CambriaRising
Member
And they wonder why everyone here thinks they are all a fucking joke.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Why is Adam Sessler tweeting about being afraid and having to leave the industry?
- Thread starter disastermouse
- Start date
- Status
And they wonder why everyone here thinks they are all a fucking joke.
ProcrasDANation
Neo Member
This entire saga galvanizes my respect for people like Jeff Gerstmann and Jim Sterling.
Mushroomer25
Member
I feel like not being able to earn money when doing your job is a bit more serious than a "1st world problem".
Northeastmonk
Gold Member
I wonder if Jack Tretton woke up and gave a shit because I highly doubt this is something to be worried about.
I just think it's very typical if it's about Sony. <3 Sony 4 Eva
I just think it's very typical if it's about Sony. <3 Sony 4 Eva
Nightengale
Member
Seems to more like everyone else who attended the event will have several days head start in the news cycle.
Why would I bother to read your review that's one week after every other major news site?
Damn'd if you do, damn'd if you don't.
UberTag
Member
Clearly the big deal is that nobody will care about these systems, launch lineups or finding out whether they're any good or not if articles don't go up before the 15th.
What Schreier says is "doing a disservice to their readers" who have to know before Day 1, I interpret as they're "doing a disservice to their advertisers" because nobody will go to Kotaku for "their word on what's great and what isn't" after the 15th. They'll go here. They'll go to Twitter. They'll go to YouTube. And they'll go to their friends.
HassanJamal
Member
Oh man, i missing a few details. So the company Adam's talking bout is Sony? Cant seem to find any proof or hints that its Sony. Just caught up with this huge panic going on today.
GillianSeed79
Member
I like you Jason, you are a good journalist, but I'm going to hold you to this. I'm talking utter transparency. If your launch-day coverage or reviews were from a review event, I want to know.
King Tubby
Member
That sounds insane to me. Reviewers can turn consumers onto an otherwise unknown title from the strength of their critical acclaim, and they can keep an overhyped shitfest like Aliens: CM from selling just on marketing. The existence of game reviews is not the problem.
It's not so simple as saying "Well, screw the publishers." Two big factors in a reviewer/journalist's success are speed and access.
Unnecessary. It was blatantly obvious enough without use of a visual aid.
Mushroomer25
Member
It really does, but they're kind of in a privileged position. They've managed to accrue a fanbase that doesn't care about when the review is published. People who read a Giant Bomb review are more likely to take that as a personal recommendation, since you have a better sense of that critic's specific interests. Same thing with Sterling - he knows people will come, no matter when he posts. Most critics don't have that.
Keihart
Member
It's 100k-250k views on youtube bad performance? i would like to know , because jeremy jahns almost always do LTTP reviews on video games, and they get those amounts. Also his reviews are very fun to watch compared to IGN or Gamespot for me, and i trust more on his taste , usually.
PS: sorry for the typos.
robertsan21
Member
hmm I dont agree, it is an anticonsumer move. if reviewers cant review the game without a controlled enviroment from the publisher, then it is a anticonsumer move.
a review of a product should have NO involvement from the people who made the product or the review is invalid and flawed.
disastermouse
Banned
Is this about my generation of video game nerds not being part of the 'cool kids' group? Because I swear, posting vague 'I know something but I'm not telling you' shit is straight-up high school bullshit.
Next we'll all be drunkenly fighting about girls.
They have been bitching about these events for years now, and it is all whiny bullshit.
There are two main things they bring up when complaining about these events, the limited window of time given to review a game, and the ability for the integrity of the review to be compromised. Complaining about a limited amount of time to play the game for review is just them being whiny little bitches. This came up in a recent podcast with Gies concerning ACIV and the fact that he had only three days to play the game. Which means that he had to put in about 10-12 hours a day to finish it in time. I have worked a hell of a lot of 12 hour days in my time, and do you know what I was doing during those 12 hours? Not playing videogames that I buy for entertainment, that's for damn sure. If you don't like doing for a job what millions of other people do for enjoyment, then find another job. Spoiler, you aren't the only one that works long hours and weekends.
