Twitty Twitty Ten Dollar

[The Random One]

The fact that you assume the lack of comment is in the hopes of things going away renders any discussion pointless. I don't feel obligated to offer an opinion simply to "prove" my innocence. You look at the tools I need to do my job as a bribe - why should I bother saying anything at all? You've clearly already made your decision, and I can't prove a negative.

Either someone looks at the body of my work and believes I am who I say I am, or they don't. And very little I say about "Doritogate" will change that.

Here's a perfect example - our high praise of Dragon Age 2 and Mass Effect 3 "proved" that we'd been bought by EA. Our low score for Medal of Honor, then, should surely "prove" that to be untrue, right? Oh, no. It's just that EA doesn't care enough about that game to pay us off. It's not one of their "big" titles.

These are actual comments that come from these very forums.

So you perhaps see why I don't jump into the fray to get into a fight that isn't mine to begin with. Do I think a game journalist should be tweeting about a certain game in order to win a PS3? Of course not, that's clearly unprofessional - as was calling out that journalist by name in an article that wasn't about her, per se, but rather about the blurring line between PR and reporting. And until the audience starts from a default of giving us the benefit of the doubt, nothing anyone says about it matters. We are assumed to be liars, cheats, and thieves, no matter what we've done or said.

I'm sorry, but that's a pretty lame excuse. "Oh but people will think we've been bought off no matter what we do!" If that's the case, then you should ignore those people and do what you think is right, and if you don't think it's right to report on such a damning issue, then I'm not sure we define that word by the same standards.

Most serious people don't think that reviewers actually are bought with shady backroom dealings, but they do know that they are given all sorts of benefits to eschew their opinion positively towards the game. That is literally what the PR people's job is. And they don't think reporters will deliberately write biased reviews to try and get more phat l00t in the future, but reporters can and do edge reviews based on past PR, even if subconsciously. And I'm sure most serious people don't think the Escapist's Dark Cabal convened and decided to slay all who would report on such a matter to attempt to hide their dark dealings with the dire producerbeasts, but the editorial decision that such a thing does not matter enough to warrant an article on the website is not a neutral decision - it's a very politically charged one, because the crux of what happened is not even 'journalists are doing this', but rather 'not only are journalists doing this but they don't even understand why some people might not find it business as usual'. Not reporting it is not a neutral editorial stance, it's a politised one that firmly agrees with the idea that there's nothing shady here at all.

(I had a great article on my browser history about how journalists believe they know where the 'sphere of consensus' on every given topic is - that is, the area between ideas that are so widely accepted dismissing them holds no water and ideas so fringe and ridiculous that only small disconnected groups take them seriously - and how when they get it wrong they unwittingly alienate large chunks of their audience. Can't find it though.)

It's actually a good thing that She Who Shall Not Be Named By Advice Of Our Legal Team stirred up this kind of ruckus, because it brought this whole thing to the forefront of public discussion, instead of just being another insightful article by Mr. Florence that disappears out of the public consciousness by the next week. The fact that even though the gaming press went silent I've seen this reported often by commenters shows this has left a mark. Kudos to Rydel & Carter, gentlemen and scholars, for being one of the few people to bring it up whose names actually are under 'writer'.

 

[vxicepickxv]

It's a shame that people would go so low as to use twitter for a chance at winning something.

This post brought to you by Brawndo, it's got what plants crave.

 

[The Lugz]

"You Will Do As Soon as this check cashes in"?

Not to be a grammer Nazi, but that really hurts my brain. You might wanna fix that or something?

Otherwise, good strip.

It's colloquial British speech. "It should do" or "you will do" is perfectly correct conversational language.

Oh, you miss understand me. "It Should Do" Isn't wrong to me when you say it as "It Should Do it" or something like that. It's wrong when it's "It Should Do As that", or "It Should Do When It Do That" or something like that.

The sentence would do better without the Do, for then it would read "You Will as soon as this check cashes in." With the Do thrown in, it feels off.

this is how people speak, like it or not it happens thus it's perfectly legitimate language to use in a comic strip about people

as for it hurting your brain, i'm sure if you talk to someone long enough that has game related psychosis they are going to hurt your brain
so again quite realistic

 

[Canadish]

I remember certain staff on this site blowing people off who said this kind of thing went on.

