Op Ed

games.on.net - Sudden (AU) price rises for games just make everybody mad – so why do publishers keep doing it?
Australians feel attacked because, without any attempt to hide it, a company slaps them with an artificial surcharge that has absolutely no basis in reality, for a digital product that doesn’t actually exist. They’ve seen behind the curtain, and there’s no magic: just a giant middle finger.

Rock, Paper, Shotgun - Some Subjective Thoughts On Objectivity.
There are an awful lot of gaming sites, and there are an awful lot of them reporting gaming news, as presented to them by PRs, publishers and developers. Because let’s be clear: the vast majority of what is presented as “news” in the world of gaming is, “This game has been announced,” or, “Here is a new trailer for this game.” Simply reporting this news may be desired by some, and there are an awful lot of places people can visit for such straight delivery of a publishers’ facts. Which is why we think RPS offers far, far more to our readers by doing something different: To report the announcement of a game, or the arrival of a new trailer, and then to give our subjective opinion of that news. Be it, “Oh boy, we’re so excited that this game exists, because the previous ones have been tippety-top!” or, “Wow, this game looks gross,” our opinion infects our coverage because it’s written by us, on our website. We know, absolutely, that our opinion can be rejected by those reading the news, and indeed we most frequently offer space below the post for people to voice their disagreement. “No, the previous games were terrible, and this one’s going to be worse!” “How can you say it looks gross, you sillies – it looks flipping amazing.”

View : : :
64 Replies. 4 pages. Viewing page 1.
Newer [  1  2  3  4  ] Older
64.
 
Re: So why do publishers keep doing it?
Sep 18, 2014, 12:20
64.
Re: So why do publishers keep doing it? Sep 18, 2014, 12:20
Sep 18, 2014, 12:20
 
ASeven wrote on Sep 17, 2014, 17:35:
Well, this is it. Milo has now done some investigative journalism and found a secret mailing list containing most of those "gaming journalism" sites belonging to the SJWs.

This is pretty much the endgame for GamerGate and something no SJW can squirm out of now.

One of the Arstechnica writers who came out in defense of Quinn several times admitted to starting this. But of course hes claiming that it isn't what people think it is, oh no

I don't know how anyone can square a defense of this idiocy, these people have been caught making things up then laying the blame on "gamers". Reading some of the bigoted shit Alexander has said on twitter was a real eye opener too, this is the social justice champion? Wow. What a bunch of fucking hypocrites.
Avatar 51617
63.
 
Re: So why do publishers keep doing it?
Sep 18, 2014, 11:48
63.
Re: So why do publishers keep doing it? Sep 18, 2014, 11:48
Sep 18, 2014, 11:48
 
Lump people into stereotypes and then immediately dismiss their opinion. Talk about "intellectual dishonesty"? There's the poster child.

This comment was edited on Sep 18, 2014, 12:10.
Avatar 56185
62.
 
Re: So why do publishers keep doing it?
Sep 18, 2014, 11:43
62.
Re: So why do publishers keep doing it? Sep 18, 2014, 11:43
Sep 18, 2014, 11:43
 
I don't think that word means what you think it means.
Avatar 56185
61.
 
Re: So why do publishers keep doing it?
Sep 18, 2014, 07:16
61.
Re: So why do publishers keep doing it? Sep 18, 2014, 07:16
Sep 18, 2014, 07:16
 
He made it clear how dishonest he is in the other thread. Beamer-lite earned himself a very well deserved ignore.
Avatar 15920
60.
 
Re: So why do publishers keep doing it?
Sep 18, 2014, 07:11
60.
Re: So why do publishers keep doing it? Sep 18, 2014, 07:11
Sep 18, 2014, 07:11
 
descender wrote on Sep 18, 2014, 00:33:
Small minds discuss people... and you two can't seem to get enough.

Almost 5% of your posts have to do with Beamer. I think you are secretly in love.

The irony there is hilarious.
Avatar 57682
59.
 
