The sad state of video game journalism
Ooh, another boring video game review! In response, GameDaily has a critique on the sad state of mainstream video game journalism; the reasons it got where it is, and what can be done to start improving. The article blames poor writing skills, overuse of cliches, cheesy punchlines (wha, wha, wha...), lack of original thought, and an overall level of immaturity.
For the record, I'll have you know my grammer is impeccable. So are video game blogs like Joystiq part of the problem?
[Thanks, Andre]
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 2)
MrPolarBare @ Jul 20th 2006 1:09PM
I disagree about poor writing skills. I think the majority of critics (movie critics especially) try to show off their vast vocabulary and really distance themselves from the normal reader. I personally want my reviews (videogame, movie, or whatever) to be simple and to use everyday dialect. I don't need any fancy punchlines. Just give it to me straight and simple.
Didn't IGN just get bought out for a ridiculous amount of money not even a year ago? Doesn't sound like these websites are hurting to me.
genericname @ Jul 20th 2006 1:12PM
More like part of the solution. At least gaming blogs like Joystiq are exploring gaming culture in a way that magazines simply can't. The audience is actually involved here, which means Joystiq or other blogs can't get away with just being multi-page adverts like most gaming magazines are.
As for the immaturity and splelling part... *fert*
Calibretto @ Jul 20th 2006 1:13PM
"For the record, I'll have you know my grammer is impeccable."
Um, that's "grammar".
Chris Taran @ Jul 20th 2006 1:14PM
Personally I'm quite happy with the state of affairs when it comes to video game journalism. I really don't understand the people that want to see it change.
Well, I guess there is one change I'd love to see. IGN ceasing to exist would probably put a permanent grin on my face.
lacking cleverness @ Jul 20th 2006 1:14PM
I don't know if I agree with Buffa's point about videogame journalism requiring an icon. I think the "personality-driven" journalism is precisely what should be avoided.
To put my worry simply, do people read Roger Ebert to get an informative review, or do people read him because he's Roger Ebert?
I do, however, agree with most of Buffa's points.
Joystiq isn't part of the problem. I find their posts to be well-considered, newsworthy and honest.
(Do I sound like I want that Joystiq job too much?)
Eagle @ Jul 20th 2006 1:16PM
I kind of understand where they're coming from...Some video game journalism sites do tend to cater to the wrong audience...I'd like to see publications go the way of more sophisticated magazines...
Sure, I want funny jokes, but they're reusing too many. You can only make fun of Raiden in MGS2 so much...I can't believe people are still making jokes about him...For the last time, I don't care if he looks like a woman anymore!
It just seems like video game publications are still made for a young generation, and I don't really like that...I personally read OPM, and I believe it has the right approach, but that's just an opinion.
As for Joystiq, it fails to disappoint...being a blog site, it has everything that one would expect...the important news, but at the same time, the wild and wacky stuff...and what;s a blog site without a touch of bias...sometimes you need bias to get your point across better. I just wish it was going the other way. :p
But yeah, I agree with the guys who wrote this on some occasions.
Christian aka nsomneia @ Jul 20th 2006 1:18PM
gameinformer (in my opinion) is a god awful magazine, very biased .. . but that's not what we're talking about
game magazines have gone downhill, they have to appeal to this 'jackass' generation, so god forbid a game magazine uses a big word once and awhile, or clever writting .. . they have to make it short, simple and redundant .. . at times they'll show abit of creativity with their writing, but for the most part the gaming magazine just falls short, and the reviews are terrible 80% of the time, these critics play one level of a game and give it a terrible rating .. . i honestly do not think many of them sit down and beat an entire game so why are they able to write a critique of a game, much less a jusitified one .. .
only reason i get egm, opm, oxm, nintendo power and those magazines is because i get them for free, other than that i wouldn't pay for them.. . only good gaming magazine, to me, would probably have to be, nintendo power .. .
jc @ Jul 20th 2006 1:21PM
Maybe it's just me, but since 1996 I really haven't taken the internet that seriously.
As for the integrity of reviews, I go to metacritic.com... the law of averages seems to work on my side.
Mike @ Jul 20th 2006 1:25PM
Sorry Blake Snow. You are the Fox News of gaming journalism. Joystiq in general shows signs of bias, but you rarely say anything that isn't clearly biased.
