I should preface this by saying that, while I am a Journalism major, I am not studying the practical aspect but rather semiology and the control schema that are interwoven throughout the media. So this is not some rant by a wannabe journo but a rant as a gamer who feels voiceless.
This was sparked by my purchase of Guitar Hero 3 (for the Wii) today and the realization that I was getting a lesser product all because of the absence of a hard drive for the Wii. I've already yelled about that in a previous blog (and to everyone who said that "Niero already said this" on it, no, he wrote about the myriad reasons that a hard drive should exist, I wrote about the mindset that created the decision to keep one from existing, morons) so I won't return to it, but it has made me wonder about gaming journalism.
It needs something to really take these nitwits to task about the decisions they make and the shit that they say. Gaming journalism rants endlessly about this in articles but the interviews with these people all read the same, tepid, balless questions that occasionally address a topic of concern but fail to put these people on the spot and demand a decent fucking answer.
Perhaps some such organization exists and I am simply ignorant of it and I freely acknowledge that such an interview style would probably end your career before it has begun, but if I was interviewing a Nintendo exec and they said that friend codes are great or a hard drive is unnecessary I'd unlock my inner Keith Olbermann and smack them around.
Nobody (that I am aware of) does this to their faces with the degree of venom necessary to make them feel stupid for saying it and until someone (preferably everyone) starts they will keep on feeding us this shit.
I mean, goddammit, Guitar Hero 3 on Wii could have been the exact same product as the rest, but no and all because of the ridiculous omission of a hard drive. So when I hear some idiot exec say that it is not necessary I want someone, anyone, to grill them on it and make them realize that it was a stupid thing to say and fucking wrong to boot.
This needs to change or my impotent rage is going to be vented onto the faces of the innocent. Interview with some balls dammit, this isn't Entertainment Tonight.
|
soul3150's blog
Follow
RSS
Contact
My major problem is that no one has the balls to go up to Sony and tell them no one cares about super mega high def gaming, but games themselves, and to start making games so people will buy their system. I want awkward silences dammit! I firmly beleive that if enough journalists did that, Sony could change their high-horse fucking attitude.
It totally gutless and it needs to stop.
It just happens FAR too much for it to be acceptable.
Seriously, I want to be the one who takes these people to task in interviews and asks tough questions. I actually value my career, so I can't exactly be venomous (maybe if I hit Paxman-like levels of infamy, but not now, it'd be suicide) but I definitely want to ask the kind of Q's that people never do.
Also, it's hard to be confrontational when your most used interview method is via email, bear that in mind too.
This is because, on his show, the politicians have to be there. Their political parties have told them to go and deal with it or they will lose popularity and votes. They can't just walk out.
If you pressed one of the big guns in gaming on a subject like that, they'd just leave! You'd get no answers, get a rep for being a dick and not get any more offers. If they don't want to talk about something, they just won't.
So in order to get any information at all, interviewers in the games industry mostly have to ask developers about what they will want to talk about. Sure, you can throw in the ocassional fast ball, but like as not, if they were willing to comment differently on issues such as hard drives on the Wii or Friends Codes, they'd have already done so.
At best, you'll get the PR line, at worst, end of interview.
We need to create the media culture, in gaming, that forces execs to answer questions. If we keep going easy they will always walk out when it gets hard, if we all start asking REAL questions they will be forced to answer.
Face questions = face the problem.
Face the problem = address the problem
Address the problem = a better gaming world.
This needs to happen, if they wanna end the interview, fine, but we need to make it that they find no solice elsewhere.
Solidarity brothers.
The only solution: creative question forming. Don't ask "Why do you implement the ridiculously inept friend code system?" but rather "If I was a kid and my mom said I could only hang out with other kids if I got their 12 digit number first, how much do you think I would want to kill myself/my mother? A follow up, Nintendo, why do you want me to kill my momma?"
Screw the creative questions, we need to create a respected gaming journo site that is taken seriously, so seriously that the execs, reps etcetera can't ignore it. Like a site that doesn't rant passionately about the faults in gaming before caving like a bitch at an interview.
Gaming is a young media so I don't expect this overnight, but it has to happen, or we will suffer under our art.