Re: So why do publishers keep doing it?
Sep 18, 2014, 00:33
59.
Re: So why do publishers keep doing it? Sep 18, 2014, 00:33
Sep 18, 2014, 00:33
 
Small minds discuss people... and you two can't seem to get enough.

Almost 5% of your posts have to do with Beamer. I think you are secretly in love.
Avatar 56185
58.
 
Re: So why do publishers keep doing it?
Sep 17, 2014, 21:27
58.
Re: So why do publishers keep doing it? Sep 17, 2014, 21:27
Sep 17, 2014, 21:27
 
Mad Max RW wrote on Sep 17, 2014, 19:34:

This is why most people have him on ignore. I was almost surprised when Prez, the most sympathetic middle of the road guy on the entire site, completely eviscerated him a couple weeks back. Beamer is living totally inside a bubble world. Any real conversation with him is impossible. Never ever EVER try to discuss anything with progressives and expect a shred of honesty out of them.

I'm getting close to that. He is running a literal deflection campaign, hundreds of posts on the subject now and attempts to evade everything by shifting focus and attention whenever something inconvenient comes up. It's utterly predictable and tiresome.
Avatar 57682
57.
 
Re: So why do publishers keep doing it?
Sep 17, 2014, 19:41
57.
Re: So why do publishers keep doing it? Sep 17, 2014, 19:41
Sep 17, 2014, 19:41
 
Brad Wardell, founder, President and CEO of Stardock speaks out:

I’ll hand the SJW anti-#Gamergate people one thing: They have chutzpah. Seeing individuals who have a history of abusing, ridiculing, lying and misrepresenting people complaining about gamers is…just breathtaking.

The best thing that will come out of this #gamergate thing, and this is the one thing that I think its supporters should really take some pride in is this: The free ride is over.

So many lurkers and neutral observers have been able to see how these guys operate: If you disagree with them you are either racist or sexist. There is no such thing as a principled argument as far as they’re concerned.

Remember: You’re always racist, sexist, evil no matter how absurd they have to stretch reality to make it so

#GamerGate–the free ride is over

Many more devs and studios are beginning to speak out. I guess the same people who make a living in this industry do give a fuck.
Avatar 15920
56.
 
Re: So why do publishers keep doing it?
Sep 17, 2014, 19:34
56.
Re: So why do publishers keep doing it? Sep 17, 2014, 19:34
Sep 17, 2014, 19:34
 
ASeven wrote on Sep 17, 2014, 17:45:

Your intellectual dishonesty knows no bounds it seems, Beamer. You are becoming so predictable it's no longer fun, just plain sad.

This is why most people have him on ignore. I was almost surprised when Prez, the most sympathetic middle of the road guy on the entire site, completely eviscerated him a couple weeks back. Beamer is living totally inside a bubble world. Any real conversation with him is impossible. Never ever EVER try to discuss anything with progressives and expect a shred of honesty out of them.
Avatar 15920
55.
 
Re: So why do publishers keep doing it?
Sep 17, 2014, 18:15
55.
Re: So why do publishers keep doing it? Sep 17, 2014, 18:15
Sep 17, 2014, 18:15
 
Again, what Milo posted just shows that video game "journalists" are friendly and of similar views.

It isn't some massive smoking gun.

This was a massive smoking gun. But it's utterly ignored by #gamergate. Reviewers flown from SF to LAX, then driven to Santa Monica and given a customized flight helmet. Put in a helicopter and flown to Ojai? Taken to a spa and given a "posh suite" for 3 days. Given a Mad Catz headset? All travel, food, accommodations, helmet and headset all courtesy of Activision?

That's an ethics issue.
Yet no one in #gamergate seems to bring this up. No, they just repeatedly bring up editorials that don't even discuss games. This is supposedly about ethics, but a huge ethical issue with Black Ops reviews and the best smoking gun we'll get outside of the GameSpot thing is no big deal. You know, because only men are involved. But an editorial about women that doesn't mention a single game? ETHICS VIOLATION!

