Extra! Extra! At a recent Playstation conference in Japan, Sony announced the specs for their upcoming portable, appropriately called Playstation Portable. As was expected, the entire journalism industry got terribly excited despite the lack of an actual system prototype, game demos, or price point being shown or mentioned anywhere at the conference. But this can be forgiven; the system is a long way off, and readers are chomping at the bit to get any information they can on it, even if it is in the form of confusing, techno-jargon specs. Which brings me to the point of this article:
System specs are meaningless on their own
I know the readership for video game websites skews a little more tech savvy, but I find it hard to believe that the average reader will know what a "MIPS R4000 32-Bit core" is off-hand. And while sites like GameSpy, GamesIndustry.biz, GameSpot and Wired wrote out detailed articles explaining what the specs meant for the lay-audience, many sites were content to copy from Ken Kutagari's slide show and mention that the specs were "impressive."
Chief among the guilty are Slashdot and Evil Avatar who simply linked to this cryptic ZDNet Japan story that listed the full specifications in English but had no other information for those who can't speak Japanese. Gamerfeed and Spong aren't far behind, posting abbreviated spec lists with a minimum of analysis.
Some of these specs, like the "Shock Proof" Universal Media Disc, are useful to the public, but others, like "Sub Memory:2MB DRAM — 2.6GB/sec" are meaningless to most readers. It's the journalists job, when presented with confusing specs like these, to decipher them and lay them out in a way that everyone can understand. Sure, you can list the full specs for the technophiles in the audience (something Wired and GI.biz notably didn't do), but you need some analysis that goes beyond the numbers and puts the systems power in easily relatable terms. All the facts and figures in the world are meaningless if your audience can't understand them.
There's nothing wrong with spec lists in and of themselves; they provide valuable, early data on what a system will be capable of. But by themselves, they are useful only to electrical engineers and others who have a deep understanding of a computer's inner workings. Unless this is your main audience, explain the specs a little more.
Wednesday, July 30, 2003
Tuesday, July 29, 2003
When worlds no longer collide
It seems like just yesterday that video game web sites and magazines were reporting breathlessly on each and every new video game property optioned for a theatrical release. But as quickly as the bandwagon can be boarded, it can also be abandoned at the slightest hint of bad news.
That bit of bad news came in the form of a quote by Paramount executive Wayne Lewellen, in which he blamed the latest Tomb Raider video game (which has been selling briskly despite bad reviews) for the failure of their latest Tomb Raider movie (which has been tanking amid bad reviews). Originally from a Reuters article:
"The only thing we can attribute that to is that the gamers were not happy with the latest version of the 'Tomb Raider' video game, which is our core audience."
Some sites, notably Adrenaline Vault and Gamespot reported the story evenly, mentioning the facts and providing a bit of context without jumping to any conclusions. But many sites used the quote as a peg to announce "The Death of Video Game/Movie Collaborations". How quick we are to judge...
Reuters: "The romance between Hollywood and the video game industry is suddenly a lot chillier."
Spong.com: "Is the romance over? We’ll have to wait and see."
EvilAvatar: "What is it that seems to always drive these two industries into conflict?"
GamerFeed: "Say it with me..video game movies don't work...video game movies don't work...video game movies don't work."
It could be argued that these quotes are merely an analysis of the new relationship between video game makers and movie makers in light of Mr. Lewellen's quote. This is a valid point, but good news analysis usually involves more than one data point as a basis for a new trend. None of these articles cite any other evidence to support their claim that video game-based movies are on the outs. Instead, one angry, finger-pointing executive becomes the spokesman for the whole movie industry. A little digging could have revealed whether Mr. Lewellen's thoughts were shared by others in the gaming and movie communities, or how other video game movies have been doing at the box office. But no one seems to have bothered with this extra reporting, and the de facto assumption is that the honeymoon between hollywood and silicon valley is over. Analysis is all well and good, but only when you have suitable data to analyze.
That bit of bad news came in the form of a quote by Paramount executive Wayne Lewellen, in which he blamed the latest Tomb Raider video game (which has been selling briskly despite bad reviews) for the failure of their latest Tomb Raider movie (which has been tanking amid bad reviews). Originally from a Reuters article:
"The only thing we can attribute that to is that the gamers were not happy with the latest version of the 'Tomb Raider' video game, which is our core audience."
Some sites, notably Adrenaline Vault and Gamespot reported the story evenly, mentioning the facts and providing a bit of context without jumping to any conclusions. But many sites used the quote as a peg to announce "The Death of Video Game/Movie Collaborations". How quick we are to judge...
Reuters: "The romance between Hollywood and the video game industry is suddenly a lot chillier."
Spong.com: "Is the romance over? We’ll have to wait and see."
EvilAvatar: "What is it that seems to always drive these two industries into conflict?"
GamerFeed: "Say it with me..video game movies don't work...video game movies don't work...video game movies don't work."
It could be argued that these quotes are merely an analysis of the new relationship between video game makers and movie makers in light of Mr. Lewellen's quote. This is a valid point, but good news analysis usually involves more than one data point as a basis for a new trend. None of these articles cite any other evidence to support their claim that video game-based movies are on the outs. Instead, one angry, finger-pointing executive becomes the spokesman for the whole movie industry. A little digging could have revealed whether Mr. Lewellen's thoughts were shared by others in the gaming and movie communities, or how other video game movies have been doing at the box office. But no one seems to have bothered with this extra reporting, and the de facto assumption is that the honeymoon between hollywood and silicon valley is over. Analysis is all well and good, but only when you have suitable data to analyze.
Friday, July 25, 2003
Spong redeems itself (a bit)
I know I've been quite hard on Spong.com recently, but I do take notice when they do something right.
For instance, their coverage of incompatibility issues with the Japanese version of F-Zero GX. Aparently, Datel's Freeloader disc, which allows Japanese games to play on American and European systems, does not work correctly with the menus in the new futuristic racing game. This led some to speculate that Nintendo had put in some new protection scheme to thwart the import of its games. Almost surprisingly, Spong did not jump to this conclusion in its initial report: Freeloader No-Loader. Even better, they included some very important words at the bottom of the informative article, posted yesterday: "...we've asked Datel to confirm this. Expect full details if and when they reply."
It's amazing how much those little words will do for one's credibility.
Finally, to complete the hat trick, today Spong posted the full reply they got from Datel. In the lengthy note, Datel said they were working on the problem and revealed that they didn't think Nintendo was deliberately blocking the menus. Spong was quick to point out that Datel was speaking exclusively to them, which isn't that surprising, as no one else probably bothered to follow up on the story with a simple e-mail to the Freeloader makers. Thanks to this simple follow-up, Spong jumps ahead of most other outlets that covered the story.
It may seem a little inconsequential on a story as small as this, but getting as much information as possible is no doubt important to anyone interested in importing GameCube games. Through the simple act of following up with Datel, Spong makes the story more complete and worth more to its readers. Kudos, Spong. Keep up the decent work.
For instance, their coverage of incompatibility issues with the Japanese version of F-Zero GX. Aparently, Datel's Freeloader disc, which allows Japanese games to play on American and European systems, does not work correctly with the menus in the new futuristic racing game. This led some to speculate that Nintendo had put in some new protection scheme to thwart the import of its games. Almost surprisingly, Spong did not jump to this conclusion in its initial report: Freeloader No-Loader. Even better, they included some very important words at the bottom of the informative article, posted yesterday: "...we've asked Datel to confirm this. Expect full details if and when they reply."
It's amazing how much those little words will do for one's credibility.
