Sections

Stephen Fry doing LBP 2 voice work?

Tuesday, 21st April 2009 08:46 GMT By Mike

lbp11b

Actor Stephen Fry has revealed via Twitter that he’s currently adding audio for a “2nd edition of a video game.”

“Morning all,” he tweeted – or whatever it is you people call it. “In studio today voicing 2nd edition of a video game. Will check when I’m there if I’m allowed to say what it is…”

Considering the only voice work Fry has done previously is Fable 2 and LittleBigPlanet, don’t be surprised if it’s the latter.

More at E3, hopefully.

Latest

121 Comments

Sign in to post a comment.

  1. Blerk

    Wouldn’t be surprised if it was more Fable, either. Wossy already blew that particular party wide open with his Twatter feed, after all.

    #1 5 years ago
  2. Johnny Cullen

    Probably Fable III imo.

    #2 5 years ago
  3. Bringit

    Doubt it’s voice work for Fable III this early in development.

    It’s LBP for PSP surely.

    #3 5 years ago
  4. DrDamn

    Yeah I think LBP PSP.

    #4 5 years ago
  5. Johnny Cullen

    Ooh, just had an epmithamy.

    What if he is doing LittleBigPlanet for the PSP?

    EDIT: :(

    #5 5 years ago
  6. Patrick Garratt

    Maybe it’s LBP for PSP.

    #6 5 years ago
  7. Spiral

    I’m hoping for a sequel to this.

    #7 5 years ago
  8. Blerk

    Do you think it might be LBP for PSP?

    #8 5 years ago
  9. Spiral

    I think it could be LBP for PSP.

    #9 5 years ago
  10. The_Deleted

    I’m going to hazard a guess…

    #10 5 years ago
  11. G1GAHURTZ

    MODERN WARFARE 2 FTW!!!

    #11 5 years ago
  12. Shatner

    Ah, look! Brownie-point sensationalism again. [yawn]

    It’s clearly not “LBP 2″ as a miniscule application of common sense shows, but it’s more important to have the potential sensationalism (and garner page and advertising hits from aggregators) than to convey useful, straightforward information.

    And, as a cute little excuse, the author can argue that he was making no statement but ‘merely’ asking a question. Hell, there’s not even a “RUMOUR:” in the title either.

    Don’t you have any integrity Mike?

    No, no. I’m not making a statement. I’m merely asking a question.

    #12 5 years ago
  13. Bringit

    Still think it’s LBP for PSP

    #13 5 years ago
  14. Lutz

    Could be VO work for the new DLC for Fable 2 too.

    #14 5 years ago
  15. deanimate

    Myself and a friend made some brownies not too long ago :)
    We put toffee in them and made a huge batch because we’re fat kints :D

    #15 5 years ago
  16. G1GAHURTZ

    What… you made some brownie guides and fed them toffee!???

    #16 5 years ago
  17. Shatner

    And, just as I stated before, the usual suspects kickstart their efforts to distract from anything they don’t want brought to anyone’s attention!

    Gee. I’m sure nobody is fooled by those clever school-yard level tactics that you guys employ!

    It’s cute to see G1GA rushing to Mike’s aid though isn’t it? It’s just like how Mike ‘innocently’ changed topics when G1GA was posed a tricky question.

    When’s the big day, lads? Is it going to be a civil service or a full-blown church do?

    #17 5 years ago
  18. Gekidami

    Could be some new tutorials for LBP, depending on what MM have planned for new DLC.

    #18 5 years ago
  19. Redh3lix

    Masturbation Shatner, it’s a wonderful thing.

    I think it’s LBP for PSP.

    #19 5 years ago
  20. Axle

    Shatner: I applaud what you’re saying, but I think that your pleas are going to fall on arid ground. Rumour is what makes the Internet tick – through posting on blogs and forums two or three words together (Halo 4: Gear Wars) increase the traffic exponentially.

    Everyone’s doing it, it’s moral relativism in the guise of competitiveness, I don’t aggree with it either, but what’s going to change?

    #20 5 years ago
  21. G1GAHURTZ

    Common sense is lost on people with psychological problems.

    #21 5 years ago
  22. deanimate

    brownies the food eaty stuff. not the young girl activity thing.
    im not sure anyone possesses the ability to create a human being in the guise of a brownie either.

    ah well, porridge on the go. it’s all kicking off!

    #22 5 years ago
  23. G1GAHURTZ

    Phew!

    #23 5 years ago
  24. dirigiblebill

    Stephen Fry has also done vocal work on the Harry Potter games, according to Almighty Wikipedia.

    #24 5 years ago
  25. Blerk

    I don’t think it’s the case that people are trying to bury what you’re saying, Shatner. I seriously think it’s because nobody else gives a shit.

    #25 5 years ago
  26. Shatner

    Axle, apathy is not a worthwhile response – particulaly for a ‘service’ that claims to inform but pro-actively misinforms and withholds information more than actually informing.

    Blerk, people who go out of their way to give their feedback on something aren’t very good examples of ‘not giving a shit’. Actions speak louder than words :)

    Low standards serve folks with little to contribute, like the examples G1GA tirelessly exhibits.

    #26 5 years ago
  27. dirigiblebill

    While I agree it’s doubtful the “second version of a game” SF refers to is LBP2, the case is hardly so clear-cut that only “a miniscule application of common sense” is required to confirm this. Nobody here (that I’m aware of!) is privy to Media Molecule’s development schedule.