I also call bullshit on the integrity complaint. I mean, what is a publisher really going to do that is going to make the game so much better that it alters the score or the reviewers take on the game? Okay, sure, the staged multiplayer events could represent a falsity when compared to a live environment, but the fact is that any review that goes up on release day, regardless of if it was at an event or not, is misrepresenting the live multiplayer environment. Hell many of these reviews mention the fact that they either couldn't find matches, or had to set up events with other insiders. There is absolutely no way for a reviewer to give a worthy multiplayer review before the game launches. If a review is compromised due to integrity, I am more worried about the writer, not the event where it took place.
At the end of the day it comes down to all of these sites wanting to get reviews out early, and publishers are setting up these events to give them the opportunity to do so. Maybe they want to stage something, maybe they want to be able to point out issues that are already fixed in a day one patch, it doesn't really matter. The publishers are creating these games, and allowing reviewers to get an early look at the game. If these critics are really that concerned about any of this they have the option of waiting for the game to come out like the rest of us, play it, and review it as a live product. They don't have to go to these review events, they don't have to agree to the embargo's, they do it because the industries desire for the earliest possible review has become standard and given the publisher all of the power, and they have forgotten how to say no.
I have no sympathy for any of these games "journalists", as publishers didn't take the power, these big sites handed it to them on a silver platter. These guys are far more concerned with appeasing their publisher overlords than they are informing the public that they work for. This has never been more apparent than the lead up to these console launches, as NeoGAF has been a significantly better source of insider information than all of the big sites put together.
amstradcpc
Member
Well, is not like KZ wasnt going to be hated by reviewers anyway (samy...), at least this way Sony controls not small biased click hunting web pages reviews are out there day one.But then Polygon shouldnt be invited(that TLOU 7.5...).
I supposse Sony is fed up of sending free copies of their games to journos that laugh at their work.
well it is how they make a living
My goal isn't to tease you; it's to try to get you all less worried about this. He's upset about something that affects how he does his job, not something that will affect gamers. I don't think it'll be a big deal to most of you guys at all.
I think you mean review scores.
So basically the theory is that these journalists are chucking a spaz because Sony have embargoed footage of their games until after launch day and the journalists feel they can't provide the public with an informed decision prior.
Okay I get it, I understand why they're upset, but what I'm more interested in is why Sony is so determined to play supervisor over this.
Okay I get it, I understand why they're upset, but what I'm more interested in is why Sony is so determined to play supervisor over this.
When consumers and fans of a medium are reduced to discussing the inside politics of websites and ad revenue models based on vague 140 character limited messages you know we are bored out of our minds!
Here's some advice my fellow gaf users, take every review before launch with several grains of salt and wait for the enthusiast fans to post real footage online.
Here's some advice my fellow gaf users, take every review before launch with several grains of salt and wait for the enthusiast fans to post real footage online.
taizuke
Member
The thing i don't get is that Tara said she was reviewing a PS4 game which she couldn't talk about in the latest Casual Friday. Then again maybe it's a multi-platform game.
And this is all solved by the reviewers playing the game after the release date. No anti-consumerism here because it's not gaming journalists god-given right to have access to games before anyone else.
Like Sessler said in his tweet, it really only affects a handful of people who perform their gaming journalism in a certain way. Not a big deal for most of us and certainly no effect on the consumer.
You do realize youtube videos makers don't get nor need as many money from ads than actual websites right?
Hard to say without actually knowing what it is. I do agree it's probably nominal and not terribly relevant to the average gamer, but it could also be a symptom of a bigger problem that DOES affect us.
razgriz417
Member
agreed
how many games are coming out on the other platforms?and this is only going on for launch games. they can review the majority of the games on the current systems. this is only a short term problem.
D
Deleted member 17706
Unconfirmed Member
Or he just doesn't feel insecure because he decided to focus on quality content rather than trying to cover everything before everyone else.
That's 100% exactly what it is. They had that staged, cryptic, melodramatic conversation in public for a reason.
James Sawyer Ford
Member
This is a system launch with a day 1 FW update.
The systems are coming in hot and it's not unthinkable that they may not be ready well in advance for reviewers, especially if they are spending time that week upgrading their online infrastructure to ensure things go smoothly.
