Game Journalism: A Table of Doritos

I'd rather read melf's stuff than the current alternative.

I don't even buy current magazines. but I buy a lot of magazines. I picked up a box of HAM radio magazines from 39 through 45. I got 30 or so old car service magazines and Electronics world magazines from that period too.

Magazines used to have a lot of 'meat' in them. Take gaming and computers for example. One of the first three personal computers was one that a magazine showed you how to build. Game magazines used to come with a sheet of code that you could type in and make your own games. They used to treat the consumer like he was very smart.

Now? They treat consumers like neanderthals.

This is part of the reason for "print is dead." Everyone treats the consumer like they are stupid. Which is easy to do. Because the writing is garbage and it takes no time or effort. Anyone can do that. The blogger, websites, random dudes on forums, etc.

The consumer is stupid though. Just maybe not the consumer that would buy mags anymore.
Games used to be small. Game Mags as a business were small. Then games blew up and mag publishers forsook their loyal crowd of nerds and tried to get in on the Madden crowd. Now that the internet is everywhere and Joe Madden doesn't need a mag to find out what the newest gun in Call of Duty will look like, mags need to go back to pandering to the nerd crowd. If retro gamer ran a piece every month where people submitted their code to make a game for an Atari 8 bit or Amstrad or BBC Micro or whatever, I would buy it!c

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Some Stupid Japanese Name

The consumer is stupid though.

---

Sure, plenty of them are stupid. But you can't differentiate yourself on that. How do you stand out? How do you make the reader think your magazine is worth more than the other magazine? There is nothing special about the way this magazine treats people like they are stupid vs this other magazine that treats people like they are stupid.

Shit, stupid people don't like to even read.

It is really any wonder that any game magazines are around. They all have the same shit in them.

Tits on the cover.

Sorry, but I just noticed: FROG, was your penguin always brown!??!?!?!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fe 26

People are so fucking lazy these days.

---

tldr

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fe 26

Game magazines used to come with a sheet of code that you could type in and make your own games. They used to treat the consumer like he was very smart.

---

Holy shit I remeber that. :) Was it Geos or something like that? Some C64 magazine... I remember typing in every damn line of code for a boxing game. :D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fe 26

Is there a game site that reviews games months if not years after the game was released? After the dust has settled? I'd like to read something like that. I rarely if ever get games at release now. Reviews about a game at release aren't very helpful. Telling me that something was hot in 94 is not the same thing as being fun in 2012. It would have the added bonus of not having to deal with this crap. You wouldn't have to suck corporate dick for a review copy.



Question: How did news and journalism fund shit 20-30 years ago? Because funding sounds like the real problem. Magazines and websites are dependent on the game producer for review copies, image/press packs. hotel rooms, parties, dinners and shit. How does a real journalist cover these costs when the corp tit is taken away?

---

Read this: http://www.the-nextlevel.com/tnl/thr...k-Rox-Approved

I saw Lauren Wainwright several times this year at various events in london.
She and others like her(mostly the IGN and Future crowd) at these events always group together to talk about what they have done recently for a certain publisher and how much that publisher greased them.
Its pretty disgusting and first hand I have witnessed people who had a sexual relationship with PR people and didnt feel the need to stop covering said companies games or even disclose their relationship.

Things are far worse today then they were when I wrote that thing five years ago.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Toupee

Sorry, but I just noticed: FROG, was your penguin always brown!??!?!?!

---

I changed him to an owl in Finch's honor at some point. He's still a blue penguin on other boards.

Eurogamer tightened their standards to basically not let their writers or freelancers do the sort of things that Wainwright (and probably everyone else) was doing.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Almaci

I have witnessed people who had a sexual relationship with PR people and didnt feel the need to stop covering said companies games or even disclose their relationship.

---

You know, I don't think this has come up in the thread yet, but yeah, I've seen this happen.

I'm sure a few have been raped by Seth Killian.