    Shatner, you may find that people are more inclined to give a shit about your generally legitimate critiques of article “spin” if you refrain from dolling them up in hyperactive rhetoric. Being courteous with those who disagree with you rather than trotting out limp-wristed patronising jibes would also be a good move, I suspect. This was precisely my problem with your posts in that “exclusivity” thread a few days ago, though in fairness that wasn’t exactly my finest hour either :)

    #27 5 years ago
  28. Shatner

    I’m courteous to those that are courteous.

    Those that are using transparent passive-agressive stunts and being discourteous but trying to fluff it up by pretending they don’t know what they’re doing or doing some sort of virtual-shrug aren’t going to get any courtesy from anyone not taken in by such fakery.

    When such transparency is repeatedly used to serve the author and mislead the reader then I see a site that (apparently) aims to inform as being knowingly hypocritical. That’s not particularly courteous behaviour.

    In fact, I rarely see anything remotely resembling ‘courtesy’ originating from this site. It deliberately baits and makes incendiary claims and goes as far as to admit and endorse its own behaviour. I see no reason why such behaviour should be free from criticism or why it should expect some sort of free pass just because shitty journalistic standards are the norm and an audience are so poorly informed that they only time they question what they’re told is when it doesn’t match their bias.

    Gaming ‘journalism’ has it easy. They hold everyone accountable apart from themselves and immediately act the ignorant victim whenever their practices are called into question. They’re happy to sit around judging everyone else but they do so with a false sense of immunity because, for the most part, they’re so good at questioning the standards of everyone else they’re rarely tasked about their own standards. Their audience is, typically, less knowledgeable about the topics than they are so whatever is coughed up through a word-processor tends to get swallowed wholesale (bias notwithstanding, naturally). Those that generally know more than these outsiders tend to just ignore them until they have a use for their copy/paste talents. Apathy isn’t the answer though.

    #28 5 years ago
  29. Blerk

    I’ve nothing against you personally Shatner and some of your comments here are both entertaining and insightful, but your ‘campaign for journalistic perfection’ is increasingly tiresome.

    Not every site on the internet has to be up for a Pulitzer prize. Some of them can just be a fun and friendly blog-style news roll for bite-size snippets of games-related rumour, presented in a jaunty style with flippant commentary from a cast of amateurs.

    #29 5 years ago
  30. Morrius

    PSP version, or Fable 2 DLC. Move along, nothing to see here. Nothing wrong with a sensationalist headline to bring in the punters through. We’re talking about virtual bouncy little puppet people after all, not something important.

    #30 5 years ago
  31. The_Deleted

    They are making LBP for the PSP. Though god knows why, and it’s too soon or little point in LBP2. It’s either more DLC, which would involve tutorials. I’m sure Fry is not as steeped in gaming as he is attracted to the money it can offer, so I’d read between the lines . It’s obviously the PSP. I’d stake money on it.

    #31 5 years ago
  32. G1GAHURTZ

    Nobody cares about the headline other than the nutcase.

    #32 5 years ago
  33. OrphanageExplosion

    Is it Ghostbusters 2?

    #33 5 years ago
  34. Shatner

    Blerk, I’m not campaigning for anything. Certainly not perfection. But if a site that (cl)aims to inform seems to put more effort into concocting misleading headlines, posting funny youtube videos, holding back information so as to create ‘news’ for quiet days, makes repeated basic errors in writing (I’m no grammar nazi, but when words are your trade then I think you should get them right) then I think there’s plenty of grounds for criticism.

    Credit to this site that it allows itself to be criticised rather than silence anyone that seeks to do so.

    But to present criticism as some ‘call for perfection’ and ‘pulitzer prize’ references is just an example of you mimicing the mentality of the site: exaggerating something for maximum effect – particularly if you’re going to stand against it.

    And your amateur/professional observation is screwed up. It’s because VG247 presents itself as professional that it’s amateur standards are so worthy of criticsm. A high quantity of poorly written, deliberately leading (god forbid readers should think for themselves!) articles that have more time spent on their title and image than their content and a nice WordPress theme don’t equate journalistic professionalism to me.

    This particular article is a prime example of all of that. With the rare exception of some basic spelling errors.

    Professional? Hardly, Blerk – you just want to give something you like a free pass from criticism.

    #34 5 years ago
  35. Shatner

    G1GA clearly demonstrating his complete lack of understanding of SEO and general web aggregation.

    Your efforts to deflect your own ignorance behind stupid remarks directed at others is a more than a little tragic. :D

    #35 5 years ago
  36. G1GAHURTZ

    I’m glad that the nutcase has identified himself as being the nutcase.

    Acceptance of the problem is the first step towards recovery.

    #36 5 years ago
  37. Lutz

    WTF is Shatner?

    #37 5 years ago
  38. Psychotext

    That’s a seriously tall horse.

    #38 5 years ago
  39. dirigiblebill

    Your view of the site rings true for me, Blerk, but conflicts of interest do arise when said “fun and friendly” outlet tries to cover major stories with wide-reaching implications. In that case “jauntiness” can verge dangerously on distortion, though I would argue the problem is far from systematic.

    I think the VG247 blurb could perhaps be clearer about the site’s objectives in this regard: It’s not like Kotaku, where the headlines are deliberate and (on the whole) unmistakeably ironic exercises in “added value” – VG247 wishes to write “seriously” about “serious” news in addition to mocking/spoofing such reportage in other areas.

    Shatner – even if other posters are guilty of “fluffing” topics or pulling “passive-aggressive stunts” to throw off criticism, you do your own arguments no service at all by playing the tinpot forum tyrant. Also – can you back up your sweeping account of the state of videogame journalism with particulars?