The launch event seems like a good compromise for what's likely a one-off event this gen.
Nightengale
Member
Dunno about the games, but I can think of reasons for the hardware.
Obviously ver 1.0 of the PS4 firmware is not what Sony wants the reviewers or media to base their opinion of the system on, so Sony wants to make sure all reviews are about 1.5, and not 1.0.
Maybe Sony is concerned that there will be problems or slow download speeds when updating to 1.5. Sony probably doesn't want to start off their console with the impression that PSN is slow and not-improved, thus making sure the consoles at the review event are already all updated, no need to showcase any PSN matters.
And in the worst case scenario of Sony being slimy, a controlled environment could also very well have the ability to influence reviewers to focus on the things that the console had done right, and less of the parts that it's not as good/not available on day-one. Sony would rather reviewers don't criticise Sony too much for not having suspend-to-resume on day one. They need to also review 3 games on top of the console ( I would suspect Knack, Killzone and Resogun ), so maybe they'll have less time to find the nitty gritty of the PS4 isn't up to snuff.
Mushroomer25
Member
Well, there's a difference between what Sony considers "anti-consumer", and what is actually bad for the consumer. For Sony, requiring a secondary subscription to use things like Netflix & Hulu is anti-consumer. You're paying more money for no reason, and you know it. This makes you mad at Sony.
But review events? The average consumer is never going to know about that (barring massive controversy). They'll see a review (that might be more positive than a traditional one), and be none the wiser. See? Not anti-consumer. (From Sony's perspective).
disastermouse
Banned
And the reason you can't tell us what the actual issue is.......is what?
Obscene Jester
Banned
I doubt everyone would suddenly lose interest.
I almost feel that is how it should be. These paid shills that call themselves journalists are so hard fastened to the industries teet that they no longer serve the consumer at all anyway. Better to get impressions from those without a stake in the game. You only need look at today's events to see how far in the corporate pocket these guys are. They are acting like disgruntled employees, not independent and unbiased newsmen.
nogoodnamesleft
Banned
not that i think polygon is a benchmark for good writing and reviews, but really?
just because you dont agree with his 7.5 doesnt mean that the reviewer doesnt legitimately think that the game deserved that score.
there are plenty of "oh my god, game of the forever!" reviews for that game that you can align your opinion with. personally i wouldve given the game a flat 7. but i know im in the extreme minority. but my god, one reviewer doesnt agree with widespread opinion and he is "wrong" and should be outcast?
yeah, ok.
The problem has been around a long time, and journalists allowed themselves to become so entangled in it, they can't get out, so they blame Sony, or GAF, or whoever.
juicyfruitas
Member
rev3 has other bodies to send if Adam can't go -- Tara, Carboni, etc
xaosslug
Member
Mushroomer25
Member
To be fair, we don't know if this upset is JUST about the PS preview event, or if it's about the multitudes of preview events happening this season. It's possible multiple major launch titles are affected by this policy. And there aren't a ton of launch titles. If a company isn't able to post just a few of those reviews on time, that's a lot of potential lost revenue.
Why do you have any right to know? Who the hell are you that you should know?
He said he wanted to let Sessler divulge the topic in full to respect his current stance.
Well not like there are many exclusives for PS4 day one anyway from a retail game perspective
It would make sense if it was the PS4 version of a multiplatform game.
The gamers are the gaming press' source of income too.
Funchameleon
Banned
Sorry but I just can't understand a tihng without a bad internet comic or, at the very least, a gif
This reminds me of when anime blog was the 'hot' thing. EVERYONE and their mother would rushed to release 'reviews' of the latest anime episodes the minute the raw came out. It doesn't matter that some of these 'reviewers' didn't even know jack about Japanese language. The result was many crappy 'reviews' where the reviewers basically just recap the entire episode since they are keen to be the first to release the reviews.
But then there are the exception few who care about their contents and actually took the time to write nice, interesting paragraph about the episode. Even though their article came out later, their readership/comments received was still higher than those who rushed it out the minute an episode came out of Japanese TV network.
disastermouse
Banned
If you don't want us to know, start by not posting vague, public tweets or posts about it. Crazy-talk, right?
- Status