At the end of the day we're talking about games. Consumer products. Publishers only share information in an attempt to get your money. There will never, ever be ethics in this. Ever. Because they're games. They're not life and death. They're not even cats stuck in trees. They're games for sale.
54.
 
Re: So why do publishers keep doing it?
Sep 17, 2014, 18:03
54.
Re: So why do publishers keep doing it? Sep 17, 2014, 18:03
Sep 17, 2014, 18:03
 
ASeven wrote on Sep 17, 2014, 17:45:
The fact that they have a mailing list encompassing all the bloggers that launched those Gamers are dead attacks is pretty much damning.

We have collusion, we have attempts to control narrative, we have corruption. Only Beamer is blind enough not to see it.

Your intellectual dishonesty knows no bounds it seems, Beamer. You are becoming so predictable it's no longer fun, just plain sad.

But then your argument still isn't their ethics, it's their view of social issues. None of Milo's petty complaints are that they're fixing reviews, or unjustly previewing games, it's that they all have similar social opinions and share them both off the site and on the site.

These are bloggers. They tell you when release dates are. That's they're job. They're not in Afghanistan braving gunfire to tell you what's going on. They're not photojournaling Arab Spring. They're telling you that Destiny came out last week and the first DLC drops in a few days. That's their jobs.

And your complaints seem to be that they think that women are important and discuss this elsewhere.



Shut up about "intellectual dishonesty." I still don't think you know what that means and you just see people tweeting it. How am I being intellectually dishonest? And how is this still not about you disagreeing about whether women are important in gaming? Again, Milo shows NOTHING other than them discussing that topic. Nothing about the supposed thing people here feel are ethical violations. Nothing on reviews. Nothing on how they cover various products publishers put out. Nothing. Just Milo doing more whining about SJWs. And you doing more whining about SJWs.

Seriously, ASeven, it's hard not to see how this is about anything for you other than hating "SJWs." You don't give a shit about journalist ethics. You REPEATEDLY link to unsourced paint images, poorly produced Youtube blogs, and articles that support your POV. Where are the ethics there?
53.
 
Re: So why do publishers keep doing it?
Sep 17, 2014, 17:45
53.
Re: So why do publishers keep doing it? Sep 17, 2014, 17:45
Sep 17, 2014, 17:45
 
The fact that they have a mailing list encompassing all the bloggers that launched those Gamers are dead attacks is pretty much damning.

We have collusion, we have attempts to control narrative, we have corruption. Only Beamer is blind enough not to see it.

Your intellectual dishonesty knows no bounds it seems, Beamer. You are becoming so predictable it's no longer fun, just plain sad.
52.
 
Re: So why do publishers keep doing it?
Sep 17, 2014, 17:41
52.
Re: So why do publishers keep doing it? Sep 17, 2014, 17:41
Sep 17, 2014, 17:41
 
ASeven wrote on Sep 17, 2014, 17:35:
Well, this is it. Milo has now done some investigative journalism and found a secret mailing list containing most of those "gaming journalism" sites belonging to the SJWs.

This is pretty much the endgame for GamerGate and something no SJW can squirm out of now.

Ok, see, this is why it's impossible to separate "gaming ethics" from anything else. ASeven right here ties it to "SJWs."

Sorry, there's nothing here other than trying to continue piling onto women. I still don't see anything half as damning as Milo is implying. A Kotaku reporter correcting people claiming Nathan Whatever reviewed her game (he didn't.) Ben Kuchera telling people they shouldn't allow comments that qualify as harassment? Oooo, damning!

Again, this is coming from Milo, a guy that said any adult male playing video games is sad, and a guy that has published numerous anti-female articles.

I see no smoking gun here, other than the journalists feeling they're being attacked and people are using their site to attack developers. All of which was happening. But whatever, ASeven, it's a massive conspiracy against just you, and it's about ethics, only ethics, and has nothing to do with anything else.
51.
 