    #39 5 years ago
  40. Shatner

    Good show guys! (Bill excluded)

    As usual, when you’re not prepared or capable of debate on the same terms, just distract or mock!

    I’m enjoying watching G1GA digging that hole ever deeper for himself though. :D

    Psycho, it’s not a high horse at all. You, like Blerk, are going to the exaggeration-fuelled response (not that you’re actually making a proper response of course). My expectations are defined BY this site. That the same site consistently refuses to live up to them is the crux of the matter. Expecting a journlist to be able to publish an article without having a typo in an acronym is not a particularly excessive demand.

    Gee. I wonder how tall your horses all are when you think someone is ‘unfairly’ charging you for DLC content that you’ve decided (but have no proof beyond guesswork) might be on the disc! Or how tall those horses are when you mope about the price of your luxury goods and compare them to the prices of luxury goods from a completely different industry! :D

    #40 5 years ago
  41. Blerk

    I will admit to liking the site and will openly admit to being ‘pally’ with the main writers, but I’d hardly say it gets a free pass from me – if something’s wrong or bad here then I’ll quite happily point it out. I just don’t feel the need to accuse them of having some hidden agenda to purposely mislead.

    As for professionalism, there are different levels in games writing just as there are in all other forms of journalism. Sensationalist headlines are hardly uncommon in other forms of writing, even from supposedly high-brow sources. Given that sites such as this survive on advertising and most readers will only skim the headlines, you can hardly blame them for trying to create hooks to tempt people in.

    I know you don’t consider ‘rumour and conjecture’ to be news, but you appear to be alone on that one. The majority of readers here do appear to be interested in that kind of thing and as long as a rumour is clearly labelled as a rumour and an opinion is clearly labelled as an opinion, I see no problem with their inclusion.

    #41 5 years ago
  42. Shatner

    DB, my tone and attitude is a response to the environment. Were this an environment where people are tolerant of a view that contrasted with their own or one that didn’t nurture dismissals and distractions away from legitimate points in discussion then I’d be more willing to give it the benefit of the doubt. We have a couple of the usual clowns in our midst right now.

    It seems odd that, in my criticism of a consistent standards that would probably earn this site a D grade in an English GCSE that they are viewed as tyranical. Apathy and pursuit of the course of least resistance is so deeply entrenched in so many that any deviation from it is clearly cause for alarm. Likewise, the absurd responses to such criticisms from onlookers (I’m not actually criticising them after all) to suggest that spell-checking an article before publishing it is a call for ‘perfection’ or the pursuit of a ‘pulitzer prize’ shows just how warped peoples views are. No doubt if you’ve spent a year swallowing shit then tasting anything else is going to seem quite alarming.

    “can you back up your sweeping account of the state of videogame journalism with particulars”

    Not without breaking one or two NDAs for specific examples of fiction and guesswork paraded as news, no. However, such examples set a precedent where, if you’re aware of such questionable behaviour being conducted when you happen to possess factual information to the contrary then you have to ask yourself (unless you endorse apathy and ignorance) how many other instances this same behaviour occurs. There’s a wealth of shitty videogame sites that follow the same “Gotta post it first and worry about the details” later sites out there were speed and character take priority over factual information on a regular basis.

    And just because a lot of shitty journalism is out there doesn’t mean it’s any less shitty.

    #42 5 years ago
  43. Hunam

    That Shatner seems like a fairly reasonable fellow doesn’t he.

    #43 5 years ago
  44. G1GAHURTZ

    The nutcase moans about the heat, but stays in the kitchen.

    Case closed.

    #44 5 years ago
  45. Hunam

    I have to say, I’ve been (and indeed, still am) in a situation where I know the truth about certain things in the industry and yet see websites (including this one) post incorrectly about them, but, well, I wouldn’t say I was angry about it, but I just chalked it down to people actually being excited or interested about it and trying to pass on news to those people to try and work out what the fuck is going on.

    #45 5 years ago
  46. Shatner

    “I know you don’t consider ‘rumour and conjecture’ to be news, but you appear to be alone on that one. The majority of readers here do appear to be interested in that kind of thing and as long as a rumour is clearly labelled as a rumour and an opinion is clearly labelled as an opinion, I see no problem with their inclusion.”

    Yes, and they’re so interested in keeping their bubble of rumour and conjecture from bursting that they’ll write an awful lot (not that they care, right?) in attempt to curtail the statements of anyone that might be critical of it. You seem to advocate the “let me just enjoy my view on things” whilst being equally keen to stifle mine.

    Many responses here are far more interested in snubbing out a particular view than endorsing any of their own, actually. Probably because they have nothing they’re capable of contributing but they like to be disruptive for the sheer hell of it. (DB – this is what I mean by not giving the environment the benefit of the doubt. Fortunately the same clowns keep proving me right on this!) Unfortunately, it’s a practice that the article authors frequently employ themselves – adding weight to the amateurish standards that detract from anything professional.

    And Blerk, the problem with rumours and conjecture is that they repeatedly get adopted as fact. You then get the blind leading the blind by arguing that such-and-such was claimed and (because they want to believe it) a ‘fact’ is argued over an opinion and the misinformation snowballs at an alarming rate. Combine the actions of those that actively seek to misinform and push their own agenda and opinions at the expense of facts and genuine information gets almost completely buried.

    I’ve no problem with rumours and conjecture – but, as this article shows, when such a status is given a lower profile to trying to tell people what to think and encouraging them to draw conclusions from such rumours then the few factual elements are lost at the EXPENSE of everything else.

    Move on three months and some twit will call a games company a liar because a rumour started by a games site that deliberately led people into formulating the own guesswork-conclusions never came true.