Finally, to complete the hat trick, today Spong posted the full reply they got from Datel. In the lengthy note, Datel said they were working on the problem and revealed that they didn't think Nintendo was deliberately blocking the menus. Spong was quick to point out that Datel was speaking exclusively to them, which isn't that surprising, as no one else probably bothered to follow up on the story with a simple e-mail to the Freeloader makers. Thanks to this simple follow-up, Spong jumps ahead of most other outlets that covered the story.
It may seem a little inconsequential on a story as small as this, but getting as much information as possible is no doubt important to anyone interested in importing GameCube games. Through the simple act of following up with Datel, Spong makes the story more complete and worth more to its readers. Kudos, Spong. Keep up the decent work.
Thursday, July 24, 2003
Will the real journalists please stand up?
The GamesIndustry.biz headline: Conspiracy Entertainment sues Eminem for fraud
The Spong.com headine: Big girlie legal rapper vs games developer handbag fight
This time, I think I'll let you decide for yourself which is the better example of good journalism.
The Spong.com headine: Big girlie legal rapper vs games developer handbag fight
This time, I think I'll let you decide for yourself which is the better example of good journalism.
Tuesday, July 22, 2003
When is a news story not a news story...
The answer: ...When it's actualy an opinion piece.
For example, take the recent Gamers.com article entitled At What Price Final Fantasy: Crystal Chronicles? This article, which was posted in the news section and showed up under "latest headlines" on the Monday it was posted, details the cost of playing the four-player version of the upcoming Gamecube game, Final Fantasy: Crystal Chronicles (FF:CC). The multiplayer version requires each player to have a Game Boy Advance and GBA-GC link cable. "If you do the math, averaging the cost of an original Game Boy Advance and the Game Boy Advance SP, the total price of the game, four handhelds, and four $13 link cables works out to around $400," the article states.
The "news" story continues by giving suggestions for other ways to spend your $400, such as a digital camera, a limited-edition PS2 or "just over 30 boxes of Okamoto Golgo 13 condoms."
Let me start by saying that I thought this was a very funny article that took an interesting look at the price-gouging often caused by Nintendo's endless peripherals. It was a well-written piece with a nice layout and a good flow.
But it wasn't news
There is nothing in this story that is remotely newsworthy. The information that FF:CC required four GBA's for multiplayer is months old. The price of the Game Boy Advance and link cables are similarly well known. No sources, written or spoken, are quoted in the article. There are no new facts being conveyed in the article. There is nothing at all that puts it in the realm of news.
Not only does the article contain no facts pushing it towards the news section, but it actually contains many opinions that should push it away from th news section. Calling the price of FF:CC "a fair bit" and "a significant expenditure" may seem innocuous, but it actually makes a large value judgement about what the author is willing to pay for the game. This is the kind ofthing that belongs in a preview or a review, not a news story. The suggestion of other things to do with the money only reinforces the fact that the author doesn't think FF:CC is worth the $400. Again, a fine point to make, but not in an objective news story. The article ends with a slight jab at the N-Gage, saying that FF:CC is "almost certainly the superior choice." Good point. Still not news.
Even the selection of this topic for an article is weighted with subjectivity. Why was there no similar article decrying the thousands of dollars it takes to buy four XBoxes, 16 controllers, and networking hardware for those who wish to play Halo "in the optimum... multiplayer configuartion." No news story about Dance Dance Revolution would decry the cost of an "optimum" $500 pad as a detriment to the gameplay. You can pick and choose what's worth the money all you want in the reviews section, but you can't do that kind of stuff in the news section!
The only explanation I can think of for this story ending up in news: Someone at Gamers.com had a brainstorm and realized that FF:CC will actually cost a lot for four people to play. They wanted to comment on this fact, but did not have a suitable reason to do so (It's way too early for a preview, and the article is too light for a feature). But news can be short and it gets posted every day. plus it gets lots of attention on the site. Why not post it in the news section? Great, done. Time for lunch.
Most visitors to the site will barely notice, I'm sure, as video game news is often just a petty excuse to spew opinions about the industry (see Spong.com, among others) But there has to be a standard. There has to be something that sets news apart from opinion, some objectivity and new information that seperates it from the subjective opinion-mongering that surrounds it. It's about time people started paying attention to this.
For example, take the recent Gamers.com article entitled At What Price Final Fantasy: Crystal Chronicles? This article, which was posted in the news section and showed up under "latest headlines" on the Monday it was posted, details the cost of playing the four-player version of the upcoming Gamecube game, Final Fantasy: Crystal Chronicles (FF:CC). The multiplayer version requires each player to have a Game Boy Advance and GBA-GC link cable. "If you do the math, averaging the cost of an original Game Boy Advance and the Game Boy Advance SP, the total price of the game, four handhelds, and four $13 link cables works out to around $400," the article states.
The "news" story continues by giving suggestions for other ways to spend your $400, such as a digital camera, a limited-edition PS2 or "just over 30 boxes of Okamoto Golgo 13 condoms."
Let me start by saying that I thought this was a very funny article that took an interesting look at the price-gouging often caused by Nintendo's endless peripherals. It was a well-written piece with a nice layout and a good flow.
But it wasn't news
There is nothing in this story that is remotely newsworthy. The information that FF:CC required four GBA's for multiplayer is months old. The price of the Game Boy Advance and link cables are similarly well known. No sources, written or spoken, are quoted in the article. There are no new facts being conveyed in the article. There is nothing at all that puts it in the realm of news.
Not only does the article contain no facts pushing it towards the news section, but it actually contains many opinions that should push it away from th news section. Calling the price of FF:CC "a fair bit" and "a significant expenditure" may seem innocuous, but it actually makes a large value judgement about what the author is willing to pay for the game. This is the kind ofthing that belongs in a preview or a review, not a news story. The suggestion of other things to do with the money only reinforces the fact that the author doesn't think FF:CC is worth the $400. Again, a fine point to make, but not in an objective news story. The article ends with a slight jab at the N-Gage, saying that FF:CC is "almost certainly the superior choice." Good point. Still not news.
Even the selection of this topic for an article is weighted with subjectivity. Why was there no similar article decrying the thousands of dollars it takes to buy four XBoxes, 16 controllers, and networking hardware for those who wish to play Halo "in the optimum... multiplayer configuartion." No news story about Dance Dance Revolution would decry the cost of an "optimum" $500 pad as a detriment to the gameplay. You can pick and choose what's worth the money all you want in the reviews section, but you can't do that kind of stuff in the news section!
The only explanation I can think of for this story ending up in news: Someone at Gamers.com had a brainstorm and realized that FF:CC will actually cost a lot for four people to play. They wanted to comment on this fact, but did not have a suitable reason to do so (It's way too early for a preview, and the article is too light for a feature). But news can be short and it gets posted every day. plus it gets lots of attention on the site. Why not post it in the news section? Great, done. Time for lunch.
Most visitors to the site will barely notice, I'm sure, as video game news is often just a petty excuse to spew opinions about the industry (see Spong.com, among others) But there has to be a standard. There has to be something that sets news apart from opinion, some objectivity and new information that seperates it from the subjective opinion-mongering that surrounds it. It's about time people started paying attention to this.
Spong.com gets burned in Shenmue III rumor shocker!
(In case you were wondering about the title of this post, I'm trying to emulate the sensationalist headline writing style of the always-good-for-a-laugh Spong.com staff. Please note I would never intentionally write a headline this bad for any other reason)
Today's karmic lesson: When you play with rumors, sometimes you get burned.
At the forefront of this particular example, as they always seem to be with unsubstantiated rumor-mongering, is Spong.com who as recently as Monday posted this article citing "various Japanese news sources" (none of them named) as saying that Shenmue III is officially in production. They go as far to say that this new "special edition" Shenmue III will include copies of the first two games along with the new installment, for the price of a regular game. If this all sounds like the wishful thinking of some pining fan, well that's because... it is.
