Stephen Fry doing LBP 2 voice work?

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.

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.

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.

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.“

“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.)

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

“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)

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

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.

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.

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.

/Facehand @ entire comments thread

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.

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

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.

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?

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.

“Do you want a job?”

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

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

Like Mike?

“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.

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.

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

@Hunam

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

Now to go write 5,000 more!

“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.

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

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.

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.

“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.

Shatner is a one man army!

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.

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

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

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!

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?

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

THE END

A debater of the masses.

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?

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?

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

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.

I’m telling you!

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

It’s just a great big waste of time.

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

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

5/10

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

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!”

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?

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

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.

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