    And, god forbid, if anyone dares to call out the journalists as the catalyst for all the confusion then all those fans of rumour, conjecture and exaggeration will have a hissy fit.

    #46 5 years ago
  47. phatb0y

    I used to think Shatner was a bit of a intellectual wanksock dial-a-troll, but by Christ he speaks some sense.

    #47 5 years ago
  48. Hunam

    Clearly serious business.

    #48 5 years ago
  49. Mike

    I like the “actions speak louder than words” adage Shatner is using recently. It’s like the irony of him writing more words than anyone else and offering little by way of “action” is lost only on him. It’s also rather amusing that although he criticises games journalism at times, he seems to have no idea as to the role of “contributor” and “editor” and everything in between.

    #49 5 years ago
  50. Lutz

    Seriously…. who gives a fuck? Move on FFS!

    #50 5 years ago
  51. Shatner

    Oh Mike. It’s rather like you and other games journalists criticising how games are made when you haven’t the first clue.

    Not that we should ever question those all-knowing gaming journalists who present their opinions as how things are really going on.

    With that said Mike, I know a fucking typo when I see it!

    I wouldn’t expect articles to be published by people who write as a profession to still have those errors in it by the time they reach the reader. Why, I even recall the dismay you expressed after you spotted typos in your thesis recently. Seems funny you should care what people think of your standard of writing sometimes and then hypocritically dismiss similar criticism from others!

    Likewise, I’d expect any accompanying image of an article to be RELEVANT to the content of the article. Not, say, from a completely different game.

    And those two school-boy errors of the most amateurish levels are instances that have occured on this site in the last couple of hours.

    I’m sure you’ll argue that you don’t need to know the difference between scripting, AI programming, rendering, rigging or producing, for example. You’ll see the end product and insist that your judgement counts irrespective of your complete ignorance of how its constructed.

    So, unfortunately for you Mike, whether I appreciate the difference between ‘contributor’ or ‘editor’ doesn’t really matter – the end result speaks for itself.

    Oh, hang about – is this another one of those bits when you’ll change the criteria of something so that you can insist that your view is valid but any other view must be dismissed?

    I like how, in your comments, Mike, you do the classic trick of not even acknowledging any accountability for your own writing – just decrying those that might criticise it. Accountability takes you into the realm of responsibility and once you’ve started to take responsibility for it it’s much harder to wriggle around and quote the journalistic mantra of ‘merely’ being the messenger. Right?

    Right.

    #51 5 years ago
  52. Psychotext

    Is it because of the criticism of the games industry that you find the mistakes and amateurism of this site so personally offensive Shatner?

    Because it looks more like a crusade than anything constructive.

    #52 5 years ago
  53. Shatner

    I don’t say I found them offensive Psychotext (if you check it’s others that have gone down the ‘offensive’ route, not me. I find them amateurish. I said that quite clearly, many times.

    But I like the way you’re seeking to flip this around. You need to be a little more subtle in your efforts though.

    You’d also need to stop ignoring the multiple references to milseading information and witholding information (something that a stat-hound like yourself ought to appreciate) I’ve made. I guess they’re a little trickier to work into your pop-psychology response.

    I’d stick to spreadsheets and guessing numbers if I were you PT.

    The inventiveness people will employ to prevent their precious rumour/conjecture bubbles from bursting is admirable. The execution, less so.

    #53 5 years ago
  54. G1GAHURTZ

    Nah, he’s just an INTERNET HERO!!!!!

    I see imbalance, bias, immaturity and plain ignorance in large swathes of gamers and reporting and deliberately make efforts to correct this imbalance using the words, facts, experience and objectivity at my disposal. I am passionate about my hobby and will never feel shame when I speak out against the actions of those that I see carelessly damaging the image of either the culture or industry that surround it. I have no interest in popular opinion and always make efforts to review topics from a number of perspectives rather than give a knee-jerk reaction.

    #54 5 years ago
  55. dirigiblebill

    “The nutcase moans about the heat, but stays in the kitchen.”

    I don’t see you coming out to play much, G1GA.

    The problem with journalism – any journalism – is that it labours under two equally vital imperatives. One is to draw readers by presenting information in an entertaining fashion – entertaining here connoting anything from polemical sarcasm through slapstick humour to (most often) sheer concision. The other aim, of course, is to serve the facts.

    These are antagonistic but necessary Muses both if the journalist in question wants to have enough to live on, and if the reader wants to keep abreast of current events. Trot out unsubstantiated fairytale bollocks on a regular basis and most visitors will turn tail. But go to the opposite extreme, posting laborious articles which seek to corroborate every single bullet point, and give all points equal weighting, and you’ll lose not only time and money but your public’s attention. You’ll also lose the support of publishers, among other news sources, who after all have a vested interest in the idea of a media that communicates information in an attractive, wallet-loosening manner, whatever their protestations whenever they feel the “message” is getting lost.

    This dilemma is epitomised by headlines. Headlines are by their very nature misrepresentative. They cram hundreds of words into a single sentence for the reader’s convenience, thus occluding at the very least important subtleties and at most hard facts. But without them, journalism wouldn’t exist, publisher PR departments would be quadruple their present size and we’d all have to go to neogaf for our news.

    In short: if journalistic fuck-ups are commonplace that has as much to do with the fundamental tricksiness of this vital balancing act as it does sloppiness or sinister intent.

    (PS. If the above sounds like I’m playing the “readers-are-thick-and-need-handholding” card, it isn’t – or at least not quite. Most readers are ridiculous. They want to stay on top of every development in their chosen subject (generally because they like pontificating about it) despite rarely having time or real inclination to do so, but they hue and cry whenever journalists, in response to this, dress up stories to make them more digestible. It takes two to tango.)