Read this entire thread, and this type of stuff isn't limited to gaming journalism. In niche music genre publications there's a lot of hidden and stealthily applied pressure to (for example) metal websites and especially print magazines to pad review scores. The scale is smaller than the gaming industry both in terms of readers/viewers and advertising dollars of course but the same principles are at work. I've heard of really good, independent metal bloggers getting shafted out of media access to a record label's artist roster, promotional copy(ies), and getting just plain ignored by label PR reps if that blogger had given one of their top acts a mediocre to scathing review. When a print magazine like Metal Hammer would hype up a particular album in previews and ultimately a review that the majority of metal fans on truly independent websites received lukewarmly -- it does begin to add up to being a rather suspicious pattern.

I'm just a small time nobody, fan blogger who runs his own metal based opinion blog. I've applied for media credentials access to a couple different labels since I've been getting some pretty heavy traffic due to articles of mine going semi-viral on twitter and reddit, and while most of the requests were simply ignored, I was told via email reply by one that they'd be taking a look at me and "seeing how things go". WTF does that mean? It basically means if I give their superstar bands a less than stellar writeup, I might not ever see credentials.

Its not really a big deal to me, because I don't get money off advertising, its just a hobby that I end up having to pay out the ass sometimes to do, but I enjoy not having to answer to anyone about anything. Point is though that the same shit ends up in every toliet -- its just that the ppl with money at stake will make sure their toliets are the jet engine flush kind, they'll suck down that shit no matter how big.

That's pretty bad. My experience with game companies is more like what Ali said: They try to butter journos up with trips and booze and friendly meetings so that the writers feel like they're "friends" with the dev/pub and don't want to trash them. But it's never been framed as this "we need a good score or else" kind of thing. Usually they know if their game is bad or if a review is fair.

I know movie studios have been known to use a lot of similar strategies to ply reviewers.

I have a friend who is in the RC car business, and his experience with RC car magazines is that they basically devote more coverage and give favourable reviews to companies that buy advertising in their publications, and from the examples I was shown, it's pretty blatant.

Sayre's law, it's probably worse as the stakes get lower. The game industry is huge and the companies are large, but RC cars and metal?

Well I dont know about metal issues being more bitter. It also works inversely that there's less for someone like me to lose. I dont make money doing this so I don't need to kiss ass unlike say someone who works at ign.

No one at IGN "has" to kiss ass, it's more that the whole business is very incestuous and you get to know the people working on the games by covering them over the course of your development, and that's going to color what you write compared to some anonymous blogger who's totally divested.

That said, I could give two fucks about review scores, and kind of don't like that they're the only part of game journalism anyone ever focuses on.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Melf

I kind of wish that more game journalists would take their work seriously. Too many times I've read articles that are only sourced off the web or have just a single source. Part of doing good work is to thoroughly research the topic, and I've read far too many poorly researched pieces "professional" sites and magazines. It kind of pisses me off that so many are published and widely read, when those of us who actually take the time to get things right have to struggle for exposure.

I just want people to read my stuff, but I'm not after hits or views. I actually don't even know if Sega-16's traffic is decent, great, or bad. What's the standard for a "popular" site?

---

Bro, I can definitely tell ya that not only people read your stuff, but they appreciate the amount of work you've put into it. Sega-16 has come a LONG way and it's definitely a solid resource.

As for some of the "pro" sites, I think you know my thoughts on that. In any case, give yourself a little bit more credit!

I read something about somebody writing a book about the history of Sega or something. My first thought was "Was Melf involved? If not they're gonna fuck this up."

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GohanX

My first thought was "Was Melf involved? If not they're gonna fuck this up."

---

QFT.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fe 26

I'd rather read melf's stuff than the current alternative.

I don't even buy current magazines. but I buy a lot of magazines. I picked up a box of HAM radio magazines from 39 through 45. I got 30 or so old car service magazines and Electronics world magazines from that period too.

Magazines used to have a lot of 'meat' in them. Take gaming and computers for example. One of the first three personal computers was one that a magazine showed you how to build. Game magazines used to come with a sheet of code that you could type in and make your own games. They used to treat the consumer like he was very smart.