Funny that.

Still glad to see a hit on the practice anyway, it's fucking disgraceful (pardon my french).

 

[Loonyyy]

The fact that you assume the lack of comment is in the hopes of things going away renders any discussion pointless. I don't feel obligated to offer an opinion simply to "prove" my innocence. You look at the tools I need to do my job as a bribe - why should I bother saying anything at all? You've clearly already made your decision, and I can't prove a negative.

Either someone looks at the body of my work and believes I am who I say I am, or they don't. And very little I say about "Doritogate" will change that.

Here's a perfect example - our high praise of Dragon Age 2 and Mass Effect 3 "proved" that we'd been bought by EA. Our low score for Medal of Honor, then, should surely "prove" that to be untrue, right? Oh, no. It's just that EA doesn't care enough about that game to pay us off. It's not one of their "big" titles.

These are actual comments that come from these very forums.

So you perhaps see why I don't jump into the fray to get into a fight that isn't mine to begin with. Do I think a game journalist should be tweeting about a certain game in order to win a PS3? Of course not, that's clearly unprofessional - as was calling out that journalist by name in an article that wasn't about her, per se, but rather about the blurring line between PR and reporting. And until the audience starts from a default of giving us the benefit of the doubt, nothing anyone says about it matters. We are assumed to be liars, cheats, and thieves, no matter what we've done or said.

Well said. For a community made up of people who supposedly partake in the content of the site, there's an awful lot of dismissing of you guys as corrupt, or bribed, from the outset. It seems a convenient cover for when people find themselves in disagreement with the site. And when the prescence of review copies is taken as bribery, that's when it's become inane.

Film has had this for a while: Critics get private screenings prior to the mass release, so that they can put out their reviews before people go to see it. Film-makers know that they can get an increase in sales on their first weekend if they get good reviews.

Similarly, game reviewers are provided with review copies prior to launch, so that the reviews are out at launch, which benefits the publication and the publishers. Now, should the pubisher blacklist a publication, then that publication would probably roast them for it. There's been numerous times on this very site where Bob Chipman has mentioned films not being given critic screenings because the film-makers are afraid of negative reviews. Assuming that people are being bribed by, as Susan so eloquently put it, "tools I need to do my job". I mean really, at that point, just discard any reviews which are on review copies. Discard any reviews on a publication (Advertising). Discard any reviews except for ones where a lone person constructs their review on a copy they bought, and publishes it themself.

I'm going to take what you say about your opinions of games at face value, as your opinion of the game. It's a combination of entertainment and consumer advice, and it's taken with a pinch of salt as a subjective enterprise. Until I see you blatantly lying about the games, I'll take it that you're being honest.

I haven't yet seen "Terrible, no fun, I hated it" =9/10 yet, so I'm nowhere near that point.

 

[nagi]

Ummm........ So if you are a games journalist in 2012 how can you NOT own a PS3?

I mean that's like being a music journalist in 1975 and NOT owning a record player. IT DID NOT HAPPEN.

The "chance" to win a PS3 shouldn't even get a head turn, let alone a twitter post.

Quite easy. She could be using a company PS3, like some other games journalists do. Or she might not have one altogether, because she covers / specializes in x360/pc games. Plenty of reasons not to own a PS3.

(Note: ex games journalist here.)

 

[Imp_Emissary]

I'd wish I was more happy right now.

The comic was funny, but the story behind it is pretty disappointing.

Good comic all the same though.

Also, people calling the Escapist evil or whatever, because this is the first thing we have heard from them about it, are full of it.

 

[theultimateend]

I don't understand your point - when haven't I known how that feels? Before I was a game journalist?

You are not alone. I read that and I'm not sure if it was intended to be so weird or if their cat walked across the keyboard.

Edit: I didn't realize this website was presumed shady? The reviews often don't match my opinion but that's the nice thing, I get a nice fresh look at something. Not really a matter of right or wrong in opinion pieces.

Plus if people think company X is buying out review websites...stop buying games from them >_>. They won't have any money and then won't be buying out websites anymore.

Bam.

 

[stoddapb]

So no matter what you've done or said, the end result is completely beyond your control?
Now YOU know how that feels.

snip

snip

Now I can't clam to be an expert on whats going on in DVS BSTrd's mind, but it sounds to me like he was making a reference to the Mass Effect 3 ending... for some reason.

