I must be allergic to idiots

#1 I came across another good example of this crap

Check it out here

By they way, he's 17... sure he's not the foremost expert on what makes a game good... but it's his opinion and he entitled to it - you of all people should appreciate this as you seem to have an opinion on everything. But like you said, it's an editorial, a short piece about a few things in games he thought stood out from the rest of the gimmicky crap...

But hey, thanks for bringing the article to our attention, you brought up some interesting points and constructive critisism that I'm sure would make CJ better at what he's doing.. speaking his mind...

Maybe his next editorial will be some bogus IRC chat between stereotypical action game characters that take pot-shots at different games' flaws... maybe the little green frogs from Daikatana, Lara Croft's left tit, and Duke Nukem ForNever (har har) will join the all-star cast... Or maybe he'll just be too destracted by his "shiney things" or too stupid from his lack of an elementary education to come up with such comedic gold.

Talk about the pot calling the kettle black... christ

-nohbdy

#2 Did you write that editorial? You sure came down hard (and off the mark) on my gripe about gaming press in general, so I'm wondering.

That article is one of so many, that I guess it really didn't matter which one I picked. I could probably find something like that on the vast majority of "credible" gaming sites, or gaming magazines. I respond in a similar manner when I see those as well.

I acknowledged it's his opinion, but my complaint was based on the widespread "kewl dude!" kind if thinking in gaming press and the possibility that gamers might actually be thinking like that. Afterall, why write it if gamers don't think the same way?

"Maybe his next editorial will be some bogus IRC chat between stereotypical action game characters that take pot-shots at different games' flaws"

He better not. I have a copyright on that.

Somehow I fail to see the link between some guy screaming how he wants overused (or soon to be) parts of games used more, to something that had no intent of being anything other than a joke about the sad state of massively multiplayer games.

Opinion is one thing, and that really isn't what's being discussed. I don't care if that's what he likes or wants or prays for every night. It's that gaming press in general is like that, and it annoys me since I Can't stand it. If I can't stand it, then I can't get much useful news on games. And well... I guess that really isn't much loss.

I guess it's just a plea for an intelligent and unbiased outlook on games. They either don't understand what's going on, hold their own biases so closely they can't make fair judgments, or they just suck up to get on the box of the game.

Kettle who? I'm Matt. Nice to meet you.

#3 Matt, this is probably how the avarage gamer (specially the FPS gamer) thinks. Never forget:

-more then half the world just is stupid (at least I think so) ;)
-A lot of game site editors are kids between 15 and 20. (Trying to prove they're social beings by making a site and moderate a game community, even tho they game all day)


What bothers me is everyone seems to think they know everything about the game industry these days. That's the main reason for stupid comments on video games etc...
On the other hand.. the more frustrated kids, the more games we sell (no, just kidding offcourse, but there's a little truth to it)

#4 No I didn't write the article... If I did write the article I'd probably be posting this under the name Pennance368 - the author of the article... the only thing I do know about the guy I found within 10 seconds of searching in an attempt to discredit your libelous remarks. (Still trying to see whether or not he actually does like 'shiny objects' as you so eloquently put it)

I'll admit I came down hard... but at least I had a reason for it... If you wanted to bitch and moan about the state of gaming news why link to the article? There's nothing that stands out in the article that's stupid or indicative of some mythical decline in the quality of video game journalism... gaming news has always been advertisements with a few useful or interesting tidbits to reel people in... hell, look around.. newspapers are nothing but full page Sears ads and whatever comes across the AP newswire sprinkled in between thinks that either a) make them money or b) have low production costs. The same with television.. hardly anyone realizes how much of what they watch or read is really just "advertainment" or "infotising".. I'd agree with you that gaming press sucks if you actually took the time to give some damn arguments or say something (ANYTHING) useful... but anyway that didn't happen.

A few things in particular from your reply...

>That article is one of so many, that I guess it really didn't matter which one I picked

Then why pick any? Only referencing this one article gives the sense that you feel it embodies all that is wrong with gaming press... You didn't even give a good reason why you hated the article enough to link it with your own personal vendetta against gaming press

>Afterall, why write it if gamers don't think the same way?

One of the things you probably were taught and forgot about writing is there are many reasons people write things. Sometimes people write to entertain, sometimes to inform, and other times to persuade. It's pretty obvious he wrote this article to inform people (namely game developers) of his opinion and to persuade them into thinking they should use the things listed in his article in their games. Whether or not he was successful in doing so is not really for me to decide. But anyway, if he thought gamers and game developers already agreed with him that the stuff mentioned was 'cool' or should be used in more games, he probably wouldn't be writing the editorial, would he?

