D
Deleted member 11852
Guest
I guess it depends what newspapers you read or news channels you watch. I read The Times and this certainly isn't the case.
Kotaku's Blacklisting........discussion
- Thread starter Persistantthug
- Start date
I just felt like mostly everything that could be said on the topic had been covered already. When I first jumped into the discussion, I had read the article and still had it fresh. I just added my two cents that "free press" "censorship" or "freedom of speech" had nothing to do with Bethesdas blacklisting. I kept on coming back to further clarify my point, but really, I've made my point.
From my side, Kotaku can do whatever they want, even if that is doing everything to piss publishers off and act surprised that they were blacklisted. I'm just stating that being surprised or offended by that is naive and silly.
The only post I found regarding "censorship" were yours. You should not make up quotes.
Do they have a site I could look at?
D
Deleted member 11852
Guest
Rewriting/transcribing other media:
http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/news/world/europe/article4623397.ece
"Capt Konstantin Murakhtin, who was rescued in a 12-hour operation involving special forces, also told Russian television that there was “no way” the Su-24 bomber could have violated Turkey’s sovereignty."
PR stuff:
http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/news/world/americas/article4622842.ece
Those were that first two links I clicked, so I can't really verify the numbers I claimed. But I think "The Times" is standard daily media, it is not as researched as something like "The Economist".
And I do not think there is anything wrong with that.
http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/news/world/europe/article4623397.ece
"Capt Konstantin Murakhtin, who was rescued in a 12-hour operation involving special forces, also told Russian television that there was “no way” the Su-24 bomber could have violated Turkey’s sovereignty."
PR stuff:
http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/news/world/americas/article4622842.ece
Those were that first two links I clicked, so I can't really verify the numbers I claimed. But I think "The Times" is standard daily media, it is not as researched as something like "The Economist".
And I do not think there is anything wrong with that.
This thread is depressing. A gaming trash news site compared to real journalism? Uff.
I was told today on the radio that old media news is dead, and that the future is crowd-sourced mobile and social news. Because the clap-trap of a thousand a**holes with an opinion outweighs the input from anyone who might possibly know what they're talking about. Good luck to Generation TL;DR, you will need it.
I was told today on the radio that old media news is dead, and that the future is crowd-sourced mobile and social news. Because the clap-trap of a thousand a**holes with an opinion outweighs the input from anyone who might possibly know what they're talking about. Good luck to Generation TL;DR, you will need it.
D
Deleted member 11852
Guest
Well The Times being a newspaper will report the news (and most 'raw' news originates from the Associated Press and Reuters) so it should factually be the same as what you will read in other credible media. Similarly there is a lot editorial and and investigate articles but those are mostly behind a subscription paywall. The same can be said for UK newspapers like The Financial Times, The Guardian and The Independent. Then there are other other types of "newspaper" which exist, in my view, more for entertainment purposes and where facts in stories are just a happy coincidence
But this is the difference between journalists covering world or local news relating to issues of interest or importance and the gaming press. The gaming press actually have little avenue to do investigations. Games are made by people who, for the most part, live their lives in private and their work is equally private. You can't just stroll into a Ubisoft studio and start asking questions so information is either released officially by marketing or it's released unofficially as a leak. I mean blimey, even in this day and age of capturing video and screens from games you see the same "press approved" screenshots and videos on several gaming websites. Perhaps it's done for convenience of journalists but it's still weird!
That's not to say you don't see some interesting or thought provoking editorials but it's not "news" per se.
I suppose we should be thankful that the gamin press aren't like the other type of entertainment press, do you want them following game developers around, trying to get pictures of them at the beach? OMG. Pete Hines has clearly put on 5 pounds since this photo six weeks ago!!!
Wow, whatever man. Why are you being so anal about this?
I think you have that reversed.
Are you leaving B3D or just this discussion (which seem to have ended)?
I blacklisted Kotaku quite a while ago personally. It seems that most sites have gone down the 'psychological crack' river, and release crap content that people just cannot help click because it's some 'wierd trick' or 'people don't want to know' etc. Kotaku is park of Gawker, and Gawker is a tributary of the river of shit that pollutes my internet.
Same. "You won't believe what happened when..." Fuck off!
"Shocking discovery will change how we..." Shut up!!!
"Shocking discovery will change how we..." Shut up!!!
Does Kotaku often ask you questions?
I've decided to post a reply before reading any of the comments, in order to offer an unspoiled opinion on the issue. While I am still a gamer (even though I play a lot less nowadays than I'd like to...), I've also been working in the industry throughout all my professional career of 15 years now, and perhaps I can offer some insights. I'll try to be as open as I can; but I'm still bound by a lot of NDAs and such, being a relatively high-level guy at our studio with access to a lot of classified information.
Video game development has become incredibly complicated, time consuming and expensive. Even titles that you'd consider a safe bet are in fact a risky investment of millions of dollars, and their success or failure will depend on many different factors. It is really the only reasonable option for the publisher to try to keep control of as many of these factors as possible.
One of the most important element here has to be the marketing campaign of the game, and a lot of it is focused on what information should be revealed and at what time. There are many ways for this, including trailers released on the internet, using licensed music and/or expensive CGI, custom press events with playable versions, large expos like E3, and even one-time special events and closed-door stuff.
One of the best examples is Blizzcon, which obviously isn't just about game announcements - but still they're always a part of the program. Blizzard has to spend an incredible amount of money on the organization, infrastructure and other elements, and in terms of the new games, all of this is justified because the event has no competitors in the media, so they can have a lot more attention to their announcements. This is also the reason behind Quakecon and a few other similar annual events. But there are sometimes other, one-time events for games, and they may include more elements that also cost a lot of money.
Premature leaks about the game will inevitably disrupt the carefully planned and organized and expensive marketing plan. They may also reveal any kinds of gameplay, graphical, online and other features that are not yet finalized and may have to be cut before even publicly announcing them, which will generally lead to negative response from the customer base; and usually from all the other internet users (NEOGAF, 4chan etc).
Any reasonable gamer should see how such leaks can be incredibly damaging. Just for a start, the resulting scrapping of existing marketing plans will cost a lot of money (canceling reservations and trailers for example), so the publisher will either have to cut the number of events and trailers and such - or end up spending more.
The other major loss could appear in sales: cutting features in later stages of development could drive away potential customers, and a premature announcement could even affect sales of other titles. This could eventually lead to cancellations of other titles or lay-offs at various studios or budget cuts on other titles.
A game journalist should be even more aware of the possible negative effects of releasing information about such leaks, or behind the scene stories about troubled development.
Make no mistake, I am quite aware of the complex moral and ethical issues related to this profession, as I've been a freelance writer for a local game magazine in sometime 1997-2004 or so. But because of this I believe I'm also aware of the responsibilities of the job, too. I also understand that there are a lot of competing media outlets, and because of this, there may be a push to use any possible means to gain more views and recognition by either being first or simply following other outlets.
Still, I do believe that the press - in general - does have an obligation to inform the public about all kinds of things. But I also believe that any kind of product should first and foremost should be judged by its own merits. Thus the journalist's first responsibility in such cases is to very carefully consider every possible consequence that could result from publishing the undisclosed information that has been delivered.
I know this is an extreme comparison, but consider this example: CNN learns that US special forces are planning a risky operation behind enemy lines to rescue a hostage. Revealing this story would compromise the mission and probably lead to loss of life. In my opinion, any responsible editor or journalist would decide to hold back the information.
Video games are obviously without such high stakes, but I believe that the same moral standards should still apply. If the story can have damaging consequences, then it is not right to publish it.
On the other hand, I firmly stand by the policy of publishing any kinds of behind the scenes information after the game's release. At this time, demos have been released, the title has been reviewed, complete walkthroughs and such have been posted on Youtube, so the game is now standing on its own. Any additional information will probably not have significant negative effects on either the sales or the careers of the developers and marketing people and others involved in its creation.
Lastly, I also see that any moral or ethic standards are always subject to debate. Others may have different considerations and thus they can make different decisions. However, they should also accept the consequences of their choices. I think that it is a publisher's right to respond to a media outlet's damaging moves by denying them special treatments like invitations to press events or free review copies.
And now I'm going to read the thread to see what others think
Video game development has become incredibly complicated, time consuming and expensive. Even titles that you'd consider a safe bet are in fact a risky investment of millions of dollars, and their success or failure will depend on many different factors. It is really the only reasonable option for the publisher to try to keep control of as many of these factors as possible.
One of the most important element here has to be the marketing campaign of the game, and a lot of it is focused on what information should be revealed and at what time. There are many ways for this, including trailers released on the internet, using licensed music and/or expensive CGI, custom press events with playable versions, large expos like E3, and even one-time special events and closed-door stuff.
One of the best examples is Blizzcon, which obviously isn't just about game announcements - but still they're always a part of the program. Blizzard has to spend an incredible amount of money on the organization, infrastructure and other elements, and in terms of the new games, all of this is justified because the event has no competitors in the media, so they can have a lot more attention to their announcements. This is also the reason behind Quakecon and a few other similar annual events. But there are sometimes other, one-time events for games, and they may include more elements that also cost a lot of money.
Premature leaks about the game will inevitably disrupt the carefully planned and organized and expensive marketing plan. They may also reveal any kinds of gameplay, graphical, online and other features that are not yet finalized and may have to be cut before even publicly announcing them, which will generally lead to negative response from the customer base; and usually from all the other internet users (NEOGAF, 4chan etc).
Any reasonable gamer should see how such leaks can be incredibly damaging. Just for a start, the resulting scrapping of existing marketing plans will cost a lot of money (canceling reservations and trailers for example), so the publisher will either have to cut the number of events and trailers and such - or end up spending more.
The other major loss could appear in sales: cutting features in later stages of development could drive away potential customers, and a premature announcement could even affect sales of other titles. This could eventually lead to cancellations of other titles or lay-offs at various studios or budget cuts on other titles.
A game journalist should be even more aware of the possible negative effects of releasing information about such leaks, or behind the scene stories about troubled development.
Make no mistake, I am quite aware of the complex moral and ethical issues related to this profession, as I've been a freelance writer for a local game magazine in sometime 1997-2004 or so. But because of this I believe I'm also aware of the responsibilities of the job, too. I also understand that there are a lot of competing media outlets, and because of this, there may be a push to use any possible means to gain more views and recognition by either being first or simply following other outlets.
Still, I do believe that the press - in general - does have an obligation to inform the public about all kinds of things. But I also believe that any kind of product should first and foremost should be judged by its own merits. Thus the journalist's first responsibility in such cases is to very carefully consider every possible consequence that could result from publishing the undisclosed information that has been delivered.
I know this is an extreme comparison, but consider this example: CNN learns that US special forces are planning a risky operation behind enemy lines to rescue a hostage. Revealing this story would compromise the mission and probably lead to loss of life. In my opinion, any responsible editor or journalist would decide to hold back the information.
Video games are obviously without such high stakes, but I believe that the same moral standards should still apply. If the story can have damaging consequences, then it is not right to publish it.
On the other hand, I firmly stand by the policy of publishing any kinds of behind the scenes information after the game's release. At this time, demos have been released, the title has been reviewed, complete walkthroughs and such have been posted on Youtube, so the game is now standing on its own. Any additional information will probably not have significant negative effects on either the sales or the careers of the developers and marketing people and others involved in its creation.
Lastly, I also see that any moral or ethic standards are always subject to debate. Others may have different considerations and thus they can make different decisions. However, they should also accept the consequences of their choices. I think that it is a publisher's right to respond to a media outlet's damaging moves by denying them special treatments like invitations to press events or free review copies.
And now I'm going to read the thread to see what others think
Last edited:
Now I've read this article, and it seems to argue about the same things that I did:
http://www.onlysp.com/kotaku-didnt-get-the-cold-shoulder-from-bethesda-ubisoft-they-earned-it/
http://www.onlysp.com/kotaku-didnt-get-the-cold-shoulder-from-bethesda-ubisoft-they-earned-it/
Let me add another possibly interesting take on this issue.
Some of you guys might know that I work at a studio that makes CG trailers and cinematics for video games. This means that we get access to a lot of confidential material - the very existance of a project, the planned features, the story and characters, and so on. Sometimes we actually make stuff that's only meant for internal use and it's never released to the public. Sometimes we even discuss projects that end up canceled, but we still get the access to the information during the talks. I don't like to brag, but some of the stuff I know would probably be quite interesting to a lot of you Hell, I could probably earn some money by making an anonymous blog posting this stuff and if I'm careful enough I could probably get away with it without losing my job.
We also get visits from our possible clients regularly. Now these guys expect to see an office where their secrets are safe. So we have security measures like the pizza delivery guy is stopped at the reception, and any time I need to leave the floor where my office is, I have to use my key card. And I do have to leave several times a day, including lunch and all.
All of this costs us real money. We have to buy the infrastructure, and we lose several minutes of each person's work day on the security check, which kinda add up through the year. We spend money on the extra storage to keep access to confidential material restricted. It might not be that much but it still adds up in the end.
Then I'm told about the security measures at other, more exposed studios. After all, we're a relatively unknown mid sized studio in central Europe... People at other studios have to make sure that their screens can't be seen from outside the office building. If you're working on a Marvel movie, you get your cell phone's cameras covered up by the security people every morning.
The point is that the industries have no choice but to respond to the leaks and increase security, which costs money, which is now removed from the budget that's actually spent on the final product. This serves no-one, it's counterproductive, and publishing leaks is only going to escalate things.
Some of you guys might know that I work at a studio that makes CG trailers and cinematics for video games. This means that we get access to a lot of confidential material - the very existance of a project, the planned features, the story and characters, and so on. Sometimes we actually make stuff that's only meant for internal use and it's never released to the public. Sometimes we even discuss projects that end up canceled, but we still get the access to the information during the talks. I don't like to brag, but some of the stuff I know would probably be quite interesting to a lot of you
Hell, I could probably earn some money by making an anonymous blog posting this stuff and if I'm careful enough I could probably get away with it without losing my job.We also get visits from our possible clients regularly. Now these guys expect to see an office where their secrets are safe. So we have security measures like the pizza delivery guy is stopped at the reception, and any time I need to leave the floor where my office is, I have to use my key card. And I do have to leave several times a day, including lunch and all.
All of this costs us real money. We have to buy the infrastructure, and we lose several minutes of each person's work day on the security check, which kinda add up through the year. We spend money on the extra storage to keep access to confidential material restricted. It might not be that much but it still adds up in the end.
Then I'm told about the security measures at other, more exposed studios. After all, we're a relatively unknown mid sized studio in central Europe... People at other studios have to make sure that their screens can't be seen from outside the office building. If you're working on a Marvel movie, you get your cell phone's cameras covered up by the security people every morning.
The point is that the industries have no choice but to respond to the leaks and increase security, which costs money, which is now removed from the budget that's actually spent on the final product. This serves no-one, it's counterproductive, and publishing leaks is only going to escalate things.
Similar threads
