Potlatching Your Way to Riches

[JessicaM]

The latest BTH is up and I'd be interested in knowing what readers thought of it. It's a bit of a touchy subject, I admit, :D.

-Jess

[SamW]

Originally posted by JessicaM
The latest BTH is up and I'd be interested in knowing what readers thought of it. It's a bit of a touchy subject, I admit, :D.

-Jess

It mostly just confirms my own ugly suspicions about the 'gaming journalists' and the corporate rags that flood my local news stands. I mean, when you see "The Official XBox Magazine" splattered across a cover, you kinda figure that the reporting is going to be a wee bit biased to keep that subtitle.

On the other hand, I seem to remember reading an article that suggested that advertising serves less to SELL products than it does to reinforce the squooshy good feelings of having BOUGHT an item, thus leading to repeat customers. As gaming magazines have become little more than 128-page advertisements for various games and/or systems, it only makes sense that they want to provide good reviews to keep post-purchase morale on an even keel. Screwy, but there ya go.

I've also noticed a recent trend in gaming reviews to completely ignore the audience a game is aimed at. A perfect example are the reviews of the Mario Party games for the N64. I hate the damn things, and so have the reviewers. But that's because we're all 20-30-somethings who want a little more from a game. The thing is, the people those games are aimed at would rate them very highly - my 6 and 9 year old daughters love the games.

So, I guess all I have to say is that in addition to the gaming magazines being beholden to the entertainment companies for cash, they also tend to get rather mediocre-to-poor talent to do their reviews, leading to a situation in which reviews are pretty much completely unreliable.

Want good gaming coverage? Rent before ya buy.

Sam

[murf]

This is not something unique to gaming. After all, ADM practically owns the Sunday morning news programs, so is it any surprise that most news programs seem to like the idea of alternative fuels made from corn and grain? Remember the storm that David Brinkley doing ads for ADM kicked up?

The only permanent solution is to make sure that the interests of the newsies are the interests of readers. This, obviously won't guarantee you good reporting (since this would aggrevate the 'if it bleeds, it leads' syndrome), but it would, at least, hold reviewers more directly accountable for their words.

Actually, I don't really feel the problem is that awful. I usually don't buy a game until after I've test-driven it. What does bother me are the hype machines. When waiting for a game is more involving than actually playing the game, there's something wrong. I don't really blame the press for this so much as the ad agencies and PR folks at the gaming companies.

Actually, I guess I should blame the fansites, huh? ;)

Brian

[Myrthos]

If you accept the notion that there is a built-in conflict of interest between publishers and the game press, how are we to read that? I'm not from a magazine but from a fan site reporting news on games. I've never been offered a single dollar and I don't believe any of my colleagues have been either (although you never know of course ;) ).
I do think there is a parallel to be drawn to gaming sites. There are fan based sites and commercial sites. Real fan sites, like RPGDot don't need money to survive. Our server costs are so low that we don't have any problems paying for it ourselves (yes advertising income does not cover all exepenses). Most of us have a day time job and do this in the evenings. But there are other things than money to be offered. We like to get features on games. When we get features from a publisher, there is never the obligation set by them that anything done about them needs to be favourable. Never the less whenever this happens and I feel their game sucks then there is some hesitation from my part in putting the (p)review up. Not that it stops me from putting the article up the way it is but there is just this short moment of hesitation.

I do not think it realy influences my articles but can one be sure? Would an article have been less favourable if I never heard of them before? Is the fact that I know some of the game developers in person influencing me? To be honest I do not know. I try to be as objective as possible and I'm very sure that even though all these relationships influences me on some level, it does not alter the articles in any big way. The advantage that we at RPGDot have is that we do not need this for a living.

I can only imagine what this would do for a commercial site. They depend on getting features from game publishers (features == visitors). Writing bad about a game from a publisher repetetively will reduce the possibility of them getting a feature I suppose. I don't know if they are paid in cash .... I hope not.

I think any review you read on a game is biassed with the personal opinions of the reviewer. There is nothing to be done about that. You can read all the reviews on the game and then try to make a decision based on that. They can't be buying everyone .... or can they? :D

[Lynx]

Originally posted by JessicaM
The latest BTH is up and I'd be interested in knowing what readers thought of it. It's a bit of a touchy subject, I admit, :D.

-Jess

IMO, having games be reviewed by developers isn't the cure; you'll just have the possibility they'll be biased toward the kinds of games they develop. It's more important that reviewers and judges of competitions be good at critical review.

What mark is a game trying to hit? Does it succeed? Why or why not? What is the gameplay like? What are the good points of the gameplay chosen for this game? What are the bad points?

Stuff like that.

Classic journalism has always been 'who, what, where, how, when, why', but reviewing is about 'good, bad, why'.

-- Lynx

[JessicaM]

I've been interested in the reaction , here and in other forums, to the column. It seems split mainly between two camps: "No, it isn't that way and what are you smoking, anyway?" and "So what? We knew it all along and take it into account when we read a review."

Another thread that seems to run through the conversations is, "Well, yeah, there is a symbiotic relationship, but it's just GAMES. Get over it."

SO the question becomes, am I taking the subject too seriously?

[JeffC]

Originally posted by JessicaM
I've been interested in the reaction , here and in other forums, to the column. It seems split mainly between two camps: "No, it isn't that way and what are you smoking, anyway?" and "So what? We knew it all along and take it into account when we read a review."

This is the reaction to nearly every posting that asks for people's opinions.

SO the question becomes, am I taking the subject too seriously?

That depends on whether or not you believe honesty in the media, all media, no matter its subject, is important. I think it is, whether it is games, needlepoint, or national economic policy. There is a general trend of journalistic prostitution to corporate interests these days, and I think it is important to address it at all levels.