Petrie @ Jul 20th 2006 1:25PM
In a lot of cases yet, blogs like Joystiq are a part of the problem, but not the biggest nor the worst offenders.
At least you guys attempt to give a bit of uniqueness and an actual voice to your writing. I especially enjoyed the recent debate about balance in games, both writers gave something unique to that piece. Well done.
There's a difference between being a pompous ass, and telling it like it is. He's right, stop reviewing the latest Kim Possible GBA release. Give us a more meaningfull look at God of War or Oblivion. Show the kind of power to motivate some change in the industry for the better. Other journalists are able to sway those in their industry because they don't cave to the whims of those in power. Part of journalism is being willing to take the bumps you'll have to in order to have credibility.
Gaming journalism is a joke. Someone needs to come out and produce an entity that doesn't rely on the powers that be. The industry is supposed to answer to us, not the other way around. As things are, we have a bunch of sites that are nothing more than PR representatives for the game companies. Only difference is they pay you with free merchandise instead of money.
SonicRift @ Jul 20th 2006 1:25PM
The last time I read an issue of Nintendo Power, it was filled with spelling mistakes and terrible grammar.
Chessasaur @ Jul 20th 2006 1:26PM
With the exception of scathingly funny reviews of hopelessly bad games, I don't give a rat's ass about game "journalism". I just want to know if a game that I'm thinking of buying is worth my money THAT I CAN'T GET BACK IF THE GAME SUCKS thanks to a no-return policy on videogames. I compare reviews across several sites to weed out bias (positive or negative), a process that requires only a few mouse clicks.
Ryan @ Jul 20th 2006 1:27PM
I've always felt that smaller gaming "journals", or whatever you want to call them, are actually quite a refresher from the same old thing we have been reading for years. I get a few vid game mags and for the most part, I don't read them. Aside from the few articles on the really amazing important things, which everyone reads btw, I don't really pay attention. A site like this is different in that, the things you cover are on a much broader spectrum, if you screw up you can fix it immediately, and then there is the whole idea of community based forums. I'm not saying that everything you spout off is gold, but I couldn't tell you how many times my opinion had changed after reading what others thought. I couldn't get that from a mag. You guys are far from part of the problem, more like part of the solution.
that guy @ Jul 20th 2006 1:30PM
Gamedaily talks about 'lack of maturity' as one of the problems with gaming journalism, yet the HEADLINE to their very story is called 'Why Videogame Journalism Sucks'. If 'we' want to be taken more seriously, maybe it would help to not use words like 'suck', especially in a headline.
Pardon my sarcasm, but it would probably also help to avoid using words like, I don't know, 'bullshit' in the second paragraph of your editorial lambasting game journalists.
This article leaves me a little peeved to be honest. Yes, they bring up some good points, but if they're so gung-ho about ending this type of writing, wouldn't it make sense - at the very LEAST - to make a mature, well-written article?
On another note, I agree with a lot of what MrPolarBare (#1) said. You don't have to write using ebonics, but everyday writing is what I was taught at j-school. I enjoy Penny Arcade's comics, but can't stand listening to their opinions on their home page. It's like they're doing everything in their power to sound 'above' everyone else. I understand what they're saying and have no problem deciphering their editorials, but it's sure as hell nowhere close to how I talk in day-to-day conversation.
Jay @ Jul 20th 2006 1:30PM
Most of the writing for reviews is pathetic, even worse is the hyperbolic previews. Most newspapers would never consider hiring someone without a degree in journalism, and they would make sure the writer was familiar with AP style.
If video game magazines and the like want to be taken seriously, they need to stop pretending that their stories are anything more than advertising and mouth service to the game companies they're writing for.
Game magazines deserve much of the blame for the crap that's being released. A developer invites 4 game journalists to view an early build. They all write how awesome the game seems. Then it's released, and they trash it. Seems to me, they should be like ... you know, honest.
Even more important -- how about writing some serious stories about how terrible entry level programmers are treated, or how input by women is dismissed, or about how terrible these companies are at handling their finances. Oh, wait, those would be serious stories and earn game journlists some respect ... why would they want that.
Joystiq is a commetary site -- like the op-ed section of the newspaper, what should be expected is different than from a news writer. I believe this site performs its function admirably, including bringing up subjects like this and consolidating news from around the Internet.
chris w @ Jul 20th 2006 1:31PM
two phrases that stood out in this article:
"That's not to say that some didn't, but even they suck", "Please excuse the language, but WTF is that?"