    #55 5 years ago
  56. G1GAHURTZ

    That’s because I saw the futility of talking to the insane a long time ago…

    #56 5 years ago
  57. Shatner

    “I don’t see you coming out to play much, G1GA.”

    Don’t feed his ego too much. He likes to play the “I’m reasonable and you’re not” game until he cracks and spazzes out with unhinged garbage (these might coincide with occurances of RROD’s).

    If you’re lucky he’ll stalk you and threaten to come around to your home and beat you up.

    Like I said, someone like that questioning the mentality of anyone else really can’t be taken remotely seriously. That he expect his comments to be regarded with any degree of credibility shows just how out of touch with reality he is.

    (Too much Xbox, I think)

    #57 5 years ago
  58. Lutz

    Quick, to a keyboard, someone is wrong on the internet!

    #58 5 years ago
  59. Psychotext

    You don’t need to say that you find it offensive Shatner. Your actions make that clear. You’ve devoted a considerable amount of time to making sure everyone knows just how bad this site is.

    Nice dig on the “I’d stick to spreadsheets and guessing numbers if I were you PT” by the way. Surprising you would choose to post something like that about a poster, given your general stance on that sort of thing.

    Oh, and for the record… I don’t really care about how accurate the site is, nor do I care about rumours. I’ll put my cards on the table – I come here to be entertained. If I wanted facts and facts alone I’d stick to reading the FT.

    #59 5 years ago
  60. Shatner

    I refer you to my comments about environment PT. Also, putting words into someone’s mouth in order to argue question what they (didn’t) say is a bit.. I dunno.. it’s not the smartest angle really is it?

    I’d also question a stat-hound’s prediliction with consistently overlooking pieces of information when trying to argue a certain point about someone to that very same person.

    If you’re trying to present yourself as the better informed out of the two of us on that particular topic then I’d very much like some of whatever it is you’re smoking.

    And don’t do the ‘nice dig’ plea. Given your earlier comment I’d be forced to admire how much higher your horse is to the one you thought I was on.

    Lutz, you should credit the source if you’re going to quote them. ;)

    #60 5 years ago
  61. Psychotext

    Yet I never said I was above posting negative things about other posters. I’d expect better from someone who would have us believe they were whiter than white.

    “I refer you to my comments about environment PT.”
    Oh… wait, you’re suggesting that you’re coming down to our level? That’s a great get-out clause, well done. :)

    As for the missing / misleading information. I’d like to think that anyone with half a brain is capable of forming their own opinions on what’s reliable and what’s not… this story being a perfect example. It might not be spelled out in black and white that it’s just guesswork, but it doesn’t take a lawyer to work out the real story.

    #61 5 years ago
  62. Retroid

    /Facehand @ entire comments thread

    #62 5 years ago
  63. Shatner

    PT, your behaviour in insisting on acting like you know me best and that you’ll disregard what I said so you can put words in my mouth and argue with those instead is already wearing thin.

    Why don’t you try the reverse-psychology thing again?

    Incidentally, oh-smart-one, you’re completely reinforcing my “prefer to dismiss another’s view rather than contribute one of their own” statement from earlier. But so long as you arbitrarily ignore bits of what I said and replace them with made up bits of things I didn’t say I’m sure you can still look like a very clever boy indeed. :D

    The herd bleat so loudly when others won’t bleat alongside them! :D

    #63 5 years ago
  64. Psychotext

    People can’t argue with you Shatner… you instantly start accusing them of ignoring everything you’ve said, being idiots, changing the subject or just flat out being wrong. It’s got to the stage where you could pick your responses to other posters from a cheat sheet.

    It’s a pointless exercise.

    #64 5 years ago
  65. Patrick Garratt

    For the record, Shatner, you’ve now posted 2,487 words in this thread alone. That’s 14,647 keystrokes. Do you want a job?

    #65 5 years ago
  66. Shatner

    PT: I didn’t accuse you of ignoring everything. I accused you of ignoring some things I said. Other things you simply fabricated. Both of which are entirely true. I know what I said, I was there when I said it.

    So don’t exaggerate unnecessarily.

    It just makes you look like you’re sulking. Your pop-psychology stunt hasn’t worked, your selective quoting hasn’t worked and your fabrication hasn’t worked. Your mild attempt at the victim ploy didn’t work because you threw that smartass comment previously.

    Whereas I can keep saying the same thing without need for silly games: shitty journalism is shitty journalism. It doesn’t really matter how you try and spin it, it’s still shitty journalism.

    #66 5 years ago
  67. Shatner

    “Do you want a job?”

    Sure. Do I have to rotate my own images to 30 degrees though?

    #67 5 years ago
  68. Patrick Garratt

    It’ll be easier than that. You won’t have to do anything.

    #68 5 years ago
  69. Shatner

    Like Mike?

    #69 5 years ago
  70. Captain Fruitloop

    “For the record, Shatner, you’ve now posted 2,487 words in this thread alone. That’s 14,647 keystrokes. Do you want a job?”

    Just imagine what he could do if he ever decided to use his powers for good?

    2500 words. That’s a good day’s work, in my neck of the woods. And he’s done it all in half a day, on an internet comments page devoted to nothing of any real consequence at all. Remarkable.

