Does anyone honestly give a crap about gaming journalism?

  • 53 results
  • 1
  • 2
#1 Edited by torenojohn7 (315 posts) -

Okay aside from all this indie nepotism hoopla.. why are gamers acting like this is something new? wasn't it always like this? isn't it kinda obvious that big companies like activision give money under the table to give themselves perfect 9's and 10's? this has been like the norm since HD era.

As a gamer after playing so many games can anyone honestly think that these reviews are unbiased and fair? i sure as hell don't! i always take their reviews with a grain of salt and try the damn game for myself or watch reviews made by genuine gamers like me.

#2 Posted by udUbdaWgz1 (631 posts) -

personally, i laugh. development and all that crap that we know is actual work is worthy. game websites and "gaming journalism" is a joke.

#3 Edited by Jimmy_Russell (681 posts) -

Gaming "journalism" is actually PR spin delivered by shills employed by the publishers who prey on weak-minded or naive gamers. Publishers purposefully hide the details about their game and suppress negative critique by saturating the media in fluff pieces, the reviewers are seemingly filled with blind optimism. The famous entertainer P.T. Barnum was famous for having said: "There's a sucker born every minute." These wolves prey on people looking for a free meal. "Fool me once, shame on you; fool me twice, shame on me." They should heed our ancestors warning: "Don't bite the hand that feeds you." Karma is a bitch.

#4 Posted by blangenakker (2312 posts) -

But I like to know when games are coming out.

#5 Edited by Jacanuk (4370 posts) -

There is no such thing as gaming journalisme, its all made up by people who wouldn´t be able to get a job in the mailroom in any major journalistic media outlet.

Gaming media are critics and laymen who just happen to be paid to give their opinion.

#6 Posted by SovietsUnited (2293 posts) -

Nope

#7 Edited by _Judas_ (721 posts) -

@torenojohn7: Game reviews are a tricky topic. Alot of people, many on this site, reads game reviews as holy gospel and the final word. Most of em' are only interested in the score... Personally, I see reviews as a guide-line, take it into consideration and see if it is correct.

Games like "Army of Two" (the series) have often recieved low to medium score, but I've still bought them and had lots of fun with all games.

"Resident Evil Operation Raccoon City" got an abysmal rating, but I kept my pre-order up, got it and loved it!

I will admit, however, that I did cancel my pre-order of RE6 after all the hype and the poor score it got... I will say that I was heavily disappointed by the demo, aswell, so it wasn't solely based on the review. I honestly don't know what the criterias for a "good score" is for each site. Is it the fun-factor? Is it the graphics? Does a game get +2 points if it is an indie or have 8-bit graphics? I take my reviewing seriously, you can check out my reviews, but I am warning you: they are long and boring...atleast most of 'em. I have lots more to say, but I'm gonna stop here...

Game journalism makes this young (?) medium seem more mature, if that makes sense. I want the gaming industry to be up there on-par with literature and movies. I want games to be studied, I want games to be created, taught and accepted into the media culture. I must admit that I care about games! And I don't like to see my culture, my industry tainted by cheap and fake people!

As our industry climbs it's way up the mountain of acceptence, all these stupid, greedy vultures come flying and pecking at our fingers causing us to drop back down. Now we have to start anew, and it sucks, because we've lost alot of credibility from the fall... will we ever make the climb?

This sounded really good in my head. Did it make any sense?

@Jacanuk : I agree with you. WE, the community can write equally good reviews. Don't you agree? I've played a lot of games in my life... a lot of games. I have acquired a certain taste, it's true, but I am still capable of delievering a well-written review. Even better if I got paid to do it. You can do it too. We all can.

#8 Posted by mastermetal777 (1299 posts) -

@_Judas_ said:

@torenojohn7: Game reviews are a tricky topic. Alot of people, many on this site, reads game reviews as holy gospel and the final word. Most of em' are only interested in the score... Personally, I see reviews as a guide-line, take it into consideration and see if it is correct.

Games like "Army of Two" (the series) have often recieved low to medium score, but I've still bought them and had lots of fun with all games.

"Resident Evil Operation Raccoon City" got an abysmal rating, but I kept my pre-order up, got it and loved it!

