Ever thought you were in the wrong career?

Sputnik wrote:Maybe a reviewer that sounds like he doesn't know much about games but likes to give his detailed impressions regardless, is actually attractive for some readers and could be a nice way to introduce some people to gaming, since you don't get the feeling that you missed out on an endless saga by not playing videogames from the very start.

If the average reader of the Guardian were to find an Edge-level review in the paper, chances are he wouldn't read past the first paragraph because he would feel overwhelmed by the detailed writing.

A good writer would be able to do both though

Maybe he's a good writer trying to approach the clinical ADD casual crowd. :shifty:

I think some game journalists are starting to get a snob-on. There are times when a bit of passion for a game helps to bind a reader to a game rather than some pretentious writer looking to be hired by some high-brown publication.

rudderless wrote:We were indeed a happy collective. I may have continued with Press Start were it not for an extraordinarily bad decision where we ignored the site for a few weeks to chase the possibility of a print version after a promise was made but then unfortunately not kept.

Oooh, 'ello.

Ah, those halcyon days of spending weeks designing an entire PDF magazine by yourself, basically learning InDesign on the way, paying for external artwork out of your own pocket, then finally getting it online only to be told by the first semi-professional A&D graduate to download it that it's all a pile of wank.

Still. See thread title.

Sputnik wrote:Maybe a reviewer that sounds like he doesn't know much about games but likes to give his detailed impressions regardless, is actually attractive for some readers and could be a nice way to introduce some people to gaming, since you don't get the feeling that you missed out on an endless saga by not playing videogames from the very start.

If the average reader of the Guardian were to find an Edge-level review in the paper, chances are he wouldn't read past the first paragraph because he would feel overwhelmed by the detailed writing.

Well, I write for The Observer on a regular basis and I've learned that writing for an audience like that is a balancing act. It's rarely a good idea to sound like you don't know what you're talking about, but you can still write in a way that's appealing to a mainstream readership without obscure terminology or oblique references.

I've read plenty of gaming reviews for mainstream publications that have factual inaccuracies, or are just a mess of lazily cobbled-together clichés, poorly written without any care for the publication or its audience, simply because editors and readers don't care enough, so they can get away with it.

I don't expect a level of depth you might find in a long-form review from the likes of, say, Edge or Eurogamer, but I do expect a certain quality of review from a professional publication.

cooldawn wrote:I think some game journalists are starting to get a snob-on. There are times when a bit of passion for a game helps to bind a reader to a game rather than some pretentious writer looking to be hired by some high-brown publication.

If someone is passionate about a game, they tend to know its name and its characters at least a little bit.

melatonin wrote:
rudderless wrote:We were indeed a happy collective. I may have continued with Press Start were it not for an extraordinarily bad decision where we ignored the site for a few weeks to chase the possibility of a print version after a promise was made but then unfortunately not kept.

Oooh, 'ello.

Ah, those halcyon days of spending weeks designing an entire PDF magazine by yourself, basically learning InDesign on the way, paying for external artwork out of your own pocket, then finally getting it online only to be told by the first semi-professional A&D graduate to download it that it's all a pile of wank.

Still. See thread title.

Hey, I wasn't blaming anyone, it was just one of those things. I worded it badly, perhaps. Either way, it was going to be print, it was going to be print and then suddenly it wasn't print and everyone's passion for the site just completely died. I can't deny that it played a big part in Press Start's demise.

It was my decision, anyway, and ultimately, y'know, mea culpa. I certainly don't bear any grudges, I was just explaining what happened.

cooldawn wrote:I think some game journalists are starting to get a snob-on.

I hate this. If you're talking about me, address me directly. "Some game journalists." Who else in this thread is in that profession?

There are times when a bit of passion for a game helps to bind a reader to a game rather than some pretentious writer looking to be hired by some high-brown publication.

One, how is wanting to read quality writing pretentious? Two, I'm not looking to be hired by "some high-brown (sic) publication". I'm just saying it's a shame standards are slipping.

Alot of games journalists these days, not you rudderless just seem to be a massive snob about it, because they feel they can write well.

Just because you're actually writing games reviews doesn't make you a better person than anyone else, I'd never respect a games reviewer as they're not making a real difference (which they seem to believe you should do just because they can write). The only people I would ever look up to or respect is people who work in the Public Services like Hospitals and the Fire/Police services. Games writers, you have no reason to be up your own arse, yes, you can pull puns out and shove them in a review but you're really not making a different to anyones lives, stop being so up yourself.

I'd just like to point out, I'm not talking about you Canton and I'm being deadly serious about a lot of games journalists who work on the bigger sites.

This is why I'm glad I've gone more niche with my writing of the strategy guides (and now a bit more towards researching and writing features as well). I've had to turn down some work recently as I've had too much mag work on my plate (otherwise I could be writing for around 2 - 3 different publications regularly-ish), but I can see HoC's point-of-view when it comes to the reviewing side of things (an area that I once pondered dabbling in, but then realised I simply preferred writing guides).

I'm FAR from a decent writer (my technical skills are somewhat lacking), but it does seem a bit mad from the OP that they'd send someone with zero interest or even knowledge to such a press event.

And that's a shame about Press Start as well, that had some serious potential...

Hope the work picks up for you HoC.