Along with two paragraph titles:
" Lack of maturity", and "Wait! Who are you?"
Night Elve @ Jul 20th 2006 1:34PM
@ 3.
I think he wrote "grammer" on purpose.
Probot @ Jul 20th 2006 1:36PM
There isn't much to like about gaming magazines.
The basic news is usually out of date when the issue is released. If they do get an exclusive, it usually just means the news is withheld from other publications or the news is released so far ahead of the game it's irrelevant.
The only reviews worth reading are 1-5 because they're genuinly funny. However, they're useless because I it's unlikey I would have ever bought one of those games. And for games that get 9-10, most people have already made up their mind about them.
I don't work for any magazines, but it seems to me like when the majority of your advertising money comes directly from the people you're supposed to be criticizing, you don't have much room to move. How easy would it be for a publisher to say "Oh you didn't like our game, well, that's ok, you can be fair. By the way, we're cutting the advertising budget to your magazine."
As for whether Joystiq is a problem. I have to mull that over a bit. I think I would put them in the same boat, but for different reasons. I'll have to post later, when the thread is hundreds of comments deep.
Dirk Dorkelson @ Jul 20th 2006 1:37PM
What's funny is that I think nearly all of these points (lack of good writers, coziness with PR people, etc.) could be made about the current state of music journalism. I used to (back in the '90s) spend probably $100 a week on music. And I spent a lot of time reading/writing reviews from dozens of publications, offline and online. But there are so many bad music writers out there, and so many people basically make the review about how much they know/how cool they are/what scene the band fits into and spend very little time on the music. But yeah, I find that a lot of these bullet points that apply to games journalism apply to music. Film seems to be the only pop medium with semi-intelligent writers that write about stuff that interests me. Occasionally, one of the NYT music reviewers will write something I like. But not most of the time.
Mike @ Jul 20th 2006 1:42PM
To me, the problem is this need to legimitize "video game reporting."
Legitimizing means you can get into unions, reap benefits, ask for bigger salaries, and overall just acquire better conditions for yourself. It's all a question of advancement.
Sure, there are sites that post every other day "news" about the "new Wii launch date" but those are normal and par for the course. They exist in every incarnation of the entertainment business, whether it be music, movies or tv, and yet there are "legitimate" reporters doing their thing.
But I also think the problem which is keeping the luminaries from getting their payday is in the industry itself.
The business' nature is what is hurting "video game journalism." As long as the business of video gaming doesn't grow up and start churning out meaningful, provoking video games those who report on it will continue to be snickered at.
It's either that or you accept that you're a reporter in a very niche market and start seeing it that way.
Portach King @ Jul 20th 2006 1:43PM
I found much of this article to spot on. Gaming is an aspect modern culture, and with that needs to be treated with a level of maturity and constructive journalism. At the moment that simply isn't there and it's the reason I've paid less an less attention to mainstream gaming websites (and don't even get me started on magazines or podcasts). Personally this is the reason I find Joystiq so appealling as a website. Where mainstream publishers find ways of reducing their content into smaller spaces, joystiq ignores this ridicuilous philosophy and continues to expand into diferent aspects of gaming society. Also it's blog entries are often editorial, usually asking for reader input. It's not often gaming websites would make any sort of effort to ask it's readers to take part in a stimulating debate yet this is exactly what the culture needs. Unfortunatly unlike film, music and theatre in which groups of people are brought to one place to experience something and discuss it afterwards, gaming doesn't have this going for it. Up to now very few games have tested its audience intellectually, and god knows that video game websites are doing very little to change this attitude.
I personally feel that Joystiq is far from the problem and that it is, at the very least, doing it's earnest to provoke the socciety into a different state of thinking.
MetaHuman @ Jul 20th 2006 1:44PM
My gaming journalism heroes (or people who write about gaming) would be Penny-Arcade.
1. They use big words.
2. They thrive on unique content (the comic itself).
3. The gamer can identify with them.
4. They don't alienate parts of their audience by calling them fanboys.
"Even more important -- how about writing some serious stories about how terrible entry level programmers are treated, or how input by women is dismissed, or about how terrible these companies are at handling their finances. Oh, wait, those would be serious stories and earn game journlists some respect ... why would they want that."