I will admit, however, that I did cancel my pre-order of RE6 after all the hype and the poor score it got... I will say that I was heavily disappointed by the demo, aswell, so it wasn't solely based on the review. I honestly don't know what the criterias for a "good score" is for each site. Is it the fun-factor? Is it the graphics? Does a game get +2 points if it is an indie or have 8-bit graphics? I take my reviewing seriously, you can check out my reviews, but I am warning you: they are long and boring...atleast most of 'em. I have lots more to say, but I'm gonna stop here...

Game journalism makes this young (?) medium seem more mature, if that makes sense. I want the gaming industry to be up there on-par with literature and movies. I want games to be studied, I want games to be created, taught and accepted into the media culture. I must admit that I care about games! And I don't like to see my culture, my industry tainted by cheap and fake people!

As our industry climbs it's way up the mountain of acceptence, all these stupid, greedy vultures come flying and pecking at our fingers causing us to drop back down. Now we have to start anew, and it sucks, because we've lost alot of credibility from the fall... will we ever make the climb?

This sounded really good in my head. Did it make any sense?

@Jacanuk : I agree with you. WE, the community can write equally good reviews. Don't you agree? I've played a lot of games in my life... a lot of games. I have acquired a certain taste, it's true, but I am still capable of delievering a well-written review. Even better if I got paid to do it. You can do it too. We all can.

^ Everything this guy has said. I, too, agree games should be on-par with literature and film, because that way more people can respect the medium the way us gamers respect and enjoy it. While games are there on a cultural level, it doesn't necessarily "feel" that way, if it makes sense. The only time games, gaming, or gamers are ever on the mainstream news is if something terrible has happened like a school shooting, and I feel that more positive journalism can change that for the better. Yes, we have our own gaming news and websites, but it's still too broadly focused and biased towards games, and doesn't exactly help getting more games to more people.

Does the current news about Zoe Quinn and Phil Fish suck balls? Yes, it does, but it doesn't change the fact that this is still a great medium to be a part of, even if the maturity on either side still needs a bit of work.

As for reviews, anyone with basic writing skills can write a review. Hell, I write reviews of games if you care to stroll on by my user page (totally not a shameless plug XD). It takes a truly passionate person to write a review that can mean something to someone. Though I do agree that they should be taken as guidelines for purchase rather than the final say on a game's overall quality. For instance, games like Metro: Last Light got great reviews last year. Did I personally enjoy it? No. But I did try it because of the good press alone, so that's something. Same deal with Beyond: Two Souls, though the effect was the opposite with that game (middling reviews for what I thought was a great game). Journalism is a benefit to any entertainment medium, so long as it's as accurate as possible, or provides opinions as guidelines rather than as a final say.

#9 Posted by Archangel3371 (15553 posts) -

Yeah I do, that's why I'm here. I enjoy reading the various news articles, previews, and reviews.

#10 Posted by HailtotheQueen (253 posts) -

Okay aside from all this indie nepotism hoopla.. why are gamers acting like this is something new? wasn't it always like this? isn't it kinda obvious that big companies like activision give money under the table to give themselves perfect 9's and 10's? this has been like the norm since HD era.

As a gamer after playing so many games can anyone honestly think that these reviews are unbiased and fair? i sure as hell don't! i always take their reviews with a grain of salt and try the damn game for myself or watch reviews made by genuine gamers like me.

This has been blown so far out of proportion that its reaching ridiculous levels. I mean do we really need like a dozen threads about this one topic? But yes, you're absolutely right. This is not something new. The big companies most likely do these things pretty often and I have no doubt that a lot of the big sites (maybe GameSpot, IGN, etc...) are involved along with many YouTube reviewers. Its like when people suddenly got upset about the NSA spying even though those types of things have been happening since the Patriot Act. LOL

#11 Posted by Minishdriveby (9869 posts) -

I don't remember the last time I read a review. I do enjoy the more personal developer coverage/stories about the development thought process and ideas that go into making a game. I think more emphasis needs to go into that area and less into the scoring, financial reports that don't release all information, and PR hype aspects that most sites enjoy covering.

I enjoy knowing and reading that Lucas Pope use to design User Interface for Naughty Dog. I enjoyed the more personal developer interview that GameSpot did with Sean Murray from Hello Games during E3. I'm looking for a site to notify me on interesting ideas and unique experiences.

#12 Edited by Jimmy_Russell (681 posts) -

I was having this conversation with a good friend of mine concerning the number of people that watch Twitch and YouTube videos rather than all the other forms of media. I came to the conclusion that a large number of consumers have become disillusioned with the traditional sources of information and prefer to gather news from people they deem more trustworthy or down-to-earth. It's evidence that the gig is up.