A Computer and Video Games story quotes an SOE spokesperson as saying, "there was a bit of Japanese text on the AM2 site which is actually a letter from a fan, saying what they want to see in the game." The article goes on: "Apparently this letter has been taken as official confirmation from AM2 itself in some quarters. Dashed hopes again then - hopefully we'll have some genuine Shenmue news for you one day..."
Now to be fair, Spong showed some unusual trepidation when posting this latest rumor on Monday. "We’re not sure exactly how concrete this all is at present," the article said in what can possibly be described as coincidental foresight. But they couldn't leave well enough alone: "The considerable spike in Shenmue III gossip of late, combined with the fact that Sega recently overhauled its official Shenmue site, leads us to believe that something is brewing in the depths of AM-2." This is what passes for video game news, Spong? "Ooh, there's a lot of gossip and they're redoing the web site. Somthing must be going on! Post post post!" (note: obviosuly not an actual quote from anywhere except my fevered imaginings)
When Spong got wind that their story was based on a simple fan letter, they handled it less than well. In a Tuesday follow up headlined "Shenmue III shows Sega's newfound cunning," Spong tries to play itself off as the victim, blaming Sega's "new level of contrite business acumen" and "a new-found software-centric spin machine," for the misinformation. The article goes on to accuse Sega of "fueling the fire somewhat," generating "a feverish level of anticipation" and putting up "a wall of silence that, in fairness, isn't really necessary." They then backtrack hard and report on the only concrete piece of Shenmue III news they actually have, a quote from Yu Suzuki: "Preliminary work for Shenmue III is underway, though nothing technical has been completed. Art and design has been going on for some time."
If you had just stuck to that story in the first place, you wouldn't be in this mess. What probably happened is that Spong.com was so intent on getting some news, any news, on Shenmue III out there, that they went with a risky story based on a questionable source with no attribution or confirmation. When this gamble didn't pay off, it was a load of sour grapes from Spong, who should be used to this sort of thing by now. Yes, every company has a hype machine in place for its latest releases, but this does not absolve the news organization from posting what is a sloppy, ill-researched and rumor-heavy story. Saying that Sega intentionally tried to mislead you when your article show no evidence of even trying to contact Sega about the story is hypocrisy of the highest order. No one at Sega is out to get you, Spong. You just messed up. Admit it.
Other sites handled the admittedly confusing situation much better. GamerFeed posted their original story with a disclaimer saying that "none of the information in this story has been confirmed by Sega," and then posted an update culled from C&VG that took on a rather mature, reflective tone: "The deal below seemed too good to be true anyway. Hopefully, Shenmue III will be confirmed soon. Keep your fingers crossed." GamePro's story was simply titled "Is Shenmue III happening" and detailed the rumors surrounding the game without making a firm announcement one way or the other (as they couldn't, really, without confirmation from Sega). Slashdot Games posted a summary from Insert Credit that detailed a timeline of the conflicting announcements and mentions a "minor controversy and buzz" around the latest announcement.
None of these sites were as irresponsible in their news postings as Spong, and none of them were as bitter when a more complete picture came to light.
A sentence near the end of the Tuesday Spong article gives a good look into the psyche of the staff there: "Indeed, it would be fair to argue that a game announcement has never been so openly longed for as this." Wishing for something does not make it so, Spong. When you grasp at straws, sometimes all you get is air. There's no reason to be all pissy about it. Admit your mistake and move on.
Today's karmic lesson: When you play with rumors, sometimes you get burned.
At the forefront of this particular example, as they always seem to be with unsubstantiated rumor-mongering, is Spong.com who as recently as Monday posted this article citing "various Japanese news sources" (none of them named) as saying that Shenmue III is officially in production. They go as far to say that this new "special edition" Shenmue III will include copies of the first two games along with the new installment, for the price of a regular game. If this all sounds like the wishful thinking of some pining fan, well that's because... it is.
A Computer and Video Games story quotes an SOE spokesperson as saying, "there was a bit of Japanese text on the AM2 site which is actually a letter from a fan, saying what they want to see in the game." The article goes on: "Apparently this letter has been taken as official confirmation from AM2 itself in some quarters. Dashed hopes again then - hopefully we'll have some genuine Shenmue news for you one day..."
Now to be fair, Spong showed some unusual trepidation when posting this latest rumor on Monday. "We’re not sure exactly how concrete this all is at present," the article said in what can possibly be described as coincidental foresight. But they couldn't leave well enough alone: "The considerable spike in Shenmue III gossip of late, combined with the fact that Sega recently overhauled its official Shenmue site, leads us to believe that something is brewing in the depths of AM-2." This is what passes for video game news, Spong? "Ooh, there's a lot of gossip and they're redoing the web site. Somthing must be going on! Post post post!" (note: obviosuly not an actual quote from anywhere except my fevered imaginings)
When Spong got wind that their story was based on a simple fan letter, they handled it less than well. In a Tuesday follow up headlined "Shenmue III shows Sega's newfound cunning," Spong tries to play itself off as the victim, blaming Sega's "new level of contrite business acumen" and "a new-found software-centric spin machine," for the misinformation. The article goes on to accuse Sega of "fueling the fire somewhat," generating "a feverish level of anticipation" and putting up "a wall of silence that, in fairness, isn't really necessary." They then backtrack hard and report on the only concrete piece of Shenmue III news they actually have, a quote from Yu Suzuki: "Preliminary work for Shenmue III is underway, though nothing technical has been completed. Art and design has been going on for some time."
If you had just stuck to that story in the first place, you wouldn't be in this mess. What probably happened is that Spong.com was so intent on getting some news, any news, on Shenmue III out there, that they went with a risky story based on a questionable source with no attribution or confirmation. When this gamble didn't pay off, it was a load of sour grapes from Spong, who should be used to this sort of thing by now. Yes, every company has a hype machine in place for its latest releases, but this does not absolve the news organization from posting what is a sloppy, ill-researched and rumor-heavy story. Saying that Sega intentionally tried to mislead you when your article show no evidence of even trying to contact Sega about the story is hypocrisy of the highest order. No one at Sega is out to get you, Spong. You just messed up. Admit it.
Other sites handled the admittedly confusing situation much better. GamerFeed posted their original story with a disclaimer saying that "none of the information in this story has been confirmed by Sega," and then posted an update culled from C&VG that took on a rather mature, reflective tone: "The deal below seemed too good to be true anyway. Hopefully, Shenmue III will be confirmed soon. Keep your fingers crossed." GamePro's story was simply titled "Is Shenmue III happening" and detailed the rumors surrounding the game without making a firm announcement one way or the other (as they couldn't, really, without confirmation from Sega). Slashdot Games posted a summary from Insert Credit that detailed a timeline of the conflicting announcements and mentions a "minor controversy and buzz" around the latest announcement.
None of these sites were as irresponsible in their news postings as Spong, and none of them were as bitter when a more complete picture came to light.
A sentence near the end of the Tuesday Spong article gives a good look into the psyche of the staff there: "Indeed, it would be fair to argue that a game announcement has never been so openly longed for as this." Wishing for something does not make it so, Spong. When you grasp at straws, sometimes all you get is air. There's no reason to be all pissy about it. Admit your mistake and move on.
Monday, July 21, 2003
Incoherent Effusive Praise - Insert Credit
Welcome to the first of what I hope will be many installments of "incoherent effusive praise," the place where I babble on about a web site, magazine, or cool piece of writing that I previously had not known about. Know something I should praise effusively? Tell me about it.