It's funny how simply not writing about these kinds of stories is by default in the benefit of guilty parties.
Jay is right. I can name NUMEROUS instances when mags like EGM advertise and have cover stories for games like Enter the Matrix and tank it. Even if games that are not anticipated and are rated badly, EGM still advertised The Floigan Bros. for Dreamcast in the next issue.
But then I don't watch Ebert's show nor do I get The Sun so I can't tell if he comments on movies as they are being developed, but it's possible what we expect from VG journalists CAN be different than from film critics.
flyNN @ Jul 20th 2006 1:48PM
Mags suck now!!! I remember when they were the best and I looked forward to them each month.
Joystiq is my main point of contact for gaming news now.
Wedge Antilies @ Jul 20th 2006 1:50PM
I think that in general - this is correct. Video game journalism for the most part is childish at best, biased and untruthful at worst.
However, there is one shining beacon in video game journalism and that is "EDGE" magazine from the UK, for the last 10 years the quality of writing in this magazine has remained high.
THey have in-depth articles, they have integrity in reviews ( only 4 games have been rated 10 out of 10 - or maybe 3 - I'm not sure ) and they have a beautiful design. Last time I was in the US (2004), I bought it from either Borders or Barnes & Noble, so if you can't find it at your local newsagent check it out there.
First post, thank you for reading
- Red 2.
PS: I have no relation to EDGE in anyway whatsoever. I'm in Australia, they are in the UK
JTS @ Jul 20th 2006 1:51PM
Blogs, and Joystiq in particular, are certainly not part of the problem. That being said, I don't know that they're part of the solution either. Most people, and commenters on this thread, would agree that the state of "traditional" video game journalism is pretty sad. (When I use traditional, I mean print.) Magazines like EGM, Game Informer and others have become bloated with ads and run low on actual writing. Even when they do write a feature, it's typically 1000 words or less and adds very little to the overall dialogue on gaming.
What needs to happen (and is already sort of underway on the net at places like this blog) is a separation between "hard news" and reviews. Film, as always, provides the best example. The hard news is the nuts and bolts: release dates, specs and stats, financial info, in short, the stuff that makes the industry go. In film you get this stuff from places like Variety and the Hollywood Reporter or at websites like IMDB or boxofficemojo.
The other side of this coin is the critical analysis or feature coverage. That also should take two forms. Straight reviews of new releases. This is your Rottentomatoes, Metacritic or traditional sources like NYT or LA Times. The other part is, for lack of a more precise word, longform critical analysis. These are longer pieces, written with a little more perspective, often after the fact, that analyze the importance or lack of importance of a given film. For this you can look to high-end film mags (American Cinematographer, Film Comment), but also in more mainstream mags like New Yorker and others. This also includes the academic debate that goes on in university film departments around the world.
We would all agree that the first part is happening, to differing levels of success. The NYT carries game reviews, and they're often quite good. IGN carries a review of every game that comes out, and they're often quite bad. Improving these type of reviews is another whole debate.
The real problem with video game journalism is what was at the heart of the Esquire column that Klosterman wrote a couple of weeks back. There are very few places that carry the longer form of criticism or analysis. This type of writing needs to be the back bone of video game writing. It can be found, most notably in Edge magazine, which I can't say enough good things about. But there are other places, which Joystiq and other blogs do well to highlight. Gamasutra is one, The Escapist another. (Full Disclosure: I have written for The Escapist, although that doesn't really effect the way I feel about their overall product).
The solution, if there is indeed one, is to draw more public interest to these places where critical analysis is going on. The hard news is going to continue to drift into the mainstream because video games continue to grow as an economic force that can't be ignored (kind of like porn in that way). But if gaming is to be taken seriously as an artform, as a profession or as a leisure pursuit that reaches the level of intellectual discussion, it will have to come from what Klosterman so adorably called, the Lester Bangs of gaming. What he got wrong though, is that that person is out there, there just aren't that many people (outside those like us here at Joystiq) who are paying attention.
zenprism @ Jul 20th 2006 1:54PM
The blogs aren't part of any perceived problem with gaming journalism.
I'd sooner visit Joystiq and Kotaku than 1up or Gamespot. Better writing, better news and speculation, and updates throughout the day is part of the reason why.