Now? They treat consumers like neanderthals.

This is part of the reason for "print is dead." Everyone treats the consumer like they are stupid. Which is easy to do. Because the writing is garbage and it takes no time or effort. Anyone can do that. The blogger, websites, random dudes on forums, etc.

---

This.

I was actually talkign to Ammadeau briefly about this. (It was a tangent after publishing the Dead or Alive 5 review on PTB)

I honestly believe that his thoughts are: gamers are stupid, have short attention spans, so let's dumb down the writing. If that's what he thought, then I'd wholeheartedly disagree. There are still people out there who value comprehensive articles and thank goodness, because I would probably want to get up writing alotgether if society as a whole was solely filled with morons.

There are still intelligent writers out there. TNL delivered it. Gaming Age for a time did it. Shit, even the guys prior to TNL at PSi did it -- enthusiast sites that were backed by passionate people that refused to let themselves become beholden to all the nonsense going on in the industry had a good lock on things. I hope that trend can still continue, even if it does end up becoming a minority in the industry.

I'm glad to see you haven't changed much in the past 12 years.

Lol.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bahn

This.

I was actually talkign to Ammadeau briefly about this. (It was a tangent after publishing the Dead or Alive 5 review on PTB)

I honestly believe that his thoughts are: gamers are stupid, have short attention spans, so let's dumb down the writing. If that's what he thought, then I'd wholeheartedly disagree. There are still people out there who value comprehensive articles and thank goodness, because I would probably want to get up writing alotgether if society as a whole was solely filled with morons.

There are still intelligent writers out there. TNL delivered it. Gaming Age for a time did it. Shit, even the guys prior to TNL at PSi did it -- enthusiast sites that were backed by passionate people that refused to let themselves become beholden to all the nonsense going on in the industry had a good lock on things. I hope that trend can still continue, even if it does end up becoming a minority in the industry.

---

Reminds me of something I heard in a webcomics podcast - you get the audience you deserve.

If you write thinking that the audience is full of morons or dudebros or whatever, don't be surprised that that becomes your audience. In the podcast, they equate how an all-ages webcomic WILL find older folks, parents, people not exactly big on nerd culture...just because the site doesn't assume a specific audience is tuning in. Contrast that to a place like Penny-Arcade, which is full of rape and dick jokes. Of course it culls some of the worst human beings as ardent fans! You reap what you sow.

So I figure it's not a matter of whether or not smart gamers exist. It's just so few writers/sites are willing to acknowledge their existence.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GohanX

I'm glad to see you haven't changed much in the past 12 years.

---

LOL. As in, I still like fighting games?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bahn

This.

I was actually talkign to Ammadeau briefly about this. (It was a tangent after publishing the Dead or Alive 5 review on PTB)

I honestly believe that his thoughts are: gamers are stupid, have short attention spans, so let's dumb down the writing. If that's what he thought, then I'd wholeheartedly disagree. There are still people out there who value comprehensive articles and thank goodness, because I would probably want to get up writing alotgether if society as a whole was solely filled with morons.

---

This attitude seems pretty common, but I really think it's the biggest mistake you can make as a writer or editor. You can't really write for an audience unless you like and respect them. The fact is, they do know the difference between good writing and condescending shit.

There's definitely an art form to writing for a mass audience, but it's not about dumbing it down, it's about avoiding esoteric references and jargon, which is really just good writing. It makes you better as a writer to learn to do that.

IGN's commentors are notoriously hasty and harsh, and most IGN writers hate them, but when I write something I know is good, the comments are always overwhelmingly positive, and if I get a thrashing, it's because I did something wrong. Yeah, sometimes you get a touchy moron who misread something or thinks ridiculous account of game history is right, but the audience as a whole has always responded to the articles I'm proudest of.

When I write a review I write for myself, what I'd want to know about the game. I could not care less if the audience is a bunch of drooling idiots. If they are reading my review they are gonna get learned.