    #70 5 years ago
  71. Shatner

    Anyone who has ever waited for a compiler to finish compiling or assets to rebuild themselves finds themselves with a lot of key-pressing time. :D

    #71 5 years ago
  72. Hunam

    2,500 words is a days work? I managed to do 3000 yesterday in 2 hours :S

    #72 5 years ago
  73. Captain Fruitloop

    @Hunam

    Yes, but my 2500 words a day are worth a lot more than your 1500 words an hour… :)

    #73 5 years ago
  74. Hunam

    :(

    Now to go write 5,000 more!

    #74 5 years ago
  75. dirigiblebill

    “So don’t exaggerate unnecessarily.”

    This from the chap who wrote “Gaming ‘journalism’ has it easy. They hold everyone accountable apart from themselves and immediately act the ignorant victim whenever their practices are called into question.”"

    Or was that a “necessary” exaggeration? ;) Again, some examples would be useful.

    #75 5 years ago
  76. dirigiblebill

    2,500 words is a days work? I managed to do 3000 yesterday in 2 hours :S

    That, sir, is because you are an inhuman BASTARD.

    /nurses stump of MA essay

    #76 5 years ago
  77. Lutz

    Depends what you’re writing, but 3000 words in two hours is more than doable.

    Shatner: No, no I don’t. Cos I’m not an eejit.

    #77 5 years ago
  78. Shatner

    You don’t have to look very far at all DB:

    Look at this thread. At no point has anyone in games journalism taken any responsibility for their output. Even the author of this article – he made a defiant (if poorly thought-out) response against the criticism but ensured he implied no accountability of it on his own part. I pointed that out at the time and nobody, least of all the author, has responded to it.

    I would LOVE to see journalism hold itself up to the same scrutiny it holds the subjects of its parasitic endeavours to. Of course, depending on the stance of the author, some scrutiny is very relaxed whereas others can be held more intense views.

    One of the few proper games journalists did shine a rare critical spotlight on other games writers in a deliberately titled article “Matt Damon, you big fat jerk!” which is an enjoyable read. Particularly the second half.

    In addition, one of the game development sites regularly posts game release schedules and inserts a fake title in order to catch out copy/paste journalism. I won’t link to it as I enjoy seeing the results that crop up when they run this exercise.

    Given the level of scrutiny the games media affords itself on whatever subject it regards as newsworthy of that particular instant says plenty that nobody is watching these watchmen – even when they blatantly go about misleading their audience in order to stay profitable so that, presumably, they can mislead them again when the oppurtunity prevents itself.

    A lack of neutrality combined with accountability, not to mention Pat’s own comments of the direction of this site do more to support my argument then my own words alone ever could.

    DB, if you have a stash (or better yet, a frequently updated ‘journalist industry watch’ blog) of links that showcase accountability or responsibility in gaming journalism I would be most interested to see them.

    I don’t agree with a one-sided view on anything. So the habitual lack of accountability that games press enjoys whilst holding their subjects to account (including being made accountable for actions made by the games press) is something that ought to be addressed with action, not apathy.

    #78 5 years ago
  79. dirigiblebill

    “DB, if you have a stash (or better yet, a frequently updated ‘journalist industry watch’ blog) of links that showcase accountability or responsibility in gaming journalism I would be most interested to see them.”

    Gamasutra runs reasonably regular critiques of the gaming media – I’d suggest Leigh Alexander’s piece on “Hot Headlines And Hype Cycles” in particular. Tom Bramwell’s editor’s blog entries at EG – dealing with the question of exclusive reviews and advertising, among other things – are also worth reading. And Shawn Elliot ran a reviewer’s symposium earlier this year which tackled a large number of topics, including the old score-vs-text chestnut.

    In terms of specific scandals, you might want to look at Kikizo’s response to their unfortunate fuck-up over racism in a Resident Evil 5 cutscene.

    #79 5 years ago
  80. theevilaires

    Shatner is a one man army!

    #80 5 years ago
  81. Shatner

    Yeah, I read Gama. I recall an enlightening article there that referenced Gawker Media’s payment incentives which naturally covered Kotaku too. Very telling.

    Naval-gazing journalists isn’t really going to convince me of an objective and impartial review of journalism, however. And, even then, a handful of articles ‘scrutinising’ one industry from within hardly balances out thousands upon thousands of articles (and I use the term in its loosest possible sense) scrutinising (again, loosely) another industry from the point of view of an outsider looking in. I’d still say things are seriously one-sided all said and done.

    Thanks for the links though.

    #81 5 years ago
  82. Syrok

    Why don’t you start your own blog, Shatner, to show everyone how it should be done? :)

    #82 5 years ago
  83. anasui

    no matter what he does, Fry will always be Jeeves to me

    #83 5 years ago
  84. Shatner

    Syrok, I think it’s more appropriate and balanced that I just go about and criticise the workings of one industry from a stance of complete ignorance whilst demonstrating absolutely no inclination to broaden my understanding or try to do any better than those I criticise.

    After all, if I try and fail then I’ve failed.
    If I never try then nobody can ever say I failed and I’ll have a perfect, unblemished record!

    #84 5 years ago
  85. deanimate

    sometimes i wish i was a cat so i could pester people incessantly to see how long it took them to see past my ridiculous level of cuteness and awe inspiring meows and finally grow tired of my feline ways.

    hah! like that would ever happen!
    mrrow?

    #85 5 years ago
  86. theevilaires

    I think its fair to say Shatner is one hell of a debater.

    THE END :P

    #86 5 years ago
  87. Retroid

    A debater of the masses.

    #87 5 years ago
  88. Shatner

    No Retroid, I don’t claim to speak for anyone other than myself.

    Oh. Sorry! You were making a mass-debate witticism. Yes. Very good! Top marks! You’re quite the wordsmith aren’t you?