Today's praiseworthy target: Insert Credit
What makes it so great?: Insert Credit is less about games and more about the experience of playing games.
Well, actually, it's obviously, ostensibly about games. "The more obscure, the more Japanese, the better," seems to be the unofficial motto. This is not a site for the mainstream. It's a site by the hardcore gamer for the hardcore gamer. References to games both classic and contemporary are thrown out at such a clip that a non-gamer would have trouble keeping up. This is a good thing. Instead of appealing to the lowest-common-denominator casual gamers who know next-to-nothing about their new hobby, the staff of Insert Credit is not afraid to revel in their unabashed fandom. They're not afraid to make fun of gaming "pretenders" or otherr magazines (protip: GamePro) A reader gets the impression that they knowers and lovers of all things video games, and that they expect their readers to be too.
But I've gotten off my main point. The appeal of Insert Credit is that is is all about the experience of playing games. The reviews and features don't harp on the technical or stylistic choices a designer made. Instead, they embody the feeling of playing/experiencing/living/being a game in text form. The writings are full of nostalgic longing for the simple pleasures of games long past, but not so much so that they lose sight of the brilliant pleasures of many of today's games. Reviews on IC are not focused on frame rates or soundtrack quality (although those things do get mentioned). IC reviews hinge on how good a game is as an experience.
The features take the experience of the hardcore gamer and discuss how it extends into real life. From a review of a minibosses concert to a balanced discussion of DDR addiction, the features engender a feeling that video games are more than simple diversions to these people. The games are an important part of their lives, lives that don't seem to fit the reclusive, loner stereotypes that haunt gamers to this day. The subtle and effective writing is peppere with snippets of conversations that show a high level of socialization and integration into the gaming "scene," (if you'll pardon the expression). The staff at IC is connected to both the real world and the virtual world in a way that made this reader think about how games fit into the larger picture of his life.
By now you probably have no idea what I'm talking about. But I've just spent an hour poring through Insert Credit's massive archives, and I'm not even close to satisfied. This is a web site that I will be haunting through for a long time to come. It's an entirely fresh take on the tired and stale world of mainstream video game journalism, and for that it deserves praise. Give it a visit and you'll probably feel the same way.
Today's praiseworthy target: Insert Credit
What makes it so great?: Insert Credit is less about games and more about the experience of playing games.
Well, actually, it's obviously, ostensibly about games. "The more obscure, the more Japanese, the better," seems to be the unofficial motto. This is not a site for the mainstream. It's a site by the hardcore gamer for the hardcore gamer. References to games both classic and contemporary are thrown out at such a clip that a non-gamer would have trouble keeping up. This is a good thing. Instead of appealing to the lowest-common-denominator casual gamers who know next-to-nothing about their new hobby, the staff of Insert Credit is not afraid to revel in their unabashed fandom. They're not afraid to make fun of gaming "pretenders" or otherr magazines (protip: GamePro) A reader gets the impression that they knowers and lovers of all things video games, and that they expect their readers to be too.
But I've gotten off my main point. The appeal of Insert Credit is that is is all about the experience of playing games. The reviews and features don't harp on the technical or stylistic choices a designer made. Instead, they embody the feeling of playing/experiencing/living/being a game in text form. The writings are full of nostalgic longing for the simple pleasures of games long past, but not so much so that they lose sight of the brilliant pleasures of many of today's games. Reviews on IC are not focused on frame rates or soundtrack quality (although those things do get mentioned). IC reviews hinge on how good a game is as an experience.
The features take the experience of the hardcore gamer and discuss how it extends into real life. From a review of a minibosses concert to a balanced discussion of DDR addiction, the features engender a feeling that video games are more than simple diversions to these people. The games are an important part of their lives, lives that don't seem to fit the reclusive, loner stereotypes that haunt gamers to this day. The subtle and effective writing is peppere with snippets of conversations that show a high level of socialization and integration into the gaming "scene," (if you'll pardon the expression). The staff at IC is connected to both the real world and the virtual world in a way that made this reader think about how games fit into the larger picture of his life.
By now you probably have no idea what I'm talking about. But I've just spent an hour poring through Insert Credit's massive archives, and I'm not even close to satisfied. This is a web site that I will be haunting through for a long time to come. It's an entirely fresh take on the tired and stale world of mainstream video game journalism, and for that it deserves praise. Give it a visit and you'll probably feel the same way.
Friday, July 18, 2003
XBox sales report - Where's the context?
Today's lesson: A dozen different outlets can report on the same story in a dozen different ways.
Case in point, the internet's reaction to this Reuter's piece and this Microsoft Press Release (through Yahoo/PR Newswire-FirstCall). As I see it, there were the following facts to be culled from these articles (in order of importance):
Which leads to today's second lesson: Context is important
Below is a summary of how a few web sites handled these facts in their articles. Note especially the divergent headlines, and look out for a few rants by me on that second lesson.
GamerFeed - Xbox Sales Pass 9 Million
GamerFeed mainly focused on fact #1 above, looking strictly at the sales numbers, (including worldwide breakdown) and briefly mentioning the effect of the price cut. A good summary article, but still no mention of competing worldwide numbers by Nintendo and Sony...
Gamers.com - Microsoft Approaches 10 Million Xboxes Sold
So did they "pass 9 million" or "approach 10 million"? The difference is... hmmm... a million units! While MS could be said to technically have been approaching 10M units since day one (their first unit got them one closer!), I think the 10M number is misleading in this headline, especially when the actual sales numbers are closer to 9M than 10M.
Gamers.com mentioned MS's sales projections and Live numbers, and also briefly compared the Xbox's numbers to the PS2's (51.2 million worldwide) and the GameCube (9.4 million worldwide... a dead heat!). The Sony and Nintendo numbers are absolutely neccesary to provide context for this article! With no competing numbers to compare it too, the reader has no idea whether 9.4 million is high or low, impressive or depressing. Any article on this subject that does not at least mention similar numbers for Nintendo and Sony is found wanting in my book.
Spong - Bach: Price cut not the power behind upped Xbox sales
Leave it to Spong, the internet equivalent of a video game tabloid, to focus on a piece of spin instead of a fact for their headline. But Spong bests itself with blatant editorializing in the second paragraph of the article:
"Bach also mentioned that global sales of Xbox now stand at 9.4 million, a respectable count by anyone’s reckoning." (emphasis added)
A respectable count? Who are you to say what a respectable count is? Just report on the numbers for Sony and Microsoft (which Spong, of course, didn't do) and let the reader decide what's respectable. Leave your opinions to the editorial section, please! Moving on as quickly as possible...
EvilAvatar - Xbox #3 Worldwide?
An interesting spin on the story based on some number-crunching by the EA crew. First, the article focuses on the current sales numbers and projections, and goes to a Forbes copy of the Reuters article to give more details. Then, they do some digging to make the important headline revalation.
"According to Japanese site Quiter, the GameCube has sold 5.13 million in North America, 1.95 million in Europe & Australia, and 2.47 million in Japan - totaling 9.55 million GameCubes worldwide since launch. And of course Sony's PS2 is sitting at around 51.2 million worldwide since their launch."
The 9.55M mark that EA sets is only slightly different from the 9.4M number cited previously for Nintendo, but it's enough to break the worldwide dead heat for second place and push Microsoft down to third. I'd be interested to find out what caused the disparity in numbers between the various sources (although my best guess would be simple rounding error). Kudos to EA for 1) including Sony and Nintendo's numbers and 2) striving for accuracy where just being close would have sufficed.
