The new forums will be named Coin Return (based on the most recent vote)! You can check on the status and timeline of the transition to the new forums here.
The Guiding Principles and New Rules document is now in effect.
Playing the devil's advocate: Denis Dyack makes an important point
Aegies
Registered User regular
Registered User regular
Amidst his blanket calls for an end to all previews prior to a game's completion, a demand that will never be met, a demand which is ridiculous and has rightly been ridiculed, and a demand that was apparently forgotten long enough to give one of EGM/1UP's biggest competitors and exclusive hands on, it's easy to miss some of the things Dyack had to say that do make sense, and are important.
There is an unhealthy fixation in the gaming press for previews, previews, and more previews. I understand that previews are a necessary part of gaming coverage/journalism, as every other form of media that serves as entertainment has a journalistic component that offers previews of some kind. Rolling Stone interviews musicians prior to big albums about their influences and inspiration, as well as providing commentary on progress and sound, Art Week does previews for major gallery exhibitions from popular and influential artists, and there are countless entities that provide previews for films and television. Previews build anticipation for things, and also fill a consumer desire to know about things before they're available, so far be it for me to imply that previews are useless or needless. Reader opinions, while not the only barometer of needed coverage, shouldn't be ignored. Hell, even I like previews now and then.
However, even Entertainment Weekly, who are essentially a critical joke and are known as a home for marketing fluff, post articles that go beyond previews or joke features and provide insightful analysis and commentary of trends in the industry. Rolling Stone finds time among reviews that are taken progressively less seriously and innocuous interviews with pop stars who will be forgotten in 5 years to publish interesting pieces related to music that don't need to be contextualized within a "this album is coming out soon, so let's associate something with it" construct. We've seen more of this kind of content in Magazines like EGM and GFW, the latter of which recently featured an article interviewing major developers outside of the context of their newest releases to get their opinions on where computer gaming is, and where it should go. It was a feature that was infinitely more interesting than a 5 paragraph review of the Burning Crusade, or a preview of the Company of Heroes expansion. Neither of those were badly written mind you, but in an era where previews and news are transmitted instantly across the internet, making their availability much more trivial, its unique content that will set content providers apart from the blogs and their competition. Not only that, critical analysis is good for games, and we need to see more of it.
But let’s be honest: the blame doesn’t lay solely at the feet of editorial content providers here. First, gamers need to support content that goes beyond fluff and we need to stop being such unrelenting whores to preview coverage. There have been some serious efforts in the last couple of years to push forward content both online and in print. Some magazines have been focusing more and more on games as art and focusing on the development efforts that go into creating games, especially Play magazine, and this is a good thing.
Then there are the magazines that have started to make a stand against pure ass-kissery; One of the best examples of this continues to be EGM and their online component 1UP, who have both taken a new, more investigative tone and no bullshit attitude in their interviews and features. They should be especially commended for this given the risky and rock nature of PR relations; after the especially aggressive interviews with Microsoft figure Peter Moore in early 2006 and Sony America’s President Jack Tretton in early 2007, Nintendo of America head Reggie Fils-Aime backed out of his planned interview with the magazine (as mentioned in their April 2007 issue). Gamers, Nintendo fans and non-fans alike, should be outraged that such a public figure is avoiding discourse with the gaming public, because the situation makes it appear that it’s because he’s afraid of responding to direct questions. Support for interviews that essentially boil down to blowing sunshine up the asses of execs for guaranteed PR access should stop.
We’re disrespecting ourselves when we settle for less just to look at pictures of a game that isn’t out yet. As a culture, we need to show support for intelligent content on games that goes beyond previews, and it makes me sad to see readership for EGM decreasing as the magazine is really coming into its own and putting out the best work it ever has.
So, thoughts? Opinions? Or does no one really care?
There is an unhealthy fixation in the gaming press for previews, previews, and more previews. I understand that previews are a necessary part of gaming coverage/journalism, as every other form of media that serves as entertainment has a journalistic component that offers previews of some kind. Rolling Stone interviews musicians prior to big albums about their influences and inspiration, as well as providing commentary on progress and sound, Art Week does previews for major gallery exhibitions from popular and influential artists, and there are countless entities that provide previews for films and television. Previews build anticipation for things, and also fill a consumer desire to know about things before they're available, so far be it for me to imply that previews are useless or needless. Reader opinions, while not the only barometer of needed coverage, shouldn't be ignored. Hell, even I like previews now and then.
