Topic: Games Journalism: Quote me accurately and I'll sue!

[UncleBob]

Who donates the stuff for the play rooms, prizes, etc?

[NWR_insanolord]

A lot of the free play stuff comes from private collections, where the owners donate them for the span of the event.

[MrPhishfood]

Penny Arcade Report has a good take on this

Many years ago when I became a little more business minded and inquisitive I started to realise that these gaming websites I go to had to survive on ads. Not just any ads but ads for the very games they were reviewing. If they trashed a game then it could also mean a loss of revenue for the website.

At the time I was a frequent visitor of GameSpot, their review scores were very much in tune with what I felt a game deserved and the wording of their reviews reflected what I had felt about games I had already played. If Gamespot gave a score above a 9.0 then it was a game I would definitely buy. Somewhere along the line I felt the scores were getting padded and especially so when the game was being advertised on the front page. I grew very suspicious of their review process and felt they had been compromised.

This is when I went to Eurogamer. Being British myself had nothing to do with it, I read some of their stuff and felt it was more in tune with me. The opinions were honest and sometimes brutally honest, they gave praise and snide remarks in equal measure. Often they would have very interesting articles that made you think about gaming in a different light. What they were advertising on front page didn't stop them from giving a bad score where it was warranted.

I've been a long time reader of Eurogamer but I've never bothered remembering any of the journalists names. I didn't think it was necessary as long as I felt the website's integrity had not been compromised. Reporting on people that have compromised their journalistic integrity is something they should do. If they don't do it then who will?

[S-U-P-E-R]

[MrPhishfood]

Yup I read about that somewhere. Its called an 'embargo' you either give it a good review and publish it before release date or give it a bad review (less than the score they are asking for) and publish it after release day. If its really a stunning game that deserves a good score then fine, if its only mediocre then you may be inclined to bump up the score to get that review out early.

You don't legally have to do it, you can still give the game a lesser score and publish it before release date but they will never send you an early copy of a game again. If other publishers find out you did this then they would also be inclined to withhold early copies for fear that you may have a higher ethical standard.

Giving a late review has its own consequences, like getting less traffic because your site is the last to come up with a review. A website's traffic is its lifeline and the publishers know they can indirectly hold your website hostage.

I think Florence said something about this. Something like if you really want games journalism to change then you're going to have to start getting use to late reviews.

I hope whoever posted that letter doesn't get in trouble. There is an easy way to tell who leaked this letter. If Microsoft had the foresight they could write each letter a little bit differently like using different words and grammar to make each one unique.

What I'd like to know is do Nintendo first party games come with an embargo or do they just expect everyone to buy and review it after release date? NWR staff?

[S-U-P-E-R]

In my days on staff, there were definitely embargoes, but I never saw minimum review scores or threats related to minimum review scores.

[oohhboy]

Embargos is one thing, but stipulating a minimum score is reaching into cartoon villainy territory. It's extortion. It also means every single launch day game review could be considered to be written under bad faith. Gaming websites are literally poisoning their own well.

[BeautifulShy]

Yeah those type of letters are one of the reasons why the gaming industry is messed up. I get why there is a embargo for releasing a review early but putting a stipulation on scores is just plain wrong. When we did REcoms on Nintemple we basically just did a written review no scores at all for a few reasons. People complain about scores. People just go to the last page of the review or just scroll down and look for the score and would not compare to the actual text of the review. A number score is relative a 8.5 for you might not be great but for me it is just fine. I do know there is a system in place with metacritic and it needs to be upheld but if you have people saying that you have to give this game such and such a score it just messes up the whole legitimacy of the system.

[MrPhishfood]

I like the idea of having no scores whatsoever. Not even a sliding bar for graphics / sound / gameplay / value / story etc. Just a written review and you'll have no choice but to read it.

Websites have numerous people dishing out review scores but being individuals they will judge game's based on a different set of criteria. So even people comparing websites saying "Oh Eurogamer gave this a 7 but Gamespot gave it a 9" is pointless in itself because its really a comparison of an individual's opinion.

[Hey Einstein!]

I agree about getting rid of review scores, but in spite of myself. I all to regularly rush to read the score or the last paragraph of a review and often decide based on that if I'm going to read the whole thing. It's stupid. I am also against giving films, music, etc scores. To my mind all the numerical system does is pigeon hole a product. I should be able to figure out what a critic thinks without a big fat number hanging on the end of their prose.