    #88 5 years ago
  89. dirigiblebill

    I think you’ve attracted a disciple, Shatner old bean :)

    I find it a bit suspicious, frankly, that you ask me to cite articles “that showcase accountability or responsibility in gaming journalism”, but write these off as flagrant “navel-gazing” the moment I do so.

    If the problem is that the gaming media tends to prioritise critiquing the industry it *exists, by definition, to critique*, over critiquing its own ends and means – well, let’s just say there are flaws with that argument… On the other hand, I like the idea of an independent outside review process – perhaps your blog could be the foundation stone? :)

    #89 5 years ago
  90. mbreber

    Hey, maybe you can all beat CNN or even go for Ashton Kutcher.

    #90 5 years ago
  91. Shatner

    OK DB, one aspect of my argument was that one party was endlessly criticising a separate party and doing so from a position where they would not expect to find themselves criticised during this process.

    This differs significantly from a scenario where one party is reviewing itself.

    With the best will in the world, objectivity in a self-review is going to be sacrificed whether intentional or otherwise.

    I would argue as well that the games media does not by definition exist to critique the games industry. That’s a pretty bold claim you’re presenting and one that works exclusively in the favour of one party at the expense of the other. I have raised the point about lack of balance and excessive one-sidedness and your ‘by definition’ assertion gives such behaviour a free pass. It implies also that one-way communication is agreed and doesn’t address any issues relating to accountability. It also raises questions about transparency.

    If, truly, its definition was one of critique then why on earth would the games industry ever court it? Certainly the industry self-certifies where necessary. It doesn’t require slapdash critique from any hack with blog software and a blackberry. By extension, the potential for incentives beyond advertising would be incalculable which, in turn, further compromises credibility of the games press as you would have it defined.

    And where, in such a definition, does the witholding of information on the part of the games press fit in? Whose interest does it serve?

    On top of all of this I’d say that ‘critique’ is a pretty ambiguous word to use and not entirely appropriate. When applied to the context of this site alone you’d need to bend some of its understood definitions to accomodate the nature of output, let alone from the games media at large.

    #91 5 years ago
  92. G1GAHURTZ

    I’m telling you!

    You can’t get common sense and reason from loonies.

    It’s just a great big waste of time.

    #92 5 years ago
  93. Michael O'Connor

    Since this is clearly for LBP on the PSP, why not just change the article to indicate as such?

    #93 5 years ago
  94. Hunam

    I dunno, this last few posts he’s gone from outraged purist to internet snob.

    5/10

    #94 5 years ago
  95. Blerk

    Christ on a bike, I knew I shouldn’t have gone to that meeting!

    #95 5 years ago
  96. deanimate

    hah! now im thinking of christ riding a bike but whats this? oh no, the bike has now brakes and christ is rocketing down the freeway screaming “CHRIIIIIIST!”

    #96 5 years ago
  97. Shatner

    So far, despite the usual variety of antics being deployed nobody’s done much to say more than “I like shitty journalism”. Instead they’ve gone to considerable lengths in their attempts to dismiss another’s view on shitty journalism.

    The journalism’s still shitty though. Isn’t it?

    :D

    #97 5 years ago
  98. fj

    I wonder if @stephenfry knows how much trouble he has caused here today.

    #98 5 years ago
  99. Shatner

    I blame Mike, not Stephen Fry.

    Other articles on other sites using the identical source have managed to produce better articles that aren’t remotely as sensationalist or misleading as this one aims to be.

    If the source material is the same then, logically, the differentiating factor is how it was conveyed to its audience.

    #99 5 years ago
  100. Patrick Garratt

    And for the 100th post in this amazing thread, please see the top of the site.

    #100 5 years ago
  101. dirigiblebill

    Shatner:

    I think “critiquing” the industry – interrogating and condemning/lauding its methods and products instance by instance, that is – is a fair though general description for the games media’s activities, though I accept that it doesn’t cover the associated role of publicist, transmitting information of interest to consumers.

    This second role, naturally, is the one publishers are most interested in, but critique and publicity are two sides of the same coin. Positive reviews from a trusted source are worth more in resulting sales than the mere transparent transmission of a press release, and even middling or negative reviews can be a boon to PR if they are balanced and detailed.

    Of course we wouldn’t expect such commentary from “any hack with blog software and a blackberry”, but it seems ill-advised to lambast the media as a whole for the sake of some biased, inarticulate bloggers – especially when their plenitude is far from proportional to their actual impact on copies sold. Babies and bathwater indeed.

    The industry may not “require slapdash critique” from any two-bit blogspot outlet, and it should take justifiable offence at any withholding of information, but it does benefit from the opinions of articulate, painstaking and (as much as is humanly possible) impartial writers like the EG crew, Edge and so forth. And not merely in sales terms, either – do you think EA would have taken some of the worthwhile creative risks it’s been taking recently (Mirror’s Edge, Dead Space, etc) were it not for the pressure of Metacritic averages? Not all writers are completely clueless as regards the ins and outs of game development, and most of those that are take pains to get to grips with the subject when developers/publishers give them an opportunity.

    Again, all of this is not to say that continual self-analysis isn’t crucial and that’s why sincere though naturally prejudiced efforts like those linked in the last post should be welcomed, rather than dismissed as pseudo-objectivism. And again, the idea of an external review process has merit. I wonder if it’s something TIGA, the ELSPA or the BBFC have ever discussed?

    #101 5 years ago
  102. Retroid

    @Shatner: TEA set it up, I just thought it would be rude not to make use of it!