I believe you are right! Take for example the BIG 3 Automakers in Detroit. They answer to the union. & The BIG 3 (Chevy, Ford, & Chrysler)have learned to adjust their rhetoric, in a hurry when the union says to STRIKE!
------
Just like gamers need a sort of major entity in the game community. Not only to ponder the tough ones but to pressure The BIG 3 Gamemakers (Microsoft, Nintendo, & Sony).
Not just to throw around their weight but to knock companies off the high horse! Also to call Shenanigans.
WE DEMAND ACCOUNTABILITY IN GAMING!!!!!
There will never be the respected gaming journalism site that you crave because there certainly isn't one for film due to the realities of both being unnecessary journalism. No one will die if Nintendo doesn't revise their friend code strategy thus no outcry if Nintendo doesn't answer questions about it. And it will always be impossible to both have complete unfettered access to media companies and ask them questions they don't want to answer if there are no larger stakes involved.
Your solution seems to be to create a solidified movement for it but, take a step back, and really think about how many gamers actually want what you want and would support it with their purchasing power. Sure, here on Destructoid, the percentage is most likely high but, in the gamer populace at large, I think the vast majority just look for news about what game they want to play next. And really, there's already some of what you talk about out there. Have you read much gamasutra?
MAybe consolidate a couple of Pie in the Sky sites / magazines. Get some sort of revenue behind them at the same time.
MAYBE if the Major League Gaming weren't already owned by Microsoft we could've rode their backs. It's possible that Microsoft saw that threat as a secondary reason to absob them. Not just to push the games & hardware.....
Games were introduced to long ago for anyone to have a legit chance to tame the industry now!
Look @ the world goverments stepping in to stop video games. It's got to the point were it like a wrecking ball ( The Industry ). Unlike Reggie's punk ass. THe Industry as a whole is kicking ass & taking names!
We need bigger ....
@Bus, "send their family into economic hardship"??? I'd like to know how many people on Earth depend on gaming journalism to support themselves. Also, it is not about purchase power, this is about the precursor to purchase power, image. If we can create a site/magazine/ANYTHING that will bear the image of the game journalists that care, to shirk it would equal hate toward the game community from the relevant company and, therefore, bad sales.
This is NEEDED. I'll say it now, NEEDED, if gaming is to evolve. Other media have the groups that ask the tough questions, granted there is an abundance of fluff, but GAMING HAS NOTHING THAT DOES THIS, NOTHING.
All I want is a "Meet the Press" for games, not for every show to be "Meet the Press", just one.
Is that really too much to ask?
The relashionship is reciprocal, the exec earns cred for appearing, thereby validating what they say.
An exec wants to make something mean something? They come to us.
That's the deal.
But I want it to be Destructoid, the name, the manner and the humour of this site all lend themselves to this task. And I don't want to rush, what I want is a start, we are yet to see one.
What you're describing is like guerrilla customer feedback -- holding someone hostage in an interview until they hear what you have to say. It's probably more effective to write a thoughtful letter to someone who actually makes decisions than to attack some clueless PR schmoe for the sins of his/her corporate overlords that everyone already knows about.
A: Journalism takes things people already know and makes them PUBLIC KNOWLEDGE, there is a HUGE difference between what someone knows and what the public sphere knows.
B: THOUGHTFULL LETTER?!? You retard, a thoughtful letter is discarded, a public trouncing is not.
That is what I mean, letters, angry nerd rants on game sites, all these mean nothing when every interview is a ball-sucking hug-fest.
C: Clueless PR schmoe? For starters, are you Mel Brooks? Secondly, it is about generating a culture, do you read the other posts? Thirdly, I used the contraction "execs" enough for anyone to realize that I am talking about interviews with EXECUTIVES, or otherwise powerful individuals within the gaming world, not PR whores, idiot.
Lastly, guerilla market feedback? No, it is agressive journalism, and the game industry needs it as opposed to pathetic online bitching.
Here's wishing you all the best in your career as a journalist. Perhaps you'll win the Pulitzer Prize for writing about Mega Man.
The first question you should always ask yourself when you think of a "great" idea: why hasn't someone already done this?