You can't write totally for yourself either. A big part of writing is learning how to communicate to a large number of people and have them all understand you.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bahn

Bro, I can definitely tell ya that not only people read your stuff, but they appreciate the amount of work you've put into it. Sega-16 has come a LONG way and it's definitely a solid resource.

As for some of the "pro" sites, I think you know my thoughts on that. In any case, give yourself a little bit more credit!

---

Thanks! :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Frogacuda

You can't write totally for yourself either. A big part of writing is learning how to communicate to a large number of people and have them all understand you.

---

Yeah, audience is a big part of the writing process. It's going to (consciously or unconsciously) determine things like vocabulary and sentence structure.

Say what you want about reviewers but Geoff Keighley is a TELEVISION HOST and interviewer, and a damn fine one at that. It's not like he's accepting money from publishers to give games a high review score.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Korly

Say what you want about reviewers but Geoff Keighley is a TELEVISION HOST and interviewer, and a damn fine one at that. It's not like he's accepting money from publishers to give games a high review score.

---

Geoff is also an expert at what he does -- he tells it like it is without w/o coming across as a shill.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bahn

Geoff is also an expert at what he does -- he tells it like it is without w/o coming across as a shill.

---

Even if he is a shill.

He should run for office.

Yes. Perhaps he should.

I still think it's a waste that Keighley is the frontman for GTTV, which is pretty much a publisher-of-the-week infomercial. The E3 interviews he does are spectacular, as are the written pieces he has done (particularly the "Final Hours" series). The man can write damn well, does his homework, and isn't afraid to ask serious questions. But you don't get any of that on GTTV.

fuck GTTV, Fuck them for buying out tech tv and putting out so much garbage.

Can't be fucked to go back to find the post but someone a few pages ago mentioned how numerical scores are what people focus on. True and it'd be interesting to see a major gaming publication (print or online) do their reviews without numerical scores. My blog has some reviews on it and I refuse (ABSOLUTELY REFUSE!) to engage in a numerical score system. Alot of times I don't even give the game away in the title of the review, my opinion only being discernible if you actually read the damn thing.

Now having said that one of my favorite metal review sites www.angrymetalguy.com has a point review system but he keeps it fairly regulated and is rather trust worthy not to overscore something (even to the detriment of being black balled by record labels). But I can't find that sort of trust worthiness in the gaming world. Everything is either overhyped score wise or you get the people on the outside who decide to dish out lower scores on popular titles just for the waves it'll make going viral as its passed around from angry nerdrager to angry nerdrager. Gimme an intelligent gaming website that reviews games without dishing out a numerical score on the top.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fe 26

fuck GTTV, Fuck them for buying out tech tv and putting out so much garbage.

---

You're thinking of G4.

Posting this in this thread because I think it fits the theme.

Check out what Polygon did: http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=497693

They posted a Microsoft ad as a news story, and then defended it by deleting comments pointing this out and complaining that "everyone is on a witch hunt" on Twitter. Open mouth, insert foot.

I wasn't honestly expecting much from them, seeing as they appeared to be a Voltron formed out of some of the worst parts of Joystiq, Kotaku, and IGN, but when a site claims to be "different" it's much more damning when they pull the same old advertisement-as-news crap as a lot of the other sites. And then tries to cover it up and play the victim. The first is just usual crap, the second takes a special kind of ignorance. The Internet never forgets.

LOL...

http://i.minus.com/ibgHRNOyOMwBV0.gif

And Polygon had such a nice start, too, working hard to build a good rep. Oh well, that broke easy.

James

In fairness, it's a goddamn contest. Whether or not they got paid, it's shilling. It's not like there's any integrity to that story to be compromised in the first place.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bVork

Posting this in this thread because I think it fits the theme.

Check out what Polygon did: http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=497693

They posted a Microsoft ad as a news story, and then defended it by deleting comments pointing this out and complaining that "everyone is on a witch hunt" on Twitter. Open mouth, insert foot.