#13 Posted by torenojohn7 (315 posts) -

@_Judas_: "many on this site, reads game reviews as holy gospel and the final word."

Man that's horrible! they should at least consider reading all the user reviews,the only reason i joined gamespot community instead of IGN is because it has user reviews that i can rely on Gamespot;s "Official" review is just one opinion that may or may not be a genuine review but i know for sure that actual people who buy and play the game are genuine gamers.

"Game journalism makes this young (?) medium seem more mature"

I DISAGREE.. game journalism is the equivalent of paparazzi and TMZ and that is NOT mature. it makes gaming community look like a bunch of immature idiots,yes i also wish that video game gets accepted as a competent art medium but i don't think our current immature gaming community deserves that.

"I don't like to see my culture, my industry tainted by cheap and fake people!"

See that's what happens when anything goes mainstream. gaming took a downwards spike in quality to appeal to non-gamers. to milk that extra cash.. before the HD gaming era gaming community was confined to a niche thus we saw so many quality games being made in past but not in the present.

#14 Posted by Blueresident87 (5339 posts) -

Not at all.

I don't often value their opinion and nothing they ever write feels very honest. The industry itself doesn't cater to actual gamers anymore though, so it is what it is.

#15 Posted by alim298 (1356 posts) -

No.

#16 Posted by The_Last_Ride (71409 posts) -

@torenojohn7: that guy is a douchebag. Zoe Quinn is awful aswell

#17 Posted by Ballroompirate (22792 posts) -

Think the last time I cared about gaming journalism was maybe a decade ago.

#18 Edited by Notorious1234NA (586 posts) -

bandwagon...game journalism does have a purpose + you are all being hypocritical now.

You are all active on this forum right? If you joined the community, it means you still value their opinion.

Nuff said

#19 Posted by torenojohn7 (315 posts) -

@notorious1234na: No i value my fellow gamer's opinions. i don't give 2 shits about gamespot editor's opinion nuff said!

#20 Edited by ooole (26 posts) -

No one is surprised about the gaming media being corrupt but I honestly never expected a "favors" for favors, censorship and such a blatant click bait agenda. At this point, IGN taking money and putting on banners of a certain game while giving it a tenouttaten is a lesser evil.

#21 Posted by Notorious1234NA (586 posts) -

@torenojohn7: You are a member of forum. Therefore, it is safe to say that you DO value their opinions or at the very least open minded enough to listen. You do so in order to make a sound decision. Regardless of what anyone says, the staff at Gamespot or other game journalist websites ARE more knowledgeable about the industry than the average Joe:

  • They make the informative videos
  • They write articles
  • They have access to alphas
  • They are the ones being contacted by game developers
  • They are going to E3 and Gamescon
  • They are promoting video games on a global scale
  • They are hosting interviews
  • They are our voice

Listening to the perspective of an individual who lives and breathes the industry is more credible than the person that just plays a distinct select few games on a casual basis. At the end of the day you choose to disagree or agree, but their opinions are not irrelevant even when they go against popular opinion. Game journalism helps bring different viewpoints to the table and in a way presents all sides.

#22 Edited by Sushiglutton (5275 posts) -

I like some journalists. For example Tom McShea, some of the Kotaku people, Jim Sterling and Total Biscuit (not sure if he identify himself as a journalist). So yeah there are some good journalists.

#23 Posted by Bigboi500 (29695 posts) -

As a reputable profession? Not really. I know there are a few out there who who have integrity and honor, though.

#24 Posted by Jacanuk (4370 posts) -

bandwagon...game journalism does have a purpose + you are all being hypocritical now.

You are all active on this forum right? If you joined the community, it means you still value their opinion.

Nuff said

Game Journalism is an oxymoron, there is no such thing as gaming journalists anywhere on the planet unless you go back to the older paper magazines. Today they are laymen who just happen to be paid to speak their mind.

Calling them journalists is just being delusional and a mockery against real journalists.

#25 Edited by torenojohn7 (315 posts) -

@notorious1234na: I already made it clear i only take their "Official" reviews and impressions with a grain of salt,i'm here for the gaming community not the website.