TotalVideoGames - Xbox Sales Rise
Click on that link and look at that big table in the middle of the article. Forget that the headline is extremely unhelpful. Forget that they say the sales increase was "spurned on by the recent price productions" despite Bach's assertion that it wasn't really. In that table, TVG concisely answers the question on everybody's lips: What do these numbers mean? TVG breaks it down by territory and gives us totals to show exactly where MS's 9.4 million number came from and how it compares to their competitors' numbers. TVG even analyzes the numbers a bit:
"As you can see from the sales tables above, the difference between GameCube and Xbox sales is negligent at best, with Microsoft’ stronger performance in America and Europe all but wiped out by their non-existent support in Japan. Indeed this is an area that Microsoft will have to address and correct in time for the launch of Xbox2, particularly if they wish to continue attracting the crucial support of Japanese developers."
Now pay attention... this is an important distinction (Spong... I'm talking to you): What TVG did in that last line was analysis. They looked at the numbers and predicted what their effect might be in the future. This was not editorializing, which is giving a blanket opinion on how good or bad these numbers are based on no other facts. It's a fine line between the two, but I think most people knowthe difference.
GamesIndustry.biz - Microsoft results reveal new Xbox sales figures
Speaking of analysis, we'll finish off with what is quickly becoming my favorite site for business related industry news. Where most sites settled for a one or two paragraph summary of the Reuters article, GI.biz took some time and space to break the situation down for the reader. They start with the same facts -- 9.4M sold, 14.5-16M projected -- but also mention that these numbers are "far, far lower than some estimates recently." They cite one piece of research as predicting sales of 13 million by this point. While I would have liked them to name their source, the fact that they are at least taking a critical look at these numbers instead of jumping on the "9.4 million is a lot" bandwagon is comforting.
The article mentions the obligatory Bach quote, then gets into the analysis: Xbox is struggling outside North America ("A massive 6.2 million of its Xbox installed base - some 66 per cent, or two thirds - resides in North America") and PS2 is still beating the pants off of everyone ("Sony has no territory in which it is weak, while the Cube and the Xbox clearly only have one territory each in which they could be considered strong"). Again, it's all about the context. 9.4 million is just a number unless you compare it with other numbers and tell us why those numbers matter.
Reporting the numbers from a press release is all fine and good, but it should only be the starting point for good reporting and analysis. As journalists, you're supposed to add some value to the numbers by giving them context and reporting on their significance. Anything less, and you might as well be in public relations.
Case in point, the internet's reaction to this Reuter's piece and this Microsoft Press Release (through Yahoo/PR Newswire-FirstCall). As I see it, there were the following facts to be culled from these articles (in order of importance):
- The Xbox has sold 9.4 million units worldwide (6.2M in North America, 2.2M in Europe, 1M in Asia)
- Microsoft predicts sales between 14.5 and 16 million through next year
- Xbox Live has 500,000 subscribers, which MS hopes to raise to one million in a year.
- The attach rate for the Xbox (games/system) is 5.4:1.
- "Home and Entertainment posted stronger than expected results in the fourth quarter, with 8% revenue growth over the prior year on higher than forecasted Xbox® console sales." (from the press release)
Which leads to today's second lesson: Context is important
Below is a summary of how a few web sites handled these facts in their articles. Note especially the divergent headlines, and look out for a few rants by me on that second lesson.
GamerFeed - Xbox Sales Pass 9 Million
GamerFeed mainly focused on fact #1 above, looking strictly at the sales numbers, (including worldwide breakdown) and briefly mentioning the effect of the price cut. A good summary article, but still no mention of competing worldwide numbers by Nintendo and Sony...
Gamers.com - Microsoft Approaches 10 Million Xboxes Sold
So did they "pass 9 million" or "approach 10 million"? The difference is... hmmm... a million units! While MS could be said to technically have been approaching 10M units since day one (their first unit got them one closer!), I think the 10M number is misleading in this headline, especially when the actual sales numbers are closer to 9M than 10M.
Gamers.com mentioned MS's sales projections and Live numbers, and also briefly compared the Xbox's numbers to the PS2's (51.2 million worldwide) and the GameCube (9.4 million worldwide... a dead heat!). The Sony and Nintendo numbers are absolutely neccesary to provide context for this article! With no competing numbers to compare it too, the reader has no idea whether 9.4 million is high or low, impressive or depressing. Any article on this subject that does not at least mention similar numbers for Nintendo and Sony is found wanting in my book.
Spong - Bach: Price cut not the power behind upped Xbox sales
Leave it to Spong, the internet equivalent of a video game tabloid, to focus on a piece of spin instead of a fact for their headline. But Spong bests itself with blatant editorializing in the second paragraph of the article:
"Bach also mentioned that global sales of Xbox now stand at 9.4 million, a respectable count by anyone’s reckoning." (emphasis added)
A respectable count? Who are you to say what a respectable count is? Just report on the numbers for Sony and Microsoft (which Spong, of course, didn't do) and let the reader decide what's respectable. Leave your opinions to the editorial section, please! Moving on as quickly as possible...
EvilAvatar - Xbox #3 Worldwide?
An interesting spin on the story based on some number-crunching by the EA crew. First, the article focuses on the current sales numbers and projections, and goes to a Forbes copy of the Reuters article to give more details. Then, they do some digging to make the important headline revalation.
"According to Japanese site Quiter, the GameCube has sold 5.13 million in North America, 1.95 million in Europe & Australia, and 2.47 million in Japan - totaling 9.55 million GameCubes worldwide since launch. And of course Sony's PS2 is sitting at around 51.2 million worldwide since their launch."
The 9.55M mark that EA sets is only slightly different from the 9.4M number cited previously for Nintendo, but it's enough to break the worldwide dead heat for second place and push Microsoft down to third. I'd be interested to find out what caused the disparity in numbers between the various sources (although my best guess would be simple rounding error). Kudos to EA for 1) including Sony and Nintendo's numbers and 2) striving for accuracy where just being close would have sufficed.
TotalVideoGames - Xbox Sales Rise
Click on that link and look at that big table in the middle of the article. Forget that the headline is extremely unhelpful. Forget that they say the sales increase was "spurned on by the recent price productions" despite Bach's assertion that it wasn't really. In that table, TVG concisely answers the question on everybody's lips: What do these numbers mean? TVG breaks it down by territory and gives us totals to show exactly where MS's 9.4 million number came from and how it compares to their competitors' numbers. TVG even analyzes the numbers a bit:
"As you can see from the sales tables above, the difference between GameCube and Xbox sales is negligent at best, with Microsoft’ stronger performance in America and Europe all but wiped out by their non-existent support in Japan. Indeed this is an area that Microsoft will have to address and correct in time for the launch of Xbox2, particularly if they wish to continue attracting the crucial support of Japanese developers."
Now pay attention... this is an important distinction (Spong... I'm talking to you): What TVG did in that last line was analysis. They looked at the numbers and predicted what their effect might be in the future. This was not editorializing, which is giving a blanket opinion on how good or bad these numbers are based on no other facts. It's a fine line between the two, but I think most people knowthe difference.
GamesIndustry.biz - Microsoft results reveal new Xbox sales figures
Speaking of analysis, we'll finish off with what is quickly becoming my favorite site for business related industry news. Where most sites settled for a one or two paragraph summary of the Reuters article, GI.biz took some time and space to break the situation down for the reader. They start with the same facts -- 9.4M sold, 14.5-16M projected -- but also mention that these numbers are "far, far lower than some estimates recently." They cite one piece of research as predicting sales of 13 million by this point. While I would have liked them to name their source, the fact that they are at least taking a critical look at these numbers instead of jumping on the "9.4 million is a lot" bandwagon is comforting.