I wasn't honestly expecting much from them, seeing as they appeared to be a Voltron formed out of some of the worst parts of Joystiq, Kotaku, and IGN, but when a site claims to be "different" it's much more damning when they pull the same old advertisement-as-news crap as a lot of the other sites. And then tries to cover it up and play the victim. The first is just usual crap, the second takes a special kind of ignorance. The Internet never forgets.

---

LAME

all that really proves is that they're shitty writers that couldn't come up with their own words about the contest

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Frogacuda

In fairness, it's a goddamn contest. Whether or not they got paid, it's shilling. It's not like there's any integrity to that story to be compromised in the first place.

---

My personal take on this is that they simply should have posted the press release verbatim and indicated that it was such. Or not posted it at all. Though, to be fair, slightly rewording press releases as news articles is hardly confined to games journalism. But that doesn't make it any more acceptable.

One reason why IGN sucks, it's full of people who don't even like games. If they did, they wouldn't want to hand out garbage from thatgamecompany out as gifts.

http://m.ign.com/articles/2012/12/16...ign-would-gift

lol Castle Crashers, how fucking topical.

Damn it, don't make me defend IGN!

Quote:

---

IGN has rounded up our editor's picks on which game experiences we'd most like to give to our loved ones this year, and we're looking for your ideas too.

---

1) Nothing in there about it being this year's game.
2) Castle Crashers was released on PC this year some time.

What I don't get is the Journey love. I mean sure, I played and enjoyed it, but it wasn't as amazing as all that.

James

it's because to journalists games=art=aesthetic and/or story. Well designed from a mechanical standpoint or engaging to an audience in a way where he/she feels authorship doesn't mean shit. Which is why Journey is awesome & Walking Dead gets a GOTY nod.

Well, I'd say The Walking Dead's accolades are well-deserved. It provides an amazing illusion of player choice. Your own decisions may mostly be smoke and mirrors in the end, but I don't think that really matters if it is pulled off effectively.

I'd rather play Super Hexagon, or what I'm currently obsessing over- The Saboteur. Games don't need legitimization, although there's still a (long, long loooooong) ways to go in the maturing of the medium.

James

Well, yeah. If somebody is praising a game because it "legitimizes the medium" or, really, for any other reason than the fact that it is a good game, then they are doing it wrong.

And The Saboteur? Really? I couldn't stand that game. Care to elaborate on why it has enthralled you? (Perhaps in the WRUP thread, to avoid derailing this one further.)

Well that's the problem, the things everyone talks about with Journey have nothing to do with its qualities as a game. Because, like thatgamecompany's other titles, it really has none.

That implies a pretty limited definition of what gaming is. Journey was a great atmospheric experience that I played a few times and enjoyed. You might be over thinking it.

Journey is also short. Game reviewers love short.

You could also look at it this way: They aren't saying that Journey is the best game ever, but that it's a game they think other should experience, and very few people bought. Everyone's had a game they thought was brilliant that nobody else was playing, if only they would give it a shot!

http://x-surface.tumblr.com/post/412...thing-you-read

Basically a guy decides to see how easy it is to get sites to publish bogus information without looking into anything. Never heard of Pocket-Lint though but that's the first one he mentions, who they defended it by saying "Well if we don't trust every tip how well we ever get the scoop" or something to that effect.

I'm not sure what people expect from these sites anymore.

I expect Bleacher Report level reporting.

I mean, they have lists o plenty. And they are also usually garbage. My favorite is the one that had Mushihimesama and God of War (lawl) in the top 10 hardest games ever. Or something like that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Joust Williams

I expect Bleacher Report level reporting.

I mean, they have lists o plenty. And they are also usually garbage. My favorite is the one that had Mushihimesama and God of War (lawl) in the top 10 hardest games ever. Or something like that.

---

I would say that most of these sites (95%) are somewhere around Bleacher Report.

Kotaku wishes it could be Bleacher Report.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Diff-chan

I'm not sure what people expect from these sites anymore.