>I have a copyright on that

I think I can site a few previous works :) Lum the Mad comes to mind...

>Somehow I fail to see the link between some guy screaming how he wants overused (or soon to be)

I quote, "They're just things that I've played, thought were really cool, and think should be used more often (but not to the point where everyone's got them)." He knows as well as you or I that if everyone uses something it loses its novelty and becomes 'lame'.

>Somehow I fail to see the link between some guy screaming how he wants overused (or soon to be) parts of games used more, to something that had no intent of being anything other than a joke about the sad state of massively multiplayer games

Hello! You're posting your newsletter on a "home for independent games and game makers"... You're gaming press! Similarities? Okay... His article asks for something new in action games, you allude to wanting something different (read: new) in MMORPG. You say gaming press doesn't use their brains. I say I don't really see a whole lot of deep thinking and useful information in your cute little satire.

Really the only difference between the two is that he actually went to the trouble of _thinking_ about it and gave some suggestions as to what he would add to make action games more fun for him and the friends he talked to about it. A far cry from the "kewl dood" "ur games suxxor u all need Bullet time Max payN3 rulz!" rubbish you seemed to describe it as.

>I guess it's just a plea for an intelligent and unbiased outlook on games. They either don't understand what's going on, hold their own biases so closely they can't make fair judgments,...

That's all I'm asking for too... which leads me to my final point...

>Kettle who?

It's called an idiom. Here ya go

The point I'm trying to get at, and the point that you've seemed to miss so many times before from people railing you on these boards, is that everyone would be a lot happier if you would actually think before you post. Before you hit submit read over what you wrote and ask yourself, "Is this really adding anything useful to the thread?" If the answer is no, scrap it and move on with your life.. If yes, ask yourself "Does this get across the message I really want to send?" Subtlely and sarcasm are easy to miss while reading and it also takes time to write a good few paragraphs on something. If you wanted to talk about gaming press why link to some poor guy's editorial and make personal attacks about someone you don't even know. Even if he was 12 and liked shiney objects - what the hell has that got to do with gaming press in general? You're derailing your own threads before anyone else gets a chance to :)

Anyway, I think if you just ask yourself those two simple questions you'll save yourself and everyone else a lot of time and energy and we wouldn't have to get into flamewars every week over something you say. I'm sure this would make a lot of people happy.

-nohbdy

#5 I managed to wangle a free year's subscription to Computer Gaming World, but I would never pay for it. It's written by 20 and 30 somethings (presumably) for teenagers. At least that was my impression from the immature-let's-crack-a-joke-in-every-article writing.

I'm not convinced that it's limited to gaming publications. I was just browsing the 3D Action Planet forums and I couldn't find many threads that were intelligent and well written. But this a pet peave of mine and probably way off topic - "How the internet is destroying the English language".

#6 By "gaming press" I mean the people who review computer games or write about them (consumer end)

If I ever write either that looks even similar to one seen on Ign.com, please. Shoot me.

This article was just one that personified why I think gaming press tends to just not seem like it's representative of an intelligent "higher power" that is trying to act as a mediator between the games no one has played to the players.

Film critics are for the most part, unbiased enough to really offer a good review. There are a handful of critics who I can almost always agree with, and actually provide interesting or at least understandable reasoning.

Is that too much to ask from game reviewers?

#7 The article is very sad, but it shows us what we want to deny to ourselves. If you are going to make a popular game, a game that sells a million copies, you have to stupify it for the general population. You just have to give the people what they want. Do you think GTA 3 sold so many copies just for it's plot? NO. It sold because all you did was go around killing old ladies and stealing cars. Sure, you can make a great in-depth RPG, but if the idiots don't understand it, then you're the one getting screwed.

#8 I would actually like to see all that stuff in one game...well except for the replay as I don't care about that. Would I want that to be the only selling point? No. But it would be a nice secondary selling point.

Personally I really like action games. I loved max payne. I love John Woo movies. I loved the Matrix. I don't think it takes a weak mind to like these things. id much rather play the game he was talking about then something like "reading classical books at the urinal" or something like that. My opinion (although this is a bit off topic) is that innovation is bad, although great innovation is good.

-Tim aka Spock

#9 Spock, I'd refine your comment to "innovation for the sake of it is bad".

I do see Matt's position, although he stated it a bit.. uh.. bluntly. Just sticking all these features into one game just because they're cool would not necessarily make an interesting game.

#10 Matt...

I agree with you, but once again you have managed to upset somebody... Why dude? There are better ways... What good can you get from making that person and "nobody" upset like that? It seems to me that the real idiot is you. Think about that...

#11 Another worthless thread courtesy of GG's official prick.