"They are the ones being contacted by game developers"

And perhaps they're also being bribed to not be critical of their games,RE5&GTA 4 wasn't criticized for it shortcomings instead was met with 9's and 10's... that is bullshit.

"Listening to the perspective of an individual who lives and breathes the industry is more credible than the person that just plays a distinct select few games on a casual basis"

Yeah i'd value the opinion of the person who is passionate about the gaming of my niche rather than some causal jock who has a love affair with the gaming industry.

#26 Edited by mastermetal777 (1299 posts) -

@torenojohn7: "And perhaps they're also being bribed to not be critical of their games,RE5&GTA 4 wasn't criticized for it shortcomings instead was met with 9's and 10's... that is bullshit."

Technically, they can't do that, since it's illegal to do so. Advertisement is one thing--it keeps these site up and running through the revenue they create--but bribery is dishonest. To think that people who give any game is being bribed to do so is a bit ignorant as to how these sites are run. In my opinion, abnormally high scores come from two things: hype and nostalgia. That's it, and many gamers are guilty of that as well.

"Yeah i'd value the opinion of the person who is passionate about the gaming of my niche rather than some causal jock who has a love affair with the gaming industry."

And people who make video game reviews aren't passionate about gaming? If they weren't, why would they choose this as their profession? Money? Journalism isn't known for giving people big bucks. These are people who want to do this because they love what they do. If it comes across as disingenuous, it's likely because you happen to disagree on the points their making and not of the content.

#27 Posted by Renegade_Fury (17123 posts) -

Nope, I just play games. I couldn't care less about the internal politics and high school drama.

#28 Posted by Notorious1234NA (586 posts) -

@torenojohn7: that's is perfectly fine, but the main point was this:

"...their opinions are not irrelevant even when they go against popular opinion. Game journalism helps bring different viewpoints to the table and in a way presents all sides."

@Jacanuk: as far as a person's title goes, I'm no judge call them what they want to be called. It's the respectful thing to do. For example, many "Financial Advisers" are really just Insurance Salesmen. Many people who work in "Housing" are really just Janitors. Many "Teacher Assistants" are just Babysitters. Much of "Game Journalism" are really just Editorials which last I checked is also in the New York Times. No need to knock down any respectful profession.

#29 Posted by Jacanuk (4370 posts) -

@torenojohn7: that's is perfectly fine, but the main point was this:

"...their opinions are not irrelevant even when they go against popular opinion. Game journalism helps bring different viewpoints to the table and in a way presents all sides."

@Jacanuk: as far as a person's title goes, I'm no judge call them what they want to be called. It's the respectful thing to do. For example, many "Financial Advisers" are really just Insurance Salesmen. Many people who work in "Housing" are really just Janitors. Many "Teacher Assistants" are just Babysitters. Much of "Game Journalism" are really just Editorials which last I checked is also in the New York Times. No need to knock down any respectful profession.

I know Journalist is not a protected title but it actually should be and i will never call someone who clearly isn't a journalist a journalist, also most know this

#30 Posted by TheDarkWolf86 (238 posts) -

I will admit...for a time I used to believe everything that was said regarding reviews. I didn't play a game if it received anything less than a 7. Thankfully, I look past what gamers write in reviews. I take it into consideration, but I don't let that review define if I buy/rent a game. To take it one step further...the fact I use GameFly helps tremendously! If a game doesn't get a great review overall, but the premise seems promising...I rent the game, see what its all about and make my own determination. Yes, this is the exactly same concept with the Blockbuster era, but it helps.

#31 Edited by Articuno76 (18786 posts) -

This is something that, as someone who has worked as a videogames writer before, I'm grappling with.

Ultimately access is what seperates journalists from the public, and access is the same criteria for casting suspicion on writers. Damned if you have it nothing to write if you don't. This is especially a big issue today where publishers don't need websites/writers as they have control/social media to sell their products - the old order of co-existance between writers and publishers is already breaking down.

There's no such thing as investigative journalism in this industry, an industry that is at times arbtrarily secretive over details that don't matter (that and, as mentioned earlier, we aren't important to publishers anymore so are less privy to interesting tidbits). So what are we writers supposed to write about? Ultimately we can only put our experiences to print (reviews, previews) based on game experiences that we have exclusive access over. I'm lucky in this respect because being bilingual I can cover Japanese imports which are off-access to most people, but not so off-access that it places me under the suspicion that comes with priviledged access.