---

Not a whole lot, and that's only because my expectations have been conditioned to take poor, awful quality of reporting and fact finding as standard. Gaming journalism is like gamers themselves. Caught up in the hype of the moment, willing to glom onto anything that's vomited out as truth. That is until proven wrong and they have to rescind - even then may not and/or would rather make excuses for themselves. When taking a deep breath and waiting the 5 minutes it would take to research something would go a long way, they'd rather be as haphazard as their audience.

At my poorest, I never really wanted to write for a gaming news website because I'm almost positive they aren't trained journalists and are just writers.

A simple phone call to any publisher that is answered almost immediately by the PR department (or shit, for some even the owner of the company) would have answered any questions. A phone call at a copyright office is slower but they'll tell you what is on hold by whom. I don't know how many times I'm going to tell you guys that writing like this is mostly PR work. But you can ask Frog or even MarkRyan about a lot of it.

You also don't publish news from an unvetted source. If you have a long relationship with the person and they've come through with gold, that's fine. But some random guy tells you something and it becomes new? Fire the entire editorial department. I'll do all of their jobs and you'll never have a complaint about false information again.

To be fair, how many times have we seen news journalists post some bullshit they read on twitter without checking it too? This is just the world of real-time news and the internet. Fact checking and responsible reporting is in short supply all over, these days.

You have to be pretty fucking stupid to post that kind of story based on a random email from a stranger, and most sites didn't touch it for that reason. But some did. Because they're fucking stupid.

It's totally true, most game journalists don't have any journalism training. I'm no exception. But I still know better than that. I wouldn't have even made a follow up call, because it was just obvious horseshit.

The issue was that some no name site posted it so a bunch of bigger ones joined in. I bet most of them were just waiting to see it posted anywhere.

Some sites (Kotaku) have gone so far as to blame the prankster for making them look like fools.

It's not about real journalism because these sites are not news sites. I expect nonsense like this out of them.

But I've seen stories much like this in every kind of internet news writing. And it is just as you say, once one site posts it, everyone piles on and just attributes it to the first site. They all just want to get the story so they write "According to..." and figure they're covered.

I'm not denying it's a real problem, or that these people shouldn't be shamed for it, but Ramon acts like it doesn't happen in his world too. We all have to live with people who suck at their jobs.

I have to agree that I don't think it's limited to game journalism, just internet journalism.

It's a huge problem with broadcast journalism, too. TV news is basically a joke because of this.

Even print is not immune, but they at least have time to let the dust settle more often.

As a guy who freelances for several news outfits, if I ever based a story on facts I didn't confirm, I would be out of a fucking job and my rep would be shit. Also, my publisher would print a retraction and apologize for their oversight.

The fact that none of these gaming "news sites" are doing this (in fact, they're actually finger-pointing instead) speaks volumes.

That's a good point. The editors of these sites should be stepping up instead of crybabying about the mean trickster.

It's gotten to the point for me now where I have pretty much no faith in games journalism any more. About the only sites I read are Gamasutra for the interesting development discussion, RPS for PC gaming, and Siliconera for Japanese stuff (I still miss Andriasang though). There seems to be no scruples at any of these big game news outlets. It's all about getting the clicks and that's about it.

Where's Dan Shoe when you need him? :p

Venture Beat

Yeah, Dan still does good stuff, but Venture Beat has run some pretty iffy stuff.

http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2013...ory-went-away/

Saw that the other day. At this point those who care know EA lied, and they're not going to stop lying about it any time soon. "Everything the Same Today as Yesterday!" isn't news, unfortunately. While people have moved on, however, they'll remember this for next time. Too bad the average consumer doesn't care and will keep throwing money EA's way.

James

It went away because, in the end, it's just a videogame. Play it or not. Nobody cares.

Yeah, it's not the kind of thing that a gaming news site would want to cover.

They did cover it. The game was a click magnet for angry nerds for a couple weeks. What's the point now? There are new games to talk about.

The point is that EA is still lying about it, and they should be called out for doing so.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Diff-chan

They did cover it. The game was a click magnet for angry nerds for a couple weeks. What's the point now?

---

Because people want the EA hate train to keep on rollin'.