I visit Joystiq and Kotaku maybe ten times in a day, while I pass through IGN, 1up and Gamespot once a day at most.
DG @ Jul 20th 2006 1:57PM
The problem is that all of you in any sort of media try to out-Best Week Ever each other. That is, you rely on whatever the trendy gag of the week is and use it to show your pop-culture bonafides.
Like, for example, the Chuck Norris thing has come and gone, but I do remember hearing about it from this site. Really, so what? If your humor is completely based on societal cues and inflammatory opinion pieces a la Robert Summa from earlier this week, there's not much reason to look at this site other than to look at the pictures.
I agree with the person about using metacritic and taking the law of averages. I enjoy the comments section of this site more than any other part if only because there are often very illuminating, sometimes very funny, remarks made here above the level of joystiq writers.
Of course, there isn't a real solution. You can't tell half of joystiq writers to go get a better personality -- no, you learn to take the good with the bad. Oh well.
I used to really enjoy Diehard Gan Fan a very long time ago. Whatever happened to those guys and their terrible subscription service?
Jason @ Jul 20th 2006 1:57PM
Anyone who says there there are no good videogame magazines has not read Edge -- it features some of the most consistently good game writing in any medium. Published in the UK but Barnes & Noble carries it.
http://www.edge-online.co.uk/
http://www.4colorrebellion.com/archives/2005/04/29/edge-at-barnes-noble/
Thomas Crymes @ Jul 20th 2006 2:01PM
You have to understand that video game journalism has fanzines as its foundation. Video Games are still treated as kids toys and aren't given any kind of legitimacy.
Next-Gen.biz is probably one of the only legitimate sites out there. Most other sites are born out of a love for video games. This site is a blog, and mostly editorial. It is far from being a fanboy publication, but it is not hard journalism either.
Every now and again, some video game will attack some executive in an interview. Yawn. It only comes off as a child screaming: "Look at me. I'm a legitimate reporter. I'm a big boy now!"
Video games will never be hard journalism as movies will never be hard journalism. Just enjoy the niche and strive to get video games recognized as a legitimate and mature art form.
jabbertrack @ Jul 20th 2006 2:02PM
I don't like the formulae of a lot of reviews. It seems though that the tag line "if you like XXX you my like this game" has nearly been eliminated though... which was one of my pet peves.
Cliches are easy to avoid and if you're a paid writer or even a non-paid writer for a popular blog you should be able to spot your own lameness so in my book they are inexcusable.
I'm not a bad wordsmith myself... but not good enough for people to seek out what I've typed out... so I stay in my element. I think one of the problems is people who are using their job as practice... and that's an easy thing to do in the volitile climate of games journalism since you never know how long you will have your cushy job playing and writing about games for.
Which leads me to believe that casual writers... people who don't get paid but who take the time to make sure they are objective tend to write the best reviews. Which is why I read the sites I do and why my free EGM subscription is pretty much a bathroom read.
Steve @ Jul 20th 2006 2:10PM
Entertain Dome actually dealt with this same subject today.
http://www.entertain-dome.com/comic.php?strip_id=315
MO @ Jul 20th 2006 2:11PM
http://www.gamedaily.com/features/?id=1060
I have to basically agree with the author on this one. And no-one can fault the writer of the article because he is including himself in there too. But I agree with him. Game writing these days are written with hyperbole and most times they don't make sense. Look at the example they have for it.
Professional game writers rarely speak their mind in the articles they write, and the only one that I know that asks relatively hard-hitting questions to developers is Dan Hsu from 1up, and even he can be a corporate shill sometimes.
The solution is quite easy: inject some personality into your writing. Unfortunately, most writers see that as trying to be funny all the time, making boob jokes, writing articles about E3 but focusing on the booth babes. If they want to be inclusive, they have to start acting a little bit more mature.
apoc06 @ Jul 20th 2006 2:14PM
Yes. Not necessarily through any fault of your own.
By the nature of the site, most of your content comes from other sources. If you link to a horribly written piece, that diminishes joystiq's integrity in the eyes of the mature gamer that actually cares about something more substantial than the latest "he-said-she-said" in the console world.
Particularly amongst posts that tend to bash console X or Y, most of their "facts" and "journalism" is purely sensational and very rarely based on proven facts. If we hold our television and newspapers to a certain level of journalistic quality and integrity, why does the gaming industry and particularly websites feel they have no allegiance to the unsaid rules? Typos and grammatical errors are never punished, and heaven forbid if someone publishes false information based upon speculation, no one ever runs a retraction.