I've been talking about this a lot with various people recently. I genuinely don't know if games journalism will ever reach some kind of 'quality' plateau. Not while a large section of the gaming community still froth at the mouth over scores without reading the review, or click on top ten lists or inflammatory headlines. Or while there's a news story announcing when your site is putting a review up. Or embargoes and the desperate need to be 'first'. It's an area than is spun with an over-reliance on PR, a low-barrier for entry and masses of people wanting to break in because they love the medium.

The thing is, you pay peanuts, you get monkeys. And with due deference to the exceptions to the rule (rudderless included) -those genuinely good writers who battle through the shitty pay because they're passionate about it- the vast majority of games journalism is poor. And there's just so MUCH of it, with people setting up sites and being able to get free games on tap before blagging about it on Twitter or what have you. The culture of 'yey, free gooseberry fool' that surrounds it can be pretty awful aswell.

There's no way that stuff in the OP is acceptable. Only in games journalism could you get away with such gooseberry fool. Could you imagine a piece about sports or film that shows such wilful ignorance? Would you find that even remotely acceptable?

So I can't see how it's pretentious or snobby to want to read genuinely good critique of your favourite medium. But at the same time, StayDead has a point. Games critics do provide a service, whether it's helping you make a decision about parting with cash, or even just brightening up your day with a well written piece. However, they should realise their place, even the best ones: they're geeks. Geeks who can write and put down words about things that more talented people create.

But it's the same with film, music, whatever. I do think the mainstream press may have a part to play, should they EVER decide to feature gaming in a 'proper' capacity. There you can have the more balanced, accessible stuff, and you can get your specialist fix from EDGE or whoever.

I don't really know what my point is, I'm not even sure I have one, I'm just blathering. What do YOU want from games journalism? :shifty:

A job

I mean this in the nicest way, but it's like this thread has been written by Stuart Campbell.

Apart from Official Nintendo Magazine, which is still a load of gooseberry fool, I think the writing in Future's gaming magazines is really good at the moment. They've at least gotten away from the lads mag phase which dominated the PlayStation market in the late 90s (& then reappeared in 2003...& then again in 2007). Features (& I mean real features, not massive previews masquerading as features) are slowly coming back in generally too; Official PlayStation, GamesTM, EDGE, Xbox World & PC Gamer all do them.

Online...well, fair enough. Video content, breaking news, rumours, screens & 'info lists' have completely surpassed great written articles. I mean just look at the state of IGN from Rupert Murdoch - it's probably the most shambolic site he owns. Magazine linked sites are both awful & an afterthought, GamesRadar is the pits (now even worse since moving into blog format) & C&VG is nothing more than out-of-context reviews stolen from their respective publications, archaic design & news coverage (which never seems to originate from them either). On the plus side, Gamespot has improved since being taken over by CBS.

The OP reads like the Edge preview of MotorStorm Apocalypse.

The problem with games journalism is that anyone can do it, and the vast majority of publications and websites don't need someone good. We all know a heck of a lot of people will click through a review just for the last paragraph and score. Why should they pay someone good to write that review?

I can count the number of games journalists I consider to be good on one hand.

KKLEIN wrote:I mean just look at the state of IGN from Rupert Murdoch - it's probably the most shambolic site he owns.

That's a bit harsh, considering he owns both The Sun and Fox News.

Videogame journos are an odd bunch. You can always spot the Edge one a mile off, they look like they'd rather be sat in Starbucks with their Macbook out so everyone can see them writing.

rudderless wrote:If I could find a decent site designer who could build a new home pretty quickly and cheaply, I'd do it tomorrow.

Hey, don't use up all your free time. I need your expertise on Mothership

And then there's the 'Super Small Game' (working title) magazine and the Japanese import magazine, and the...

I'm in the construction industry at the moment... and whilst i do love it, i would have give an arm and a leg to be a games designer.

I've written about videogames and music, and snobbery is evident in both. It's just one of the things about writing. If you feel you have an audience and that people want to read what you write, it seems to give some people a big head. Thankfully the writers we have on here all seem quite self-deprecating about their writing.

The problems with games journalism are...

a) Anybody can do it. Make a site with a few half-decent reviews, and you can contact publishers and get free stuff. Pay people pittance for their reviews, with the promise of them being able to keep the games, and all sorts of people apply, and all sorts of sites, both good and bad, spring up.

b) Games still aren't taken seriously. And if games themselves aren't taken seriously, why would the people who critique them be taken particularly seriously? While the Internet has done wonders for making games more accessible, finding out opinions on games easier, and lots of other benefits, it's also opened up a forum for any old chump to think they know what they're talking about and get money/games in return for giving their view. The quality writers that the magazines used to have now lose out to the more easily-accessible opinions of these numpties.

Shadow wrote:The OP reads like the Edge preview of MotorStorm Apocalypse.

No it doesn't. For one, Edge is more knowledgeable. Secondly, it's not even close to Edge's style.

The problem with games journalism is that anyone can do it and the vast majority of publications and websites don't need someone good.

You could say that about any form of journalism. The difference is between doing it, and doing it well. And why don't the vast majority need someone good? That's the whole point of this thread.

We all know a heck of a lot of people will click through a review just for the last paragraph and score. Why should they pay someone good to write that review?

I can count the number of games journalists I consider to be good on one hand.

Because they want people to come back? Because they want people to actually READ what they're writing? And either way, that doesn't apply to magazines, does it?

I'm genuinely curious. Can you name the five (or fewer) you consider to be good?

Ever thought you were in the wrong career?

Who is online

Affiliates