However, even Entertainment Weekly, who are essentially a critical joke and are known as a home for marketing fluff, post articles that go beyond previews or joke features and provide insightful analysis and commentary of trends in the industry. Rolling Stone finds time among reviews that are taken progressively less seriously and innocuous interviews with pop stars who will be forgotten in 5 years to publish interesting pieces related to music that don't need to be contextualized within a "this album is coming out soon, so let's associate something with it" construct. We've seen more of this kind of content in Magazines like EGM and GFW, the latter of which recently featured an article interviewing major developers outside of the context of their newest releases to get their opinions on where computer gaming is, and where it should go. It was a feature that was infinitely more interesting than a 5 paragraph review of the Burning Crusade, or a preview of the Company of Heroes expansion. Neither of those were badly written mind you, but in an era where previews and news are transmitted instantly across the internet, making their availability much more trivial, its unique content that will set content providers apart from the blogs and their competition. Not only that, critical analysis is good for games, and we need to see more of it.
But let’s be honest: the blame doesn’t lay solely at the feet of editorial content providers here. First, gamers need to support content that goes beyond fluff and we need to stop being such unrelenting whores to preview coverage. There have been some serious efforts in the last couple of years to push forward content both online and in print. Some magazines have been focusing more and more on games as art and focusing on the development efforts that go into creating games, especially Play magazine, and this is a good thing.
Then there are the magazines that have started to make a stand against pure ass-kissery; One of the best examples of this continues to be EGM and their online component 1UP, who have both taken a new, more investigative tone and no bullshit attitude in their interviews and features. They should be especially commended for this given the risky and rock nature of PR relations; after the especially aggressive interviews with Microsoft figure Peter Moore in early 2006 and Sony America’s President Jack Tretton in early 2007, Nintendo of America head Reggie Fils-Aime backed out of his planned interview with the magazine (as mentioned in their April 2007 issue). Gamers, Nintendo fans and non-fans alike, should be outraged that such a public figure is avoiding discourse with the gaming public, because the situation makes it appear that it’s because he’s afraid of responding to direct questions. Support for interviews that essentially boil down to blowing sunshine up the asses of execs for guaranteed PR access should stop.
We’re disrespecting ourselves when we settle for less just to look at pictures of a game that isn’t out yet. As a culture, we need to show support for intelligent content on games that goes beyond previews, and it makes me sad to see readership for EGM decreasing as the magazine is really coming into its own and putting out the best work it ever has.
So, thoughts? Opinions? Or does no one really care?
eat. sleep. game.
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
Aegies on
0
Posts
Editors are very leery to let a writer pass judgment on a game or even say something like "if the final product isn't markedly better than the demo stay away."
It's frustrating because we shouldn't have to wait until review time to tell readers that a game is shitty if we know in advance, but if you slam games that aren't out yet then smaller sites are less prone to receive preview builds and review copies later.
If those are all my options, I'd rather we didn't preview games either because no news is better than false news.
I was personally very, very surprised to hear that Reggie / Nintendo backed out of being interviewed. I mean.... What's he afraid of, you know? I was really looking forward to that interview.
As for him crying about the Too Human bashing... if you're going to have your game demoed in an event where hundreds of gamers will see/play it, make sure what you have is exciting and will make the players interested in your product. If you don't have something fun that's ready to show you stick to videos or a live demo played only by one of your employees.
Battle.net: Fireflash#1425
Steam Friend code: 45386507
see, i can actually pick that kind of thing up already. Reading previews on gamespot, you can tell from their language whether they actually like a game, or are expecting bad things. It's all written from a positive angle, but there'll be suggestions of where it could improve, or things they expect to see being better for the final version. If it's a unanimously glowing writeup, you can feel more assured.
So I can kinda see an analogy to video games. After all, they're just software, too. Having someone play your game well before it's finished may create unrealistic expectations, or bad feelings on the part of the user if things don't run well. If I were running one of those projects, I might opt to keep reviewers out of the protoypes, as well. But I doubt most gamers would hear of it, and reviewers would get all pissy and pan a game just for not allowing them to make their precious previews that drive readers to their site. Or something.
@ShiftyPumpkin on the Twitterings. Book the Faces at [facebook.com/PerceptivePumpkinProductions]
Wasting his time for the privilege of having any statement made twisted about and misconstrued by idiots?
Yes, well, that's the point. When you're in demand, you don't need to do bullshit interviews, you can hold press conferences and they'll kill each other trying to be the first one there.