The article mentions the obligatory Bach quote, then gets into the analysis: Xbox is struggling outside North America ("A massive 6.2 million of its Xbox installed base - some 66 per cent, or two thirds - resides in North America") and PS2 is still beating the pants off of everyone ("Sony has no territory in which it is weak, while the Cube and the Xbox clearly only have one territory each in which they could be considered strong"). Again, it's all about the context. 9.4 million is just a number unless you compare it with other numbers and tell us why those numbers matter.
Reporting the numbers from a press release is all fine and good, but it should only be the starting point for good reporting and analysis. As journalists, you're supposed to add some value to the numbers by giving them context and reporting on their significance. Anything less, and you might as well be in public relations.
Wednesday, July 16, 2003
Codename: Rumor
It doesn't take much to get the internet rumor mill going. In this case, all it took was an article at Computer and Video Games (C&VG) citing "one UK development source," as saying Microsoft's next system is being codenamed "Xenon" internally.
First off, even if this story ends up being confirmed, I have to wonder whether it's actually news. What is the point of telling fans about a name that C&VG admits "is highly unlikely to be associated with the final product." What is the possible news value associated with letting an already information-glutted public know what might be the codename for a system that isn't coming out for two years? Was the "X-Box 2" moniker everyone had been using insufficient? Was there a public need to know that someone somewhere is calling the thing "Xenon"? It's a tough case to make, not that anyone probably had to make it to get it posted on C&VG.
Secondly, given that the entire story rests on the testimony of one unnamed development source, the "news" here is really just " idle gossip," anyway, as C&VG admits. Which begs the question: is C&VG in the business of news or in the business of gossip? Would the Washington Post run a story citing one unnamed Pentagon official as saying the War in Iraq was being renamed "Operation Duck Hunt"? Of course not. They would either (1) seek confirmation from other sources or (2) force the source to go on the record and put his name behind his statements. If they were forced into a corner on a big story, they would at least seek comment from the head of the Defense Department or a senior level official on the rumor. C&VG decided to do none of these, instead running an unimportant story with a shaky foundation. I don't care how plausible the name sounds or how trustworthy your source is, writing a speculative news story based on one source is not acceptable.
Of course, one rumor begets more rumors, and before you know it the whole of the link-and-quote internet is infected with the Xenon bug, and more! C&VG, not content to file a story with just one major rumor, starts us off by saying that "current industry speculation" suggests that Microsoft won't name their next system X-Box 2 for fear that it will be inferred by the public as less than the Playstation 3, purely from a numerical standpoint. Whether this "industry speculation" is coming from outside industry analysts or C&VG's own editors is unclear, although my educated guess would be the latter. GamesIndustry.biz says that "current bets are on 'XBox Next' as the brand name," although it's anyone's guess who is actually making those bets.
XBoxActive goes out of its way to call Xenon the "official codename" for the X-Box 2. In fact, they broke the rumor about a few days before C&VG did, but buried it in a rumors column with absolutely no attribution, not even an unnamed source. "The Hedgehog" goes on to say that you shouldn't expect DVD-RW capabilities from the Xenon, but should expect backwards compatibility and XBox Live support at launch. While these are good educated guesses, I can't take them as any more than that unless someone at Microsoft or some other gaming company is saying them.
Spong continues the exagerations by saying on Monday that the Xenon name "is now in common use at both Microsoft HQ and third-party development studios." Their source for this bold assertion? "Senior development sources," which the article does not name. I would not be surprised if their "senior development sources" and the "UK development source" that C&VG cited are one and the same. Without any names attached to the statements, there is no way of knowing.
Oh... in the excitement of all the rumors about Xenon, I forgot to mention that Nintendo's new system is being called the N5. Spong, never one to be out-rumored, broke this amazing story on Friday, citing no source more than "gossip within the development community." This did not stop GamerFeed and GamesIndustry.biz, among others, from running with the story, if a bit skeptically. GamerFeed was quick to point out that Nintendo had not confirmed the report, simlar to what they did in their Xenon story (in which they cited the entire "UK development community. Amazing how that one unnamed source got so big so fast). GI.biz called the N5 name "news to us" and pointed out that they had been using such a codename for a while because "it's easier to type than 'the console that Nintendo are doing after GameCube'." Could Spong be confusing internet shorthand for "industry sources?" Hmmmm.
I will admit that there is some value in reporting industry rumors. Speculating about things like names and sequels and release dates before solid information is available gets the public discourse going and is just plain fun to think about. But such rumor-mongering is best left to a seperate rumor column, and should not be passed off as official news when it is really just information "according to men on the internet" (great quote from GI.biz)
First off, even if this story ends up being confirmed, I have to wonder whether it's actually news. What is the point of telling fans about a name that C&VG admits "is highly unlikely to be associated with the final product." What is the possible news value associated with letting an already information-glutted public know what might be the codename for a system that isn't coming out for two years? Was the "X-Box 2" moniker everyone had been using insufficient? Was there a public need to know that someone somewhere is calling the thing "Xenon"? It's a tough case to make, not that anyone probably had to make it to get it posted on C&VG.
Secondly, given that the entire story rests on the testimony of one unnamed development source, the "news" here is really just " idle gossip," anyway, as C&VG admits. Which begs the question: is C&VG in the business of news or in the business of gossip? Would the Washington Post run a story citing one unnamed Pentagon official as saying the War in Iraq was being renamed "Operation Duck Hunt"? Of course not. They would either (1) seek confirmation from other sources or (2) force the source to go on the record and put his name behind his statements. If they were forced into a corner on a big story, they would at least seek comment from the head of the Defense Department or a senior level official on the rumor. C&VG decided to do none of these, instead running an unimportant story with a shaky foundation. I don't care how plausible the name sounds or how trustworthy your source is, writing a speculative news story based on one source is not acceptable.
Of course, one rumor begets more rumors, and before you know it the whole of the link-and-quote internet is infected with the Xenon bug, and more! C&VG, not content to file a story with just one major rumor, starts us off by saying that "current industry speculation" suggests that Microsoft won't name their next system X-Box 2 for fear that it will be inferred by the public as less than the Playstation 3, purely from a numerical standpoint. Whether this "industry speculation" is coming from outside industry analysts or C&VG's own editors is unclear, although my educated guess would be the latter. GamesIndustry.biz says that "current bets are on 'XBox Next' as the brand name," although it's anyone's guess who is actually making those bets.
XBoxActive goes out of its way to call Xenon the "official codename" for the X-Box 2. In fact, they broke the rumor about a few days before C&VG did, but buried it in a rumors column with absolutely no attribution, not even an unnamed source. "The Hedgehog" goes on to say that you shouldn't expect DVD-RW capabilities from the Xenon, but should expect backwards compatibility and XBox Live support at launch. While these are good educated guesses, I can't take them as any more than that unless someone at Microsoft or some other gaming company is saying them.
Spong continues the exagerations by saying on Monday that the Xenon name "is now in common use at both Microsoft HQ and third-party development studios." Their source for this bold assertion? "Senior development sources," which the article does not name. I would not be surprised if their "senior development sources" and the "UK development source" that C&VG cited are one and the same. Without any names attached to the statements, there is no way of knowing.
Oh... in the excitement of all the rumors about Xenon, I forgot to mention that Nintendo's new system is being called the N5. Spong, never one to be out-rumored, broke this amazing story on Friday, citing no source more than "gossip within the development community." This did not stop GamerFeed and GamesIndustry.biz, among others, from running with the story, if a bit skeptically. GamerFeed was quick to point out that Nintendo had not confirmed the report, simlar to what they did in their Xenon story (in which they cited the entire "UK development community. Amazing how that one unnamed source got so big so fast). GI.biz called the N5 name "news to us" and pointed out that they had been using such a codename for a while because "it's easier to type than 'the console that Nintendo are doing after GameCube'." Could Spong be confusing internet shorthand for "industry sources?" Hmmmm.