[Ceric]

Reginald and contract sign on 9-24-2012 would be enough to identify him.  Reginald is a relatively unique name combined with the date.

I'm fine with saying to not release your review till a certain time but, to have the score predetermined that is just dishonest.  You might as well just give them what they should print.

[shingi_70]

Shady as hell.

The games jounalism space really needs an overhaul. The whole giving collectors edtions too reporters is bad. Reporters should the game in non. Descript boxes or download codes. They get all the games a month in advance and after the review is complete the games should be returened to the company.

However that's a pipe dream one of the episoides on the polygon.com documentary talked about this. Something about sometimes getting 4-5 games on a week download.

I would reccomend people to wacth the polygon documentary.

[Halbred]

Games journalism isn't a THING.

It is a gigantic branch of media PR.

[azeke]

I would reccomend people to wacth the polygon documentary.

These jokers are THE biggest stain on "games journalism". One of them is the famous "dancing with Skyrim" guy.

[Shaymin]

I would reccomend people to wacth the polygon documentary.

You mean the one Microsoft paid $750k to sponsor... wait, forgot who I was talking to.

[Hey Einstein!]

Eurogamer have just publicly updated their editorial policies in light of Doritosgate. Here's the link:
http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2012-11-09-editors-blog-new-editorial-policies


and here's what they've changed:
We do not attend "VIP" review events at hotels or abroad.

• If it is ever necessary to review games at a company's offices then we will cover travel and accommodation costs ourselves and disclose the conditions under which the game was reviewed.

• If we accept travel or accommodation from a company then we disclose it.

• We will only accept games, items for reviews and things that enable us to do our job (i.e. consoles, peripherals).

• Games and other items received through work may not be sold or traded. If they are no longer useful for work then they will be given to the GamesAID charity.

• Staff and contributors are not permitted to do "mock reviews" for or provide consultancy to games publishers.

• Staff and contributors may not write about a company they have worked for in any capacity within the last two years.

• 
  [/size]Seems good to me. I think that the way some outlets have responded to all of this stuff shows to what extent some sources are just gloomy PR drones and that some view themselves as actual journalists.
  [/size]BTW which online sources do you fine folks trust or value the most?

[azeke]

Eurogamer have just publicly updated their editorial policies in light of Doritosgate.

How about apologizing to the writer who they fired after the first threat of libel suit and publicly apologizing to everyone for editing his article?

Still in my ignore list.

[TJ Spyke]

Azeke, did you read the original post? They didn't fire him, the douche decided to quit because he doesn't like the fact that his article was edited (which he doesn't realize happens when you are a writer).

[oohhboy]

TJ, the libel suit was an instant lose/lose for Eurogamer and Rab. In Britain, it is up to the defendant to prove something is factually correct, not for the plaintiff to prove it was false. Even if it was completely true, the cost of the case is simply untenable. This is why Britain is the prime location to go to for libel tourism.

[ejamer]

Games journalism isn't a THING.

It is a gigantic branch of media PR.

This bears repeating.  Too many people (both inside and and looking in) forget this.

[TJ Spyke]

TJ, the libel suit was an instant lose/lose for Eurogamer and Rab. In Britain, it is up to the defendant to prove something is factually correct, not for the plaintiff to prove it was false. Even if it was completely true, the cost of the case is simply untenable. This is why Britain is the prime location to go to for libel tourism.

If you make a claim about someone, you should have factual proof. I can't call someone a nazi loving homosexual, for example,  without expecting to be able to prove it in court if they sue me. It is up to the person making the claim that it is true, not for the other person to prove it is not true.

[Hey Einstein!]

Wahey, an ideal time to quote myself:

The people who I think come out of this very badly are:

TJ who reads to me as very angry and dismissive. I think it's unnecessary...

[UncleBob]

Azeke, did you read the original post? They didn't fire him, the douche decided to quit because he doesn't like the fact that his article was edited (which he doesn't realize happens when you are a writer).

Dude, there's a huge difference between "editing" someone's article and removing parts of it.

[Ceric]

Games journalism isn't a THING.

It is a gigantic branch of media PR.

Wait a minute.

I have met the man and he loves dinosaurs and figurines.

[Louieturkey]

BTW which online sources do you fine folks trust or value the most?

This site is one I trust.  For games other than Nintendo games, I'll still come here because some of the writers review games from the 360 or PS3 in their blogs or the forums.  They are very open about how they get their copies of the games and what events they were invited to and everything involved.