Joystiq tends to try their best and I will give you your credit. However the majority of linked sites, articles, and non-feature content have horrible quality control. That is out of your hands; all you can do is opt not to publish it.
You want an example of whats wrong with video game journalism? Take the article from the other day on the "death" of the PSP. It contained no facts, ignored the fact that it is the #2 selling console overall worldwide, contained "fuzzy" math and was a one/ two page article broken up into five parts to drive the author's ad revenue.
At the other end of the spectrum, you have reviews that are written to appeal to 10-14 year olds. I started gaming more than twenty years ago, I've grown older and gaming journalism by and large has not. There are no words larger than three syllables, and they follow the exact same formulaic pattern. Throwaway expository about reception of game -> history of series/ description of how it fits the genre -> synopsis of the story or lack thereof -> gripes about loading time/ framerate/ controls/ graphics/ voice acting/ lag/ etc -> throwaway summary culminating in the game scoring some useless number on an even more useless scale. Unless it is an obvious masterpiece, its hard to tell the difference between games unless they are utter trash and pure gold.
Can anyone point out any unbiased news on the web that knows that caters to gamers with a mild form of intelligence? I would love to bookmark one or two.
robotplague @ Jul 20th 2006 2:21PM
I don't come to Joystiq for the writing, that's for damn sure. I come here to find out new tidbits of info that just got released. Very few gaming journalists/outlets do I actually read for their educated opinion on something. In that respect I would say Joystiq is part of the problem. I've seen some absolutely horrible stories posted here.
cap-n-crunch @ Jul 20th 2006 2:27PM
Gameinformer is by far my favorite magazine. The magazine is clearly written by comic book nerds who enjoy video games classic and new regradless of the system. The magazine is always fun and never takes itself to serious.
EGM is written by hsu who imho is a pompus prick who has become cynical with the gaming industry. He wishes he got the respect of other real journalist. Egm is always breaking it's own arm patting itself on the back. it gets off on throwing red meat to sony fanboys.
I mean why has'nt hsu gone all gonzo reporting on sony still yet? I mean after the pronouced a new style of interviewing with peter moore, he still didnt grill haz kari about the prerendered footage shown at last year's prendered footage shown at E3.
Egm never mentions xbox live unless it's talking about racism. I hate racist foul mouth punks too. But still I dont think you can condemn all online console gaming just because it isnt sony.
Ty M. @ Jul 20th 2006 2:28PM
I don't know if someone has already said this(sort of pressed for time), so here.
In comparission to movies, music, literature, art, etc., and every other "artistic medium", videogaming, and the internet in general, is an infant. Space Invaders, the first main stream big name arcade game is just now celebrating the big 2-5. Mario and Nintendo just hit 20.
The reason the medium doesn't have the kind of critiques that film and music has is because it has had a fraction of the time to find great writers and legendary styles. We haven't even figured out all the genres of gaming. The newest one for film was the "mockumentry" and that was way back with Spinal Tap.
People are too critical of the gaming and the internet this early in their lives. Give us a time to solidify the mediums themeselves, and we'll get back to you.
futurebiblehero @ Jul 20th 2006 2:29PM
The "lacks maturity" thing has merit, although I'd blame sensationalism more than anything. You rarely see balanced, well thought out reviews in lieu of reviews that are either predictable or there to make a point. EGM's developed a habit of just that; predictable 9s and 10s to the GTAs out there and hard hitting reviews that "stick it to the man" on low budget, creative, but ultimately flawed games like Dreamfall. The man, of course, being the minute, overzealous fanbase that needed to be told who's boss. Good thing we have EGM for things like that.
Did Dreamfall deserve that score? Maybe, but that's not really my point. My point is that they go out of their way to prove their integrity in instances that no one'll really care about, other than the said fanbase, and then lazily rate "the next big thing" like Halo a near-perfect score (and then have the audacity to whine about the state of gaming).
I could find more informative reviews at Gamefaqs.
Petrie @ Jul 20th 2006 2:33PM
www.petrieslastword.com caters to gamers with a mild form of intelligence. (shameless plug-I think not!)
