It must be hard being a game journalist or a game blogger. I'll be honest, I don't really know the difference between the two vocations. I guess one of them has a lah dee dah degree that the other one doesn't, maybe they even take themselves seriously when they write a review on the latest Hannah Montana game hoping beyond hope for that Pulitzer Prize. What I do know is that while both of those jobs are of those that are extremely sought after and daydreamed about by the many lovers of games, it has got to be a tough racket. Or at least I think so, I really don't know from personal experience, but being as there's a new gaming website that springs to life on the net everyday trying to get a piece of the pie, of your attention, it must be an incredible undertaking for them to get you to notice them over the others.

The job grows exponentially larger when for all intents and purposes, every one of them are basically informing you of the same thing. The meat and potatoes of most game sites are the run of the mill presentation of upcoming games, new in game screenshots/trailers, unsubstantiated rumors, previews, reviews and of course what sets them apart, the editors and their original written pieces and various podcasts. What usually entices gamers to take a closer look at something? Usually an exclusive on a game may do the trick. Scoops in game journalism typically are that peek at a game, high profile or otherwise, before the next site. Yes, my peepers will scan that. Excellent writers/bloggers definitely is one as well. But even good writing skills may not be enough.

Example: Have you read a fantastically written cblog yet it can't churn out more than a handful of comments? Sure you have. That is a daily occurrence in our cblogs and as amateur bloggers it really is of no concern to us. Why would it be? The cblogger in question is not on payroll nor is he or she required to attract hits to the site. Have you ever thought of an editor in the same situation? What about an editor who can't generate hits, though is well versed. What of him or her? And how long before they get to continue to write before their pieces are bumped off? Perhaps I'm being melodramatic but game journalism/blogging is a business after all. So where am I going with this? Simply put, I feel there is a growing trend in gaming. The trend of luring an audience with fabricated controversy.

Take a look around and at first you may not even realize how much we are bombarded by it because we are so used to it being there. Unlike real life news where there may very well be a Watergate story or some smoking gun leading us on the trail of an honest to goodness scandal, this is games we are talking here. Not a promiscuous politician, a killer on the loose, a former president talking of racism, or a black rapper intruding on a performer's acceptance speech. Just videogames. And let's be honest to ourselves, most videogame controversies are of the minuscule proportion...usually self imposed by the very same people covering games. Not by some outside entity that hates all things gaming. Sure some politician may say something cross about our loved past time but that's usually every four to eight years when elections are held.

The fabricated controversies I speak of are the fueling of fanboyisms in the console wars. The pitting of game consoles to one another like a pre-fight weigh in to a boxing match. The stories of why this one is better than the other one. The top ten reasons why brand x is the winner over brand o. The splicing and editing of an interview with a game developer or someone else on the top of the totem pole of said game company and creating a sensational title to hook you. But really its just what that writer perceives from what they said, not what was truly stated. But the best of all is when some just create shit out of the blue, from scratch like say racism in a videogames. That one is always a keeper.

Perhaps its just me but I'm growing bored with that. It's like reading the National Enquirer shit. It's fluff. Its just there to get a rise out of you. To get you to stop and listen. And we eat it up. Who doesn't like to argue over something on the internet? Who doesn't love something to debate? Perhaps we're at fault for it. But the thing is if you're good, you don't need that lure to net attention. You already should have it before even picking out a bait. Yet I can't help but feel that nowadays these fabricated controversies need to be a part of the repertoire of not just a successful journalist/blogger but of their site as well.