I will admit that there is some value in reporting industry rumors. Speculating about things like names and sequels and release dates before solid information is available gets the public discourse going and is just plain fun to think about. But such rumor-mongering is best left to a seperate rumor column, and should not be passed off as official news when it is really just information "according to men on the internet" (great quote from GI.biz)
Tuesday, July 15, 2003
VG in Fiction: D.B. Weiss' Lucky Wander Boy
Welcome to what I hope will be a continuing feature on this blog: My analysis of how video games and related topics are handled in popular (and unpopular) fiction. I know that, technically, fictional writing about video games isn't journalism, but I believe the way fiction authors deal with the medium gives some insight into how they are perceived by the public at large. Besides, a lot of what is passed of as video game journalism ends up actually being fiction anyway, so what's the difference really? =P
Anyway... Lucky Wander Boy. One word review: Wow!
I can't remember the last time I was so drawn into a story. I went from thinking the main character was a jerk to thinking he was like me to thinking he was what I should be to thinking he was what I shouldn't be until finally I came to realize that he just was and that's all there is to it (This sort of buddhist tautological thinking is one of the book's main themes)
By now those of you who haven't read the book are horribly confused so let's away with the condensed summary: Adam Pennyman is an unfulfilled copywriter at a "new media" company who tries to find meaning in his life by tracking down Lucky Wander Boy, an existentialist game which is un-emulatable and near-impossible to find (it's also fictional, in case you were wondering, as is the grusomely detailed Mortal Kombat clone "Eviscerator"). In an effort to gather data for his "Catalogue of Obsolete Entertainments," Adam searches out information on the game's mythical third stage and it's equally hard-to-reach creator, Araki Itachi. As a rogue's gallery of secondary characters flow in and out of his life with the speed of a Donkey Kong barrel, Adam's obsession with the game leads him to write a script for a non-starter movie version, drive to a classic video game convention in the New Mexico desert and eventually fly out to Japan where the book's climactic scene is replayed through a half-dozen different scenarios, like a video game with a conveniently placed save-point.
The parts of Lucky Wander Boy many gamers will find most interesting are the snippets from the Catalogue in which Adam waxes philosphical about the greater meaning of Donkey Kong, Double Dragon, and other classic arcade games. Some may find these sections pretentious, but I found them refreshing; a new way to look at games in the light of higher film and literary criticism that most game "reviewers" can only dream of. Adam's ruminations on life in the context of video games are likely to resonate with any gamer who has ever considered what Pac-man actually experiences when he travels down those magic tunnels on the sides of the screen.
Weiss uses supplementary Catalogue entries on subjects like geekdom and imaginary games based on Adam's work-a-day life as an interesting literary device; revealing Adam's state-of-mind and personal cosmology without bludgeoning the reader with ponderous "who am I?" monologues. Weiss has a flair for subtelty that lets the reader fill in the blanks with their own experience where necessary to piece together what ends up being a rather complicated protagonist.
But the best thing about this book, from a gamer's point of view, is the way Weiss subsumes the language and culture of the haardcore gamer into a compelling fictional world. Adam speaks the same language of any gamer raised on the blips and bloops of Tempest and Galaxian in dingy arcades where the lights are always off and the no smoking signs are meant to be ignored. Adam's quest to immerse himself in that childhood arcade forever is a goal that any kid at heart can relate to and cheer on, (even through Adam's lapses into the insane, psuedo-religious ceremony involving an Atari 2600, and Intellivision, and the Fibonacci sequence).
Adam's story is the story of an entire generation that didn't want to leave the arcade when their mothers got back from shoe shopping, and didn't know what to do once they left. It should be on the must-read list of every such gamer.
Anyway... Lucky Wander Boy. One word review: Wow!
I can't remember the last time I was so drawn into a story. I went from thinking the main character was a jerk to thinking he was like me to thinking he was what I should be to thinking he was what I shouldn't be until finally I came to realize that he just was and that's all there is to it (This sort of buddhist tautological thinking is one of the book's main themes)
By now those of you who haven't read the book are horribly confused so let's away with the condensed summary: Adam Pennyman is an unfulfilled copywriter at a "new media" company who tries to find meaning in his life by tracking down Lucky Wander Boy, an existentialist game which is un-emulatable and near-impossible to find (it's also fictional, in case you were wondering, as is the grusomely detailed Mortal Kombat clone "Eviscerator"). In an effort to gather data for his "Catalogue of Obsolete Entertainments," Adam searches out information on the game's mythical third stage and it's equally hard-to-reach creator, Araki Itachi. As a rogue's gallery of secondary characters flow in and out of his life with the speed of a Donkey Kong barrel, Adam's obsession with the game leads him to write a script for a non-starter movie version, drive to a classic video game convention in the New Mexico desert and eventually fly out to Japan where the book's climactic scene is replayed through a half-dozen different scenarios, like a video game with a conveniently placed save-point.
The parts of Lucky Wander Boy many gamers will find most interesting are the snippets from the Catalogue in which Adam waxes philosphical about the greater meaning of Donkey Kong, Double Dragon, and other classic arcade games. Some may find these sections pretentious, but I found them refreshing; a new way to look at games in the light of higher film and literary criticism that most game "reviewers" can only dream of. Adam's ruminations on life in the context of video games are likely to resonate with any gamer who has ever considered what Pac-man actually experiences when he travels down those magic tunnels on the sides of the screen.
Weiss uses supplementary Catalogue entries on subjects like geekdom and imaginary games based on Adam's work-a-day life as an interesting literary device; revealing Adam's state-of-mind and personal cosmology without bludgeoning the reader with ponderous "who am I?" monologues. Weiss has a flair for subtelty that lets the reader fill in the blanks with their own experience where necessary to piece together what ends up being a rather complicated protagonist.
But the best thing about this book, from a gamer's point of view, is the way Weiss subsumes the language and culture of the haardcore gamer into a compelling fictional world. Adam speaks the same language of any gamer raised on the blips and bloops of Tempest and Galaxian in dingy arcades where the lights are always off and the no smoking signs are meant to be ignored. Adam's quest to immerse himself in that childhood arcade forever is a goal that any kid at heart can relate to and cheer on, (even through Adam's lapses into the insane, psuedo-religious ceremony involving an Atari 2600, and Intellivision, and the Fibonacci sequence).
Adam's story is the story of an entire generation that didn't want to leave the arcade when their mothers got back from shoe shopping, and didn't know what to do once they left. It should be on the must-read list of every such gamer.
Tuesday, July 8, 2003
Arguments and Differences Reign in VG Top 100 lists
IGN says it's Super Mario Bros. G4 and Entertainment Weekly say it's The Legend of Zelda: A Link to the Past. Electronic Gaming Monthly said it was Tetris, then said it was Super Metroid a few years later.
These widely varied picks for "the best video game of all time," show the differences of opinion that go into the making of each video game top 100 list.
This is not necessarily a bad thing. Each list is supposed to be a product of the writers and editors that make it, and it's hard to get any two gamers to even agree on a top ten list. But despite the different opinions that go into each list, the same games seem to show up time and time again near the top of many lists (Tetris is in the top four of all four lists mentioned earlier). Are there certain agreed-upon criteria that make some lists more objective than others?
"Yes, of course this list is entirely objective. Just don't ask the other guy," said Peer Schneider of IGN, paraphrasing one of his favorite quotes from the Japanese story Rashomon. Schneider, who worked on IGN's top 100 list, said that objective ranking is only possible to a certain extent; much of it is just the editors' personal taste. "It's IGN's Top 100 Games -- very much a collective, objective, subjective ranking of our favorite games."