Still, more often than not my impressions or reviews are met with scepticism and suspicion as a natural response. It's pretty upsetting that my scribblings, which are designed to exite and/or inform are largely met with hostility: "Thanks, but no thanks". What's more shocking is the gap between when I fulfill the same function as a writer (press asset seeding, writing reviews/previews) as a forumite. I'll be met with open arms and congratulated for my efforts where I would have been coldly shrugged off if I'd done the exact some thing for a website.

And If we don't have exclusive access then our writing is considered pointless, little more than glorified blogging (well, I guess it is. But even that should have some value). It's often said we do little more than recycle press releases, but even that is, IMO, a role worth doing. Have you guys read raw press releases? They're long-winded, confusingly worded and disturbingly exuberant in their praise; someone has to wade through the PR speak and distil the news.

I think the term "journalist" is at the root of a lot of hostility and confusion here. It should be noted that no one I know within the games writing industry actually thinks of themselves as a "journalist" even if they nominally are labelled as such or might use the term themselves; it's widely understood that games writing is reactive whereas actual journalism is pro-active. Even Dan Amrich's book (a sort of modern bible on videogames writing) takes pains to point this distinction out.

Apologies if this come of as a bit bitter, but it's quite frustrating to be told on a daily basis how pointless your role is from the same people that take advantage of the services that you're offering. And not just a tiny bit hypocritical.

#32 Posted by Minishdriveby (9869 posts) -

This is something that, as someone who has worked as a videogames writer before, I'm grappling with.

Ultimately access is what seperates journalists from the public, and access is the same criteria for casting suspicion on writers. Damned if you have it nothing to write if you don't. This is especially a big issue today where publishers don't need websites/writers as they have control/social media to sell their products - the old order of co-existance between writers and publishers is already breaking down.

There's no such thing as investigative journalism in this industry, an industry that is at times arbtrarily secretive over details that don't matter (that and, as mentioned earlier, we aren't important to publishers anymore so are less privy to interesting tidbits). So what are we writers supposed to write about? Ultimately we can only put our experiences to print (reviews, previews) based on game experiences that we have exclusive access over. I'm lucky in this respect because being bilingual I can cover Japanese imports which are off-access to most people, but not so off-access that it places me under the suspicion that comes with priviledged access.

Still, more often than not my impressions or reviews are met with scepticism and suspicion as a natural response. It's pretty upsetting that my scribblings, which are designed to exite and/or inform are largely met with hostility: "Thanks, but no thanks". What's more shocking is the gap between when I fulfill the same function as a writer (press asset seeding, writing reviews/previews) as a forumite. I'll be met with open arms and congratulated for my efforts where I would have been coldly shrugged off if I'd done the exact some thing for a website.

And If we don't have exclusive access then our writing is considered pointless, little more than glorified blogging (well, I guess it is. But even that should have some value). It's often said we do little more than recycle press releases, but even that is, IMO, a role worth doing. Have you guys read raw press releases? They're long-winded, confusingly worded and disturbingly exuberant in their praise; someone has to wade through the PR speak and distil the news.

I think the term "journalist" is at the root of a lot of hostility and confusion here. It should be noted that no one I know within the games writing industry actually thinks of themselves as a "journalist" even if they nominally are labelled as such or might use the term themselves; it's widely understood that games writing is reactive whereas actual journalism is pro-active. Even Dan Amrich's book (a sort of modern bible on videogames writing) takes pains to point this distinction out.

Apologies if this come of as a bit bitter, but it's quite frustrating to be told on a daily basis how pointless your role is from the same people that take advantage of the services that you're offering. And not just a tiny bit hypocritical.

Thanks for the great response.

#33 Edited by torenojohn7 (315 posts) -

@mastermetal777: "To think that people who give any game is being bribed to do so is a bit ignorant as to how these sites are run"

I beg to differ.. to think that these reviews are genuine is more ignorant.

"abnormally high scores come from two things: hype and nostalgia"

Except they are professional reviewers who are supposed to provide us with unbiased critical analysis of the game! otherwise if they're going to let their hype&emotions to influence their reviews then their reviews are not any better than a review made by an average gamer.

"And people who make video game reviews aren't passionate about gaming?"

Well old game reviewers used to be.. nowadays not so much.