#12 Daniel: I wouldn't say I'm upset... I'm just trying to understand why Matt went out of his way to trash this particular article and maybe possibly get some resemblance of an intelligent comment on why he thinks gaming press sucks or why this article was so bad he had to bring it to our attention...

I just don't understand the motives behind it

*shrugs*

-nohbdy

#13 I would rather not validate these insults coming from the gallery, but my pride isn't going to let that happen.

Gaming press acts like it's MTV, People magazine, and the local newscast all rolled into one with a bit of 'N Sync to cover the seams. Like the proverbial straw on the camel's back, this article was beamed to my email inbox via Gamespy's newsletter. Wow, some guy wants to explain how a pile of gimmicks means a pile o' gaming goodness!

The article was not important. It's one of the hundreds I've read on the many web sites and magazines. Some guy, talking about something, in a manner that is insulting to people's intelligence. I didn't feel the need to compile a massive list to back up my reasoning, just the one that I had at my fingertips and fresh in mind.

Gaming press has given up on trying to provide an interesting look at games or quality reviews. It's become style over substance, and that style is something I can't understand.

This kind of writing and publishing wouldn't continue if it wasn't what people were looking for. People would be fired, wages cut, many would no longer have a cubicle to sleep in or work computer to download pornography from.

Editorial is something that should be an accent to research and information. It should be secondary to providing the news.

Now, it's become the focus. Instead of basing game reviews on previous games, someone might complain about how it's not "loyal" to the prequel, or how it only gets around 80 FPS when he believes it should be pulling an easy 110. He will then explain how eating cheese is hazardous when you play the game, and how his cat scratched his CD ruining his gameplay experience. He'll remind us of his childhood and how he loved the endless summers of pool-side glasses of lemonade and getting wedgies because he spent hours at the arcade trying to beat the high score in Centipede. Then he'll provide a one sentance explanation on why he gave the game it's score, and leave us all wondering how he could have written so much without saying anything.

This article was the reason I broke, and not because it stood out as an excuisitely crafted piece of crappery but that it was in the wrong place at the wrong time.

I just cringe when I see that it is becoming the norm for gaming press, and I just have to wonder.

Is this what the average gamer wants to read?

#14 The wonderful thing about the internet and to some extent a capitalist society is that you aren't forced to read stuff you don't want to. you can just tune it out, switch web pages, or disconnect your computer from jack if you really can't handle it. Noone's forcing people to watch MTV, listen to shit music, or read crappy reviews. Noone forced me to read this thread, but it sure had a promising title with a promising author.

#15 Btw, I still don't know what Matt reads to get all this apparent drivel. Doug Perry over at IGN writes excellent in-depth reviews, you can pretty much guarantee that if he says a game is good, it will be. And Gamespot's "11th hour" articles on Black & White and MGS2 were superb. Oh well.

#16 I'm not forced to read it, but when I'm looking for a review on a game I might want to play I have no where else to look.

So in a way, it's a monopoly.

As for Ign or Gamespy or Gamespot. For every one good article you find, I'll find you ten horrible ones. I have no doubt there are a few decent people out there, but they sure are hard to find.

I guess the only real way to do it is by following a "collage" of reviews. Just line up 10 different review's scores, and then find the average. Usually pretty spot on.

#17 What is a monopoly? the gaming press? you must be joking. You're joking right? Tell me you're joking.

#18 I have to agree with Matt that most of the gaming press is crap, especially in terms of content vs random personal information and other diatribes. I remember last year reading gamespot about E3, most of the editorials went something like:

Having never been to an E3 before, I was really excited...I was really tired getting off the plane...grabbed a burrito that gave me indigestions...boy it was hot there...clowned around in the hotel...[one sentence about e3 show]...man that was fun...

I don't think editorializing is a problem. There isn't that much actual NEWS on a day-to-day basis. The problem is that the editorials just aren't good for the most part. They are unprofessional and try to be "clever" and "witty" while usually saying very little of substance. It's like all the writers want to be Dave Barry.

But what do you expect? The job isn't glamorous, it doesn't pay well, it will tend to attract people without a broad world view, much work experience or writing ability. Gaming is immature (in general) and the gaming press reflects that. That's all there is to say about it really. When most games are pretty crappy and low-minded the writing about them is going to be crappy and low-minded as well.

#19 Let it go... enjoy life's brief ride...

-J

#20 I wasn't joking, but I think you heard a different punchline.

"Monopoly" referred to the fact that you have two options. Give up, and don't get gaming news or listen to their rather dumb writings.

Monopoly just means having total control of something. In this case, these people control the main gaming news outlets.

As for life, you choose to ride it or have it ride you. Although, I have to admit. I'm complaining about rather unimportant things.