    Not aimed at you, either: you’re entitled to your opinion of this place, and I make it a rule to try not to make personal digs or be sarcastic.

    Sinking to levels, and all that.

    #102 5 years ago
  103. Axle

    Shatner have you got a job? Don’t tell me you’re a videogames devloper and you spend all day googling LOLcats!

    This must be a nice diversion for you. As I’ve said before I agree with much of what you’re saying, and you’ve in turn accused me of apathy but consider this:

    When Jade Goody, who by her own admission is a ‘reality TV star’ dies, her image is plastered all over print, news and digital media.

    When JG Ballard, who, by my admission is one of the finest ever writers to grace the English language dies, he is barely given an ‘And finally’ on the evening news.

    When one of Britain’s greatest novelists dies and is extended nothing more than an arbitary addendum can you expect any more than a reflected culture of sheen, shallowness and vacuity?

    #103 5 years ago
  104. dirigiblebill

    You don’t by any chance write for this place, Shatner? ;)

    http://www.vgmwatch.com/

    #104 5 years ago
  105. G1GAHURTZ

    When one of Britain’s greatest novelists dies and is extended nothing more than an arbitary addendum can you expect any more than a reflected culture of sheen, shallowness and vacuity?

    That’s because Goody sells advertising space and makes money. It’s about contraversial news that people want to watch/read, not what is more or less important.

    Blame Murdoch.

    #105 5 years ago
  106. Shatner

    I don’t spend all day googling LOLcats.

    I see the point you’re trying to make Axle, but I’m not sure that the demographics of JG Ballard fans and Jade Goody fans shared too much common ground in the first place.

    I believe audience relevance could also be argued in your example. I’m not sure how relevant conjecture and misleading a readership could ever possibly be, however. Unless your audience prefers being treated like idiots that is. In spite of growing evidence of such a notion, I’m not inclined to believe this is the case.

    Pretty fucking harsh of you to associate Mike’s writing with a recently deceased, questionably racist, frequently vacant reality TV ‘star’ but that’s your call, not mine.

    He’s got a Masters you know.

    #106 5 years ago
  107. Shatner

    Thanks DB, no I don’t. You’ll notice it’s been a bit quiet there for the last 6 months and that it’s not quite really analysing the media as copy-blogging them.

    I appreciate your continued efforts. Maybe we’ll start a movement. Let’s do lunch with Paul Jackson.

    #107 5 years ago
  108. Axle

    G1GA, it’s a bit simplistic to ‘blame Murdoch’ when this kind of thing is endemic throughout society. Just look at the virulence of inane ‘Reality TV’ which is mirror to all of the sad individuals who consume it.

    Where Goody lived it, Ballard critiqued it and in his death there is the final irony that the voice of dissent, the genuinely important is relegated to below the interminably trivial.

    It’s not Keynesian economics: demand creates supply. That’s why we have VG247 and all of the polemic and controversy that it spits up.

    #108 5 years ago
  109. The_Deleted

    http://playstationgameruk.com/2009/04/21/littlebigplanet-confirmed-for-psp/
    Ta-Daaaaaa”!

    #109 5 years ago
  110. Blerk

    Heh – Sony themselves confirmed LBP for PSP weeks ago. Catch up PlaystationGamerUK!

    #110 5 years ago
  111. G1GAHURTZ

    @ Axle:

    I think that the demand is certainly there, but I think that it’s limited to a particular demographic who are more easily influenced by the media into spending their money.

    I wouldn’t say that it’s a sign of the state of the general populace, but more a display of the power of the capitalist marketing juggernaut that relentlessly bombards us with every means at its disposal.

    Sure, there are millions of people who no doubt see BB as the pinacle of entertainment, and who treat the likes of Goody as heroine, but I wouldn’t say that they count for the majority or are indicative of any sort of dangerous trend.

    The media is an expert at convincing us that whatever their top story is is the topic of discussion in every household, but that’s not always the case.

    Don’t forget that BB has also been in the press for having a big decline in viewers, and I believe that there was talk of it being in real trouble during the racism episode.

    Even more than that, both Channel 4 and ITV, two stations known for the kind of low level TV that BB falls into have been in real trouble in terms of a decline in viewers and have been linked with attempts to get some government funding recently too.

    #111 5 years ago
  112. Axle

    All true G1GA. Maybe I read too much Baudrillard and Ballard to be able to see this kind of stuff as entertainment as opposed to a kind of ‘soft’ thought control and pacification.

    Then again I play videogames . . .

    #112 5 years ago
  113. Mike

    So…what did I miss?

    #113 5 years ago
  114. Shatner

    Try reading. You might learn something.

    #114 5 years ago
  115. Lutz

    Nah, he already knows you’re an idiot Shatner.

    #115 5 years ago
  116. Hunam

    Shatner is such a blow hard.

    #116 5 years ago
  117. Shatner

    Hey, if Mike wants to pretend he’s out of the loop then I don’t see what’s so bad by going along with it.

    His whole ‘innocence through ignorance’ bullshit is pretty tired. He could say plenty, but his refusal to take any accountability for his own writing says the most.

    #117 5 years ago
  118. Mike

    I don’t think I did anything wrong. I saw something, I drew a conclusion, I wrote about it, it got published. I’m sorry if you didn’t like it.

    #118 5 years ago
  119. Seraphemz

    Damn…118 posts… on this topic ?? WTF ?

    #119 5 years ago
  120. theevilaires

    120 bitches :P

    #120 5 years ago
  121. dirigiblebill

    Sure I’ll join you for lunch with Paul Jackson, Shatner. Providing he’s buying.

    #121 5 years ago