"If it comes across as disingenuous, it's likely because you happen to disagree on the points their making and not of the content"

I find it disingenuous because they fail to criticize the game for its shortcomings and give games 9's and 10's for no apparent reason,GTA 4 should've been heavily criticised for its lack of diversity when compared to san andreas.

#34 Posted by Articuno76 (18786 posts) -

I should point out a distinction I failed to earlier that might make my post seem contradictory if not taken into account. Namely that I feel videogame journalism does have a role to play, even if that role is the thankless job of writing previews/reviews and putting press releases in digestible form. In other words, as a role/function it fulfils a useful purpose for many people.

What I'm grappling with is whether or not the role should even exist. After all, the value of writers comes from how we help publishers and audiences connect... a role that wouldn't need doing if we weren't in the way to begin with.

#35 Posted by torenojohn7 (315 posts) -

@Articuno76: I'm mostly passive about it.. i'm just surprised to see that some gamers actually take their reviews and impressions as the ultimate word.

#36 Posted by HailtotheQueen (253 posts) -

Total Biscuit (not sure if he identify himself as a journalist).

I almost vomited on my keyboard when I read that.

#37 Posted by Minishdriveby (9869 posts) -

I should point out a distinction I failed to earlier that might make my post seem contradictory if not taken into account. Namely that I feel videogame journalism does have a role to play, even if that role is the thankless job of writing previews/reviews and putting press releases in digestible form. In other words, as a role/function it fulfils a useful purpose for many people.

What I'm grappling with is whether or not the role should even exist. After all, the value of writers comes from how we help publishers and audiences connect... a role that wouldn't need doing if we weren't in the way to begin with.

It's a valuable role that you fulfill, especially with more and more games coming out at an exponential rate. Some games may not get the attention they deserve or are extremely obscure releases. You're right Publishers may find a way to get their product to public hears while circumventing the gaming press; however, for smaller games, with no publisher, I think websites like Indiestatik are invaluable sites that help highlight a mass of games that would get no attention (or next to none) otherwise. What the press, author, or public thinks about the game doesn't really influence my choice as it once would. I'm more interested in games being highlighted, not the score, and developers' stories than anything else that is covered.

#38 Posted by veemonro (6 posts) -

The reason people care about the #gamegate scandal is the following


1. Yes we knew jurnalists are corrupt but now there is actual evidence for it
2. The people who were pushing a feminist agenda are proven to say one thing but do another. (Saying gamers are worse then Isis for instance)
3. People utterly loathe censorship and there have been over 25.000 threads deleted on reddit.
4. They picked on popular youtubers like Tottalbiscuit who so far has very rarely let me down in his reviews.
5. They turned on gammers saying that gamers are virgin basement dwellers and that gamers are dead.

They basicaly dug their own grave.

#39 Posted by Xeno_ghost (683 posts) -

I don't give a gosh darn about gaming journalism, I watch gameplay videos and reviews from real gamers. Sorry about that strong language in the beginning of my post :P

#40 Posted by torenojohn7 (315 posts) -

@veemonro: lol who takes these 1st world feminists seriously? are they honestly saying that they have less rights than men like in 3rd world countries? they obviously don't so they're more than joke.

#41 Posted by ysn81972 (10 posts) -

Nope!!!

#42 Posted by loafofgame (523 posts) -

I do, although I wouldn't call everything these people do journalism. They fulfil some journalistic tasks, but it is important not to label everything they do as such. That would give the wrong impression. Still, no matter how you look at them, I think they serve a purpose. After all, all the accusations of corruption and biased reviews aside, in most cases they simply report on events.

#43 Posted by danny_dm_moore (298 posts) -

Couple of things on this. If you think Games Journalism/Writing is corrupt, and that the whole Zoe Quinn thing is disgusting, why is no one going after the writer involved? surely he is the problem, not the fact that Miss Quinn had a relationship with him that may have influenced his writing. At the end of the day, he still wrote that. Even though it was proved he didn't.

Second, yes I care about this. These people are clearly passionate about this, they are not working in this industry for the money, they want to have a job they enjoy and there is nothing wrong with that. Perhaps calling it Journalism is a bit wrong, but then if they say "I am games writer" people might think they write the stories for games and not stories about games. So they can't really win.

Third I have to agree with all the people who say that this thread is a bit hypocritical. If you don't like what the writers and content creators of this site do, why the hell are you on the forums? why have you signed up to the site? if you are so totally against the whole thing, then why are you here? just to fuel a fire that is getting increasingly stupid as time goes on?

