377
More than 1,200 games journalists have left the media in the last two years | VGC (www.videogameschronicle.com)
submitted 9 months ago by to c/games@lemmy.world
118 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

“For quality games media, I continue to believe that the best form of stability is dedicated reader bases to remove reliance on funds, and a hybrid of direct reader funding and advertisements. If people want to keep reading quality content from full time professionals, they need to support it or lose it. That’s never been more critical than now.”

The games media outlets that have survived, except for Gamespot and IGN, have just about all switched to this model. It seems to be the only way it survives.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [S] 1 point 9 months ago (1 child)

Take the reviews for example, VGC’s coverage on Borderlands 4 Does not even address the games broken state but gives it 4/5 stars

That's because it's not broken; it performs poorly relative to its visuals. It's an excellent game.

You've done little to convince me that "mistrust" of games media is any more than people getting upset that reviewers have different opinions than they do. I can tell you right now, for instance, that Jordan Middler loves Pokemon, so it's no surprise to me when VGC gives good reviews to Pokemon games. I've got a friend who really gelled with Suicide Squad as well, so I know it's possible for people to really enjoy that game. In this very thread, you can see people who are convinced that reviewers are paid off or playing difficult games on extra easy modes, neither of which are true, because they just can't reconcile that anyone could possibly enjoy a game that they didn't enjoy or weren't interested in.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 9 months ago (1 child)

    Its a non functioning product at launch, something that should be called out in a review. It is a low quality slop review, whether or not I agree with the conclusion. You can like or dislike a game counter to a review but I expect that at the very least an attempt will be made to point out pitfalls, and that was not done. The Suicide Squad was a bad game, someone liking it does not justify a dishonest or lazy review. You can not toss out one anecdotal view while pushing your own without looking a bit silly.

    In this very thread, you can see people who are convinced that reviewers are paid off or playing difficult games on extra easy modes, neither of which are true, because they just can’t reconcile that anyone could possibly enjoy a game that they didn’t enjoy or weren’t interested in.

    Neither of which are true is a bold statement that needs more then a "trust me" level of response. Next your going to tell me that redfall was actually good without much issues is more likely then some one was paid to write a fluff piece (a thing that happens in all forms of journalism). You seem to be pushing the idea that its the audience is wrong and desperately assuming that people don't like the media state due to an inability to reconcile their own preferences with the articles (wild and odd).

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] [S] 1 point 9 months ago

    Its a non functioning product at launch, something that should be called out in a review.

    It literally functions. I've played it at launch and will continue playing it. Watch Austin's review on SkillUp, who had the benefit of releasing his review some time after launch but started during the embargo period, to see why a reviewer would not call it out.

    The Suicide Squad was a bad game, someone liking it does not justify a dishonest or lazy review

    The quality of a game, and the evaluation of it in a review, is entirely subjective.

    Neither of which are true is a bold statement that needs more then a “trust me” level of response.

    Try looking right under the comment where someone who has been a paid reviewer called it out as nonsense. Or ask literally anyone in the industry. It's come up on podcasts like Friends Per Second and Giant Bomb over the years enough times. If this was all a big marketing stunt where reviews were bought and paid for, someone would have blown the whistle by now.

    You seem to be pushing the idea that its the audience is wrong and desperately assuming that people don’t like the media state due to an inability to reconcile their own preferences with the articles (wild and odd).

    And yet you're doing it right now. I can see why you would distrust a review if you don't understand what a review is.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent