social implications of a game? Everyone must be looking for some asinine social justice issue, even if there is nothing there, just to cater to the social justice warrior crowd.

These fads of optimism, cynicism, and pointless social analysing? More or less ships that journalists and critics jump onto, because doing so otherwise is going to put you at odds with many parties.

 

[Broz]

Meh, for some of us 90's game journalism was "The game you like is shit, you're shit, I'm shit, everything's shit." That and a lot of MS Paint based atrocity comics...

 

[Vegosiux]

Chalk me up for the "Yup, that's Yahtzee, isn't it?" column. Actually, that's the only reason I came to comment here, because, well...enough on my plate as it is, so...

 

[JimB]

I'm not quite sure how to take this comic, so I may be responding to a statement the creators never intended to make. That said, I tend to think the trends being described are...well, you know that one friend you have, the one who just found Jesus and now won't shut up about it? She's kind of pushy about it, and not only keeps bringing it up but judges people using Christianity as the foundation for beliefs she didn't have a week or a month or a year ago? I think the gaming journalism industry is going through something like that. They've been converted to a new belief system, and it's become an exaggeratedly prominent personality feature.

I don't think that's necessarily a bad thing, mind. New beliefs are passionate beliefs that need to be tempered by time, distance, and perspective. That part is coming. Personally, I'm glad when games journalists display sensitivity to people who are not straight, white men. I do see how it could be a little tiresome, though.