A lot of people have already answered this question in drips pieces as they commented but the bottom line is thinking about what you need to set this up. You've said it yourself, we need to make the industry accountable and have something to lose by not taking these questions in interviews. That's why the government need to go on Paxman and Daily Show; because they're accountable and they need the public's support.
So in order for the industry to need to take these questions, they need to have something to lose. That something, at the moment, is us. So, simply put, you are the one stopping what you propose from happening. You supported the Wii when it had a bad friends system. And again with GH3.
If you want to see this happen, yes, it'll take hard work. Not just from you but from others. If no-one buys the Wii, things change. Same with the PS3, the 360 or any game that comes out with a flaw that deems it to be "not worth it" in the eyes of a significant portion of the public. Are you willing to not get a game, convince your friends not to get a game, start a campaign with others to try to get things sorted out?
If they have nothing to lose because the public are weak and don't demand more, then we are just men shouting in a vast wilderness. We do what we can by spreading the word and making the hits when and where we can but to turn the industry against us would defeat what you're asking for.
@glipe, you take a positive-consumerist attitude toward media. As though capitalist ideals are in some way democratic, and I will say to you what I say to every other follower of that ideal, were I to stop buying, what would happen?
Hmmm? Mr Balls? You wanna not buy a GOOD game to punish a company? Hmm?
The media must generate a thought process that a market can follow in order for said thought process to occur, if a gamer protests and no-one is around to hear it THEY DON'T MAKE A FUCKING SOUND!
If enough media make the point then the public sphere won't buy, I know better, but the masses are idiots and will foil my efforts at every turn.
So me buying GH3 is NOT a self defeat, libertarian idiot.
( They knew what they did thar! )
You saying that it's not your fault for buying the game because Joe public will be buying it anyway and it won't affect anything is exactly the same excuse they can use when you buy it. One man can make a difference, if he can convince others to stand with him. Not my problem if you don't think that going the extra mile will help your cause.
Not-buying a good game isn't what I'm talking about anyway, or what you were talking about either. No-one has a problem with people buying a good game. It's people buying a massively flawed game or version of a game that keeps the developers rubbing their hands with glee and throwing money over each other as they romp naked on the beach. We can complain all we like to the shopkeeper about the lovely apple with the worm in the middle but he'll keep smiling and offering us another apple if we're still willing to buy it.
And yes, there's no easy solution. There's no way to stop the public buying a game if it's great but flawed. So we deal with the system we have. If I thought we lived in anything but a capitalist state, I would look at ideas outside of capitalism and consumerism. Destructoid is already doing its bit to give a megaphone and a soapbox to all us degenerates who actually have an opinion that isn't just "I hate Sony/MS/Nintendo, I love Sony/MS/Nintendo - delete as appropriate." and I'm thankful for that. Any chance I get to ask the tough questions, I'll be polite but direct and hope for a response.
That way I'll get to ask again.
I'm not suggesting that we be rude to the people we interview, just that we don't sit there and grin as they feed us their swill, but actually say "No" to them on some matters. And as I said in my little addendum, when someone wants cred with the public, they come to us.
In all honesty, I can't think of a game that has really disappointed me due to a inaccurate review. What I DO want to see is a more honest viewpoint to formats:
PCs - expensive
PS3 - over-priced
360 - hardware problems
Wii - slim range of titles
DS - errr, actually it's pretty fucking perfect
If you want to buy a decent mag, try the UK magazine EDGE. It's a multi-format magazine that's quite strict with reviews and isn't afraid to give lower marks that the vast majority of gaming media.
I, like I'm sure many others do, find myself without a representative. I don't want to read regurgitated corperate press releases and hype, that is not journalism. I would very much value the opinions of someone who had the bollocks to say what they are actually thinking. I would want this across the board however, not just in interviews.
I want read from journalists who have maintained their integrity and not just sold out to become an accepted part of the scene.
The comments above about journalists putting themselve out of work if they 'rock the boat' are fu*king pathetic. I know that the majority of people operate within the safety margin, however, it's the people who push the envelope who are respected.
Would you rather have one true friend or a million sycophants?