CUZ THERE'S SOMETHING IN THE MIDDLE AND IT'S GIVING ME A RASH
Than previews shouldn't be approached like a review. Lay it out flat: the features, the story, the style, the sound, the graphics etc. etc. You don't have to pass judgement, you simply have to report the facts. A preview is a preview; things will change, the game could become vastly better or remain very similar. You can explain the features and details of a game without adding, "This was good" or "This needed improvement."
I'm not sure I ken to this. Not the idea behind it - that we need to have hard-hitting interviews is a truth that borders on reflexive - but the idea that the gaming public at large needs to jump on Reggie for backing out on this is specious at best. Basing this on the appearance of the thing, not seeing a trend of reaction but actually recommending it as a catalyst for action, seems somewhere between irresponsible and simply ridiculous.
The thing about these interviews - particularly the kind you're talking about - is that it centers around either the philosophy behind a given platform or platforms or the strengths and weaknesses of it. Given this, an interview with this aim about the Wii is at its best merely superfluous - the philosophy and successes and failures of the Wii have been repeatedly stressed every time Reggie or Miyamoto or anybody has talked about it, can be seen in any commercial, can be heard echoing on every message board and in every Wal-Mart and in every magazine and review site and honest, thoughtful discussion about the growth and direction of the industry. What you're calling for here isn't Reggie's willingness to expose himself to ridicule, it's a willingness to waste time just to repeat things he's already said. This is an exercise no less vacuous than blowing smoke up Reggie's ass about how awesome he is; in fact it may be even worse.
Come back to him in a year, when things have changed and he'll have something new be talked to about and to talk about himself.
Right. If it works with Duke Nukem Forever, it works will all upcoming games.
EDIT: I'll also add that I enjoy games more when I don't follow previews for them. For me, I didn't follow games like OddWorld: Stranger's Wrath or Chronicles of Riddick - I bought them on the cheap after people I knew recommended them. No previews, no reviews, no real expectations and I think I enjoyed them a lot more than if I hadn't been surprised by their quality.
Now some series, I'm gonna go all-out and read every scrap of info available. Castlevania, for instance...
Denis Dyack sez: "I know my game sucked at E3. But check out this wrestling parable about me, and also this Penny-Arcade style comic about said parable. See? I'm a cool guy...
....please love me!!!"
I have nothing against him or his game, but he seems way too obsessed with what people think of him, and I actually wouldn't be surprised if he posted this.
Closed doors media events suck ass.
I have to say, as ridiculed as they've been, I LOVE the stance of the Duke Nukem Forever team on this.
"Preview?"
"Hey, it's not ready. Fuck off."
I like that. They're too much of an extreme; we haven't seen so much as a screen in years.
Let's take, say.. Smash Bros Brawl. I'm perfectly happy to see Nintendo release videos and screens. No previews. Then they release the game. Much less crap that way. I also imagine this'll be the case with Brawl.
XBL/PSN/Steam: APZonerunner
Reggie has made an image from making bold, inflammatory statements about the competition. And yes, I expect that if Nintendo has now decided that they want to compete directly with the other platform holders, as they've declared repeatedly in recent memory, then they should come forward and address the same hard questions that Moore and Tretton did. Nintendo is the only company that seems to get away with giving smug and evasive answers, and when it appeared that they wouldn't be let off with that kind of approach from EGM, then his interview was canceled. It may not be the most desirable thing in the world to jump to conclusions as to why he did, but when they cancel without comment, he left the door open to that kind of speculation.
Are you trying to say that Nintendo gets to be untouchable now because a horde of people who have no investment whatsoever in gaming have been told the Wii is cool and different? What about the supply shortage on hardware that has an incredibly low margin and old hardware? What about the continued delay of Metroid Prime 3? What about the delay of and continued hemming and hawing about the release of Mario Galaxy? There are a lot of things Nintendo should be asked, and giving them a pass because they're Nintendo is pretty disingenuous.
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
I completely agree. You can't tell whether a game is going to be good or not until it's done; some games have seemed totally awesome in the preview stage and then tanked utterly, and others have come out of nowhere and done brilliantly. A preview should briefly describe the game's backstory, plot, gameplay and what kind of gamer it's trying to appeal to. I don't care whether in the previewer's opinion it will rock the industry to its core by brilliantly executing blah blah blah blah blah.
Regarding Too Human, I watched the video and it's all, "We are the cyber-Norns, take this schematic for a robot spider to fight Mecha-Grendel (btw I'm a hot chick, call me)."
...
I think they should have stuck with the "no previews" policy.