If you only want to read reviews from 'real' gamers, then think about that statement. These writers might get paid to write and play games, but they doesn't make them any less of a gamer.

#44 Edited by Bigboi500 (29695 posts) -

Why the hell do some posters think you have to be in agreement with the writers/reviewers of a website to enjoy and be part of that website's community?

We interact with other posters, not the reviewers and admins, so wouldn't the natural conclusion be that we're here more because of the community?

#45 Edited by Revan_911 (1708 posts) -

They died when they generalized all their audience like worthless scum. Gamespot / IGN were worse first by silence then by spinning the entire story and spreading even more misinformation.

#46 Edited by torenojohn7 (315 posts) -

@danny_dm_moore: "why is no one going after the writer involved"

Because WE DON'T CARE! gaming journalism is pompous bullshit and everyone knows it.

"you don't like what the writers and content creators of this site do, why the hell are you on the forums?"

What? do i have to kiss ass and suck up to every biased opinion on this forum to be a member?

#47 Edited by Randolph (10503 posts) -

@danny_dm_moore said:

Third I have to agree with all the people who say that this thread is a bit hypocritical. If you don't like what the writers and content creators of this site do, why the hell are you on the forums?

These forums have had so little to do with the actual main website the last few years, that it has essentially become a completely different website with loose at best affiliations to Gamespot proper. I almost never read or watch anything on the main site either, that's because it's all crap. No one at ANY video game websites is a journalist, and everything they say is either a) an outright lie b) extremely biased or c) bought and paid for shilling. The fact that they so blatantly coordinate and scheme together lately to push an extremist SJW agenda only drives how utterly worthless they are at this point.

Just look at the latest way how they coordinated with Anita Sarkeesian to help promote her new video. Her series had been seeing a serious decline as of late. She released the newest video, faked some death threats, and the SJW movement that has co-opted gaming "journalism" went into overtime turning her, oddly enough, into a damsel in distress. Did she report these death threats to the FBI? No, she did not. Shortly after talking about/responding to these "death threats" (which is the first thing the FBI tells you NOT to do) on twitter, what was very next tweet? Begging for money. It could not have been any more clear just how utterly fake this whole incident was.

It worked, her newest video saw a big spike in views and she raised some more money off these so called "death threats". Really hilarious how Joss Whedon tried to white knight for her as well, especially given the fact that a Sarkessian style examination of his own body of work would make him look like a profoundly misogynistic woman hater.

Now they've had to attack their own audience. That really drives home the fact that they are aware fully of how increasingly irrelevant they are. Gamers (Yes, I said the "G word", I won't let a bunch of high and mighty snooty pseudo intellectual fluffmeisters co-op such a wide open identifier and make me ashamed to use it) don't need these people anymore, and frankly, we never did, and that terrifies them. Most of these people have no plan B, this is it for them, and it's all falling to pieces. They desperately want/need to maintain the power we gave them years ago when the internet started getting really big to tell us what to play, to make us dependent on them. But I see no logical reason for us to do that. They don't deserve it, and they never did.

Gamers aren't dying/done. Game "journalists" are.

#48 Edited by Notorious1234NA (586 posts) -
#49 Edited by torenojohn7 (315 posts) -

@notorious1234na: Damn that's a profound reply! you stumped him speechless with that gif there! try out a grumpy cat gif next time it'll add so much to the discussion.

EDIT: What really annoys is that some people here think that just because i joined this forum i would automatically care about what these pseudo "Game journalists" do,i frankly never have and never will... yes its nice to see a good video review here and there but us gamers also make the same damn reviews&blogs! just because these "journalists" have beta access and stuff like that doesn't make them any relevant... their opinions&scores are just as meaningless especially after witnessing how fu*king disingenuous they are when reviewing games...

they're NEVER really critical of AAA games except for maybe Yahtzee who is actually a joker but actually provides more valid criticism than any of these shameless sellout "Journalists" that alone speaks volumes of the corruption looming the gaming "Journalists" ugh..

#50 Posted by Ultramarinus (578 posts) -

I do, as I have been reading gaming journalism for over 25 years now and would like it to be free of social agenda pushing, favoritism, constant guilt-tripping and misleading against games whenever it doesn't suit their agenda. Gamespot has been suffering from this a lot and even though the dismissal of some writers was a good move, it's still not free of this.