Re: So why do publishers keep doing it?
Sep 17, 2014, 17:35
51.
Re: So why do publishers keep doing it? Sep 17, 2014, 17:35
Sep 17, 2014, 17:35
 
Well, this is it. Milo has now done some investigative journalism and found a secret mailing list containing most of those "gaming journalism" sites belonging to the SJWs.

This is pretty much the endgame for GamerGate and something no SJW can squirm out of now.
50.
 
Re: So why do publishers keep doing it?
Sep 16, 2014, 18:08
UHD
50.
Re: So why do publishers keep doing it? Sep 16, 2014, 18:08
Sep 16, 2014, 18:08
UHD
 
Creston wrote on Sep 16, 2014, 11:43:
mag wrote on Sep 15, 2014, 16:55:
Gen X is ~1960 to ~1980. The youngest Gen Xers were 18 in 1998. Millenials are ~1980 to 2000. The oldest Millenials are in their thirties now.

Oh, okay, I thought Gen-X was the late 80s to 2000s. My bad.

In that case, then yes, most of the Blues regulars are probably Gen-X'ers.

So as an early-30s millennial when can I start bitching about the current generation? Or can I already? Does it even have a name? This is important.
49.
 
Re: So why do publishers keep doing it?
Sep 16, 2014, 11:44
49.
Re: So why do publishers keep doing it? Sep 16, 2014, 11:44
Sep 16, 2014, 11:44
 
Cutter wrote on Sep 15, 2014, 17:51:
You once thought you were wrong but it turns out you were mistaken.
Toff

*mind splodes*
Avatar 15604
48.
 
Re: So why do publishers keep doing it?
Sep 16, 2014, 11:43
48.
Re: So why do publishers keep doing it? Sep 16, 2014, 11:43
Sep 16, 2014, 11:43
 
mag wrote on Sep 15, 2014, 16:55:
Gen X is ~1960 to ~1980. The youngest Gen Xers were 18 in 1998. Millenials are ~1980 to 2000. The oldest Millenials are in their thirties now.

Oh, okay, I thought Gen-X was the late 80s to 2000s. My bad.

In that case, then yes, most of the Blues regulars are probably Gen-X'ers.
Avatar 15604
47.
 
Re: Op Ed
Sep 16, 2014, 10:47
47.
Re: Op Ed Sep 16, 2014, 10:47
Sep 16, 2014, 10:47
 
InBlack wrote on Sep 16, 2014, 02:47:
I applaud you for completely derailing this thread Beamer, by somehow bringing Anita & Gamergate (or whatever stupid label they keep using) into the discussion about articles which have very little to do with this issue. The main issue was objectivity and journalism in gaming. You have successfuly managed to troll the thread up to post 43. Que Applause. 10/10.

I'm not even the first one to bring Gamergate up in this topic. But the fact remains that most people saying absolutely disgusting things about people like Anita and whomever else hide behind #gamergate. That's their shield. While you can break out the journalist ethics from the misogynistic sludge that is gamergate, it's hard because, on this very board, in this very thread, there are an enormous amount of people that fail to see the difference.

And, again, I'm not the first one to bring it up in this topic.
46.
 
Re: Op Ed
Sep 16, 2014, 03:23
46.
Re: Op Ed Sep 16, 2014, 03:23
Sep 16, 2014, 03:23
 
Id still like a nice reasonable discussion about the problems in journalism (or rather the lack of any 'significant' journalism) as related to the gaming industry, without the issue being obfuscated and/or steered into the non sequitur territory of #gamergate which has nothing to do with the issue at hand. (Although the issue is blown out of all proportions directly as a result of the non-profesionalism that is ever prevalent in the gaming media)
I have a nifty blue line!
Avatar 46994
45.
 
Re: Op Ed
Sep 16, 2014, 03:08
45.
Re: Op Ed Sep 16, 2014, 03:08
Sep 16, 2014, 03:08
 
RPS didn't post that article in a vacuum.
64 Replies. 4 pages. Viewing page 1.
Newer [  1  2  3  4  ] Older