These are probably the same people who stupidly voted them worst company in America two years in a row or whatever that bullshit was. Because DRM you choose to buy is worse than foreclosure or toxic waste.

I'm perfectly fine with video game news sites pointing out when video game companies screw customers and dodge explanation but I don't think any of them should be on the worst company in America list.

Guess I'm a rebel.

EA screwing up Sim City and screwing over the Sim City fan-base was utterly ridiculous. If I'd spent money on the game, I'd be $60-worth of pissed off. Not only that, I'd be perfectly right to be pissed, because not only was the game released in an unplayable condition, the reasons behind it are demonstrably untrue. The bullshit explanations EA gave on what the game is and why it went as it did are the result of a slick PR team that has no interest in explaining what's going on, but rather sounding good while covering the corporate ass. The people who were screwed hopefully learned not to trust EA again, and those who bought the game after it became playable hopefully knew what it was they're buying.

Taking $60 for a product that isn't the thing it says it is, when all the reviews were based on a working version of the game that EA was unable to deliver, isn't a "Worst Company in America" offense, by a long shot. If it was my $60, though, I'd be 100% justified in being very unhappy with EA. I'm not going to hold it against those who got screwed that they've got an excess of negative emotion.

James

Eh, most people that are angry did not buy it nor were they going to. They are mad for EA doing something to Molyneux's studio forever ago. The same guy that released a game where you pay to chip away at a cube and pay to put it back together.

I bought two EA games on Origin this weekend.

The people who didn't buy it need to be thankful they dodged a bullet and stop whining. Bad games are released all the time. If someone's just mad at EA for being EA and didn't actually lose anything, they get no defense from me.

James

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Joust Williams

Eh, most people that are angry did not buy it nor were they going to. They are mad for EA doing something to Molyneux's studio forever ago. The same guy that released a game where you pay to chip away at a cube and pay to put it back together.

---

Bullfrog actually had a few incredible games. The real crime was destroying Origin, though. And then they exhumed the corpse seven years later for their shitty rebranded store.

I'm actually ambivalent on Origin. EA's mismanagement did doom the company, but Origin's own mismanagement would have doomed the company in short order had EA not bought them. And for the rank-and-file, the EA buyout was actually a good thing since EA put Origin's salaries in line with their own - before the buyout, if you weren't one of the big names at Origin, you'd probably make more money as a burger flipper.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by epmode

Bullfrog actually had a few incredible games. The real crime was destroying Origin, though. And then they exhumed the corpse seven years later for their shitty rebranded store.

---

Populous (1989)
Powermonger (1990)
Populous II (1991)
Syndicate (1993)
Magic Carpet (1994)
Theme Park (1994)
Syndicate: American Revolt (1994)
Hi-Octane (1995)
Magic Carpet 2 (1995)
Syndicate Wars (1996)
Dungeon Keeper (1997)
Theme Hospital (1997)
Dungeon Keeper 2 (1999)

Syndicate Wars rules.

The Theme games, Magic Carpet and Dungeon Keeper are great too! I've... never played Populous.

It was rad in 1994.

I still want someone to remake Magic Carpet without the bad case of 90s fog.

James

I don't recall seeing a blatant advertisement within the text of an "article" before, but here's IGN blazing that skid mark of a trail:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by IGN

The Wii U bundle Reggie was referring to is available at Walmart, and so is the Mario Kart 8 bundle.

---

The word Walmart is hot linked in the original article. Please don't click the link above.

Wait what? IGN's still around?

I find the keyword hotlinking throughout the site to be far more offensive than a "where to buy" link at the end of an article.

At least that can be automated though. Some "journalist" actually had to type that sentence.

I'm assuming the bundle is available to buy just about everywhere else in the world too, and not a WalMart exclusive?

Gamers who post on boards like this are jealous of videogame critics because they get paid to play the very same games that we pay to play.

That's all it is. Seething jealousy. Just STFU and deal with it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by James

I'm assuming the bundle is available to buy just about everywhere else in the world too, and not a WalMart exclusive?

---

Yep.