Though I do feel the need to post the first paragraph of my latest post here as well, feel free to read the rest if you wish:
We have another huge shock today! Chris Buffa has given us another take on what video game journalism needs to do. This was amusing at first, but now it has grown stale. Quit telling us what's wrong with it and instead, do something to fix it. You won't become the Bill O'Reilly of video games just by calling us all out on what's wrong with the rest of us. You think you're fit to lead us to the promised land? Prove it.
GSI @ Jul 20th 2006 2:50PM
Sorry but if you write for a blog...you are NOT a journalist. You are exactly what every other person who writes for blog is called...a "blogger."
/start rant
It's also funny how people bring "Fox News" when it has NOTHING to do with the story b/c "they" think it is biased. I watch Fox News all the time and EVERY show on there has opinions from people on BOTH sides (of all degress), so I fail to see how that is being biased.
/end rant
riffgod @ Jul 20th 2006 2:51PM
I would say that Joystiq is part of the problem, but they would probably just give me another negative star.
Seriously though, GameDaily are the ones who lack originality, they are the ones in the sad state. This is obviously just another attempt to use what Chuck Klosterman said about video game critics to get more people to read what they write. Writing an article that criticizes video game reviewers in general when you review video games is just a tactic. They want us to think that because they wrote this article that they are dedicated to improving the process and they want us to think that we can trust them as a reviewer so that we visit their site. Basically what they're doing is compared to saying, "I'm not racist, I have lots of black friends"
I can't wait until gaming news gets out of the summer funk so that we don't have to read silly things like Game Daily criticizing their peers.
Aresef @ Jul 20th 2006 2:55PM
This is why I want to write about video games. There's a big problem in the field that needs fixing, and writers who spend too much time not focusing on the important stuff are part of it. You don't see Roger Ebert analyzing the fine points of how a movie renders walls. Rather, he analyzes the big picture. He analyzes it as a work of art, not (generally) a technical achievement. As I believe games are an art form on par with movies or music, I feel we need to look at games under a different light than we have been.
Petrie @ Jul 20th 2006 3:00PM
I want to seriously look into the prospect of finding others who are interested in pursuing this type of journalism as a career, and put forth the financial resources and man hours necessary to make it a reality. Only so much I can do on my lonesome. Problem is knowing where to start and where to find others capable of such an endeavor.
*starts looking*
Petrie @ Jul 20th 2006 3:03PM
@GSI
I'm not sure if you were calling me out with that comment, but I was using the Bill O'Reilly comment as a compliment to Mr. O'Reilly. He's a big name who people listen to about all aspects of his field, and it seems to me that Chris Buffa is trying to shoehorn his way into that role by making people think he's the man for the job, just by writing about what all the problems with everyone else are.
GSI @ Jul 20th 2006 3:05PM
I was referring to Mike's (#9) reference of Fox News.
dan diemer @ Jul 20th 2006 3:18PM
this has been a poplular topic the last few weeks on the 1up yours podcast. podcast.1up.com
billychaos @ Jul 20th 2006 3:48PM
I have never read a video game review without ignoring everything they ranted or dispised about a game. In most cases, reviews are nothing but how much the dispise a parts of a game leaving the reader second guessing the game. You can almost say bad game reviews can hurt the industry, but that's another argument.
Judging from what I read of game reviews, it appears to me that they do NOT have the correct educational background for journalism. Before, anyone gets offended and retailate with their college degrees, let me finish. I said judging from what I read. Most video game reviews are NOT 'tell me what's good and bad about the game', they are 'tell me what sucks about the game'. Becasue of this I ignore them all and go with my instincts. 9/10 I really fall in love with games that they have given very very low review and negative remarks.
This is why you should sell your opinion and call it a review. If the purpose of a review is to give you a heads up on what you may like or dislike, the best 'review' i've seen was Amazon.coms suggestions (that's just a computer program). My point is what you dislike, someone else loves. When you have a good background in communications, you learn not to put your personal feelings into anything you discuss unless asked. I guess the entire game review industy assumes we are asking for their opinions... Hence I ignore all of them.
TC @ Jul 20th 2006 4:07PM
When it comes to "overuse of cliches,(and)cheesy punchlines" some of Joystiq's bloggers are part of the problem. Does every post need a strike through in it? Does any thing about a movie require a remark about Uwe Boll. Are PS3 posts incomplete with out either a quote from Kutaguri or the phrase "Riiiidge Racer" and yes, well all know the PS3 $600.