 

[ScrabbitRabbit]

"You Will Do As Soon as this check cashes in"?

Not to be a grammer Nazi, but that really hurts my brain. You might wanna fix that or something?

Otherwise, good strip.

It's colloquial British speech. "It should do" or "you will do" is perfectly correct conversational language.

Oh, you miss understand me. "It Should Do" Isn't wrong to me when you say it as "It Should Do it" or something like that. It's wrong when it's "It Should Do As that", or "It Should Do When It Do That" or something like that.

The sentence would do better without the Do, for then it would read "You Will as soon as this check cashes in." With the Do thrown in, it feels off.

With my Mancunian accent it flowed fine. Y'hear people using sentences like that all the time up here.

 

[theultimateend]

Now I can't clam to be an expert on whats going on in DVS BSTrd's mind, but it sounds to me like he was making a reference to the Mass Effect 3 ending... for some reason.

If so that's brilliant. I didn't catch that.

 

[Savryc]

"You Will Do As Soon as this check cashes in"?

Not to be a grammer Nazi, but that really hurts my brain. You might wanna fix that or something?

Otherwise, good strip.

It's colloquial British speech. "It should do" or "you will do" is perfectly correct conversational language.

Oh, you miss understand me. "It Should Do" Isn't wrong to me when you say it as "It Should Do it" or something like that. It's wrong when it's "It Should Do As that", or "It Should Do When It Do That" or something like that.

The sentence would do better without the Do, for then it would read "You Will as soon as this check cashes in." With the Do thrown in, it feels off.

With my Mancunian accent it flowed fine. Y'hear people using sentences like that all the time up here.

Beat me to it, I didn't even notice until the first bloke pointed it out.

OT: Meh? I really can't summon up any feeling for this. Acussations of Bribery and Libel Claims are like gaming journo's bread and butter. What next? The shocking revelation that sky is blue? (Occasionally, when it isn't grey)

 

[Twilight_guy]

Gamers: So perpetually nice and naive that they fail at evil.

Meh. I think Facebook is essentially the 'off-the-job' space for professionals. It's your personal space where you don't represent your work. Yet, lots of employes still get scrutinized as if they represent their company even on a personal Facebook page, or Twitter, or whatever. I think its more people lacking defined borders between public and private space.

 

[Taddy]

I'll be honest. I have never had a single can of Mountain Dew in my entire life.

 

[Shiro No Uma]

I don't consider anything this or any other website dedicated to gaming "Journalism." Here there are so many sensationalism opinion videos, that are highly entertaining, and everyone openly proclaims a bias towards a genre of gaming. I don't see why everyone is surprised on both sides of this issue. I don't think everyone in the industry is paid off, but it's not a health system, (especially if you get the things you're reviewing for free.)

 

[Shiro No Uma]

I'll be honest. I have never had a single can of Mountain Dew in my entire life.

I just posted on this issue your post was above mine. I don't know why, but I can't stop laughing. That was truly great! Just curious, have you ever had a beverage that made you feel like making false statements about a game?

 

[Vigormortis]

I find it kind of sad that this comic is the only commentary on the situation I've seen from the site so far.

The rest were all paid not to. >.>

Paid not to? Or (wisely) hiding from these:

Spoiler

Lawyers

 

[ZexionSephiroth]

Relative cost of PS3: $300

Estimated price of decent Advertising: $3,000 a minute.

...Okay, if any of these twitter feeds have any kind of following, they're going to have to get a lot of games in the package to make up for the price of the advertising space that they just wasted for a box that will be obsolete again when the next cycle rolls around.

*Sigh* And I actually like my PS3 that I already have; and even I'm depressed people would sell themselves that short. A decent spokesperson deserves a lot more.

... they deserve an office full of collector's edition loot to go with it!

 

[Taddy]

I'll be honest. I have never had a single can of Mountain Dew in my entire life.

I just posted on this issue your post was above mine. I don't know why, but I can't stop laughing. That was truly great! Just curious, have you ever had a beverage that made you feel like making false statements about a game?

Once a week on average. Farmers Union - Iced Coffee is truly a wonderful drink.