Secondly, things like "/gets on soap box" and "*slaps self in face*" never where funny to start with. So many game journalists and bloggers need to realize that they come off less like Rodney Dangerfield and more like Paula Poundstone (minus the child molestation charge of course).
SuicideNinja @ Jul 20th 2006 4:12PM
"gameinformer (in my opinion) is a god awful magazine, very biased"
Biased? I don't think so. It's one of the few magazines I find acceptable because it covers multiple consoles and it is very readable. I find I agree with them more often than not.
I'm not a big fan of EGM, OXM, PSM, Nintendo Power, and OPM. Aside from most of those being brand-exclusive, I often find the writing somewhat dull and uninteresting. OPM is the worst at that, and that's probably why no one in our house has a subscription anymore.
Anyway, "grammer" was a joke to whoever was trying to point out the "spelling error". One problem with text is that it's difficult to convey sarcasm, which the Video Game industry seems to require heavily.
As for "immaturity" I actually don't think it is out of place to an extent. Gaming should be fun, and not so damn serious (Hear that Sony? Lighten UP!). Thus, teasing via juvenile expression seems quite appropriate. Another factor along those lines is that the age range of gamers can be quite large...so a mixture of silliness, seriousness, and sarcasm doesn't seem out of place if you think about it.
LaughingTarget @ Jul 20th 2006 4:31PM
A lot of it has to do with how long the medium has been around. Take the New York Times for example. They report a lot of speculation, false facts, and use poor grammar on a regular basis, yet no one jumps down their throats about it. They post a lot of retractions (though you have to dig around to find it). They are considered reputable mainly because they've been around since 1851, not due to hard hitting or unbiased journalism.
What do we have in games journalism? IGN? Since 1999 doesn't exactly sound impressive.
We can't hold games journalism to the same standards as standard, mainstream journalism. If we did that, games journalism will never get accepted. It already holds the same standards. There isn't an unbiased new source. Fox News gets a lot of flak because it covers the conservative viewpoint and people are not used to seeing that after 60 years of only one political spectrum being covered that it is now assumed to be centrist. ABC, NBC, and CBS ran 10 times as many anti-Bush stories than they did anti-Clinton stories. This is questionable when both presidents are equally moronic and equally ineffective, except one has better public speaking abilities.
The only way gaming journalism will gain any acceptance is to do what mainstream journalists do - make sure their detractors don't have a voice. We don't see the people who dislike CNN because CNN makes sure to not air any letters that are critical of their journalistic integrity. Go to Gamespot, and you can click a "comment on this review" link and have at it. Sure, you can moderate it, but deleting critiques once they get posted is far more hazardous than shutting down your message boards so no one can say anything.
I also hear a lot of speculation that game journalists inflate reviews for money. This again isn't surprising as mainstream journalists do exactly the same thing. You're unlikely going to find a negative story on a company that just bought a few full page ads in your paper or a few hours of commercial time on your network. Game journalists need the product and need to review it before it hits the shelves to get the most exposure. Game publications cannot buy the product themselves to do this because they'll have to wait like everyone else to get the product and review it a week later. Hits won't come pouring in if a large chunk of the readers already own the title.
Something else that needs to be done regularly is putting the journalist's picture up on each and every review and editorial. Why? Humans most identify with visuals. If all we have to go on is a text name, then we got nothing. The journalist can never become famous. Doing a few video reviews here and there like IGN does won't cut it either. Mainstream newspapers put a photo of their top journalists in every one of their stories and editorials for a reason. They're more likely to be remembered and followed.
To gain legitimacy, games journalists will have to hold standards above and beyond what mainstream journalists use (not unionize as suggested above, unions are beginning to be viewed as an illegitimate way to get things done these days), shut down message boards to eliminate the negative voice, put their picture up on reviews, and ultimately, just wait a while. In time, game journalism will be considered legitimate simply because it was around long enough.
Grim @ Jul 20th 2006 4:50PM
I do think that the trend toward blogging is a small part of the problem. Just like any other buisness, journalism needs to make money to survive. Magazines and more traditional media outlets feel pressure to be less formal and more folksy...and i think that is part of the degeneration into bad writing and a less formal style.
oh, and come on guys grammer was in italics...