EGM Executive Editor Mark MacDonald, however, thinks that video games can be ranked more objectively. "Games, as subjective as they are, there are still objective criteria to them," said MacDonald, who worked on EGM's second list. "People who say, 'That's only your opinion,' they're wrong. It is your opinion, absolutely, but it can also be a matter of objective criteria."
MacDonald says things like backwards controls or jumpy frame rates are objective problems that most game players can agree on. "It's not always like chocolate ice cream, where you can like it or not with no evidence," MacDonald said. "Like they say in logic class: all truths are not equal."
At the same time, though, MacDonald acknowledges that "no two gamers are going to have the same list. There will never be the definitive list. You can make it as well thought out as possible, but that's pretty much all you can do."
Schneider said that comparing old and new shows the difficulty in generating an objective list. "Can we really list a game like Pitfall alongside infinitely more complex titles, released two decades later? The creation of any ranking is a subjective process that's bound to lead to plenty of disagreements."
Is a revolutionary game that started it's own genre better or worse than a newer game that improved on the graphics? MacDonald and the team at EGM asked a simple question of older games to help prevent the team from being blinded by nostalgia: "Would you pull it out now and play it today?"
"If [someone brings up an old game], but they never pull it out and play it, then we'll tell them to quiet down," MacDonald said. "If they say they played it last week, then it's definitely a consideration, but not be all end all. In general, the games that revolutionized the industry are the ones you'd still pull out and play."
In the end, Schneider said that gameplay fun and intelligent design were more important than influence or technical merits. "If you stress technological prowess or general influence too much, you'd end up with a list devoid of charming follow-ups like Ms. Pac-Man or SimCity 2000. The reasons for a game being "good" are manifold. A game is the sum of its parts -- and sometimes more; the balance of gameplay, graphics, presentation, sound, and how well everything is wrapped up into a unified whole."
But is an intangible "fun factor" really a strong enough criterion to rank an entire medium? You don't see other pop art forms like music and movies ranking themselves by how fun they are. For that matter, you rarely ever see top 100 lists for "higher" art like literature or painting. Is the ranking of video games itself indicative of an industry viewed merely as "an exciting form of pop-culture entertainment," as Entertainment Weekly put it in a press release?
"I think the things you think about for things like video games and movies... it's kind of silly when you think about it in terms of books, paintings, and sculpture." MacDonald said. "It has something to do with pop culture. Books are in [higher art], but video games and movies are only in pop culture."
Schneider, on the other hand, thinks video game style rankings are applicable to all art forms, as long as the ranking is done by people who know the subject matter. "Would I agree with anyone else's Top 100 Paintings? No, of course not. But the whole beauty of these lists is that you will remember things you thought you'd long forgotten. I can't tell you how many games came up on other people's lists during the selection process where I sat up and went 'Oh, man! Yeah, M.U.L.E. was great! That has to be on there!'"
Schneider also said he thinks video games are well suited to ranking because of the time constraints associated with playing them. "There just isn't enough to time anymore to go back and play all these games, so remembering them by writing about them is as close as we can
get."
MacDonald said he thinks that the drive to rank video game might be indicative of the industry's consumer-oriented nature. "It's really consumer driven more than something like painting or sculpture... it's much younger. As younger art forms, maybe more younger people are into them. I definitely think video games 100 years from now will be considered higher than today. As they broaden into different niches, they'll definitely be held in higher regard, but I don't know if this will affect how they're ranked."
Want more analysis of the video game journalism industry? Visit my blog at http://vgombud.blogspot.com
These widely varied picks for "the best video game of all time," show the differences of opinion that go into the making of each video game top 100 list.
This is not necessarily a bad thing. Each list is supposed to be a product of the writers and editors that make it, and it's hard to get any two gamers to even agree on a top ten list. But despite the different opinions that go into each list, the same games seem to show up time and time again near the top of many lists (Tetris is in the top four of all four lists mentioned earlier). Are there certain agreed-upon criteria that make some lists more objective than others?
"Yes, of course this list is entirely objective. Just don't ask the other guy," said Peer Schneider of IGN, paraphrasing one of his favorite quotes from the Japanese story Rashomon. Schneider, who worked on IGN's top 100 list, said that objective ranking is only possible to a certain extent; much of it is just the editors' personal taste. "It's IGN's Top 100 Games -- very much a collective, objective, subjective ranking of our favorite games."
EGM Executive Editor Mark MacDonald, however, thinks that video games can be ranked more objectively. "Games, as subjective as they are, there are still objective criteria to them," said MacDonald, who worked on EGM's second list. "People who say, 'That's only your opinion,' they're wrong. It is your opinion, absolutely, but it can also be a matter of objective criteria."
MacDonald says things like backwards controls or jumpy frame rates are objective problems that most game players can agree on. "It's not always like chocolate ice cream, where you can like it or not with no evidence," MacDonald said. "Like they say in logic class: all truths are not equal."
At the same time, though, MacDonald acknowledges that "no two gamers are going to have the same list. There will never be the definitive list. You can make it as well thought out as possible, but that's pretty much all you can do."
Schneider said that comparing old and new shows the difficulty in generating an objective list. "Can we really list a game like Pitfall alongside infinitely more complex titles, released two decades later? The creation of any ranking is a subjective process that's bound to lead to plenty of disagreements."
Is a revolutionary game that started it's own genre better or worse than a newer game that improved on the graphics? MacDonald and the team at EGM asked a simple question of older games to help prevent the team from being blinded by nostalgia: "Would you pull it out now and play it today?"
"If [someone brings up an old game], but they never pull it out and play it, then we'll tell them to quiet down," MacDonald said. "If they say they played it last week, then it's definitely a consideration, but not be all end all. In general, the games that revolutionized the industry are the ones you'd still pull out and play."
In the end, Schneider said that gameplay fun and intelligent design were more important than influence or technical merits. "If you stress technological prowess or general influence too much, you'd end up with a list devoid of charming follow-ups like Ms. Pac-Man or SimCity 2000. The reasons for a game being "good" are manifold. A game is the sum of its parts -- and sometimes more; the balance of gameplay, graphics, presentation, sound, and how well everything is wrapped up into a unified whole."
But is an intangible "fun factor" really a strong enough criterion to rank an entire medium? You don't see other pop art forms like music and movies ranking themselves by how fun they are. For that matter, you rarely ever see top 100 lists for "higher" art like literature or painting. Is the ranking of video games itself indicative of an industry viewed merely as "an exciting form of pop-culture entertainment," as Entertainment Weekly put it in a press release?
"I think the things you think about for things like video games and movies... it's kind of silly when you think about it in terms of books, paintings, and sculpture." MacDonald said. "It has something to do with pop culture. Books are in [higher art], but video games and movies are only in pop culture."
Schneider, on the other hand, thinks video game style rankings are applicable to all art forms, as long as the ranking is done by people who know the subject matter. "Would I agree with anyone else's Top 100 Paintings? No, of course not. But the whole beauty of these lists is that you will remember things you thought you'd long forgotten. I can't tell you how many games came up on other people's lists during the selection process where I sat up and went 'Oh, man! Yeah, M.U.L.E. was great! That has to be on there!'"
Schneider also said he thinks video games are well suited to ranking because of the time constraints associated with playing them. "There just isn't enough to time anymore to go back and play all these games, so remembering them by writing about them is as close as we can
get."
MacDonald said he thinks that the drive to rank video game might be indicative of the industry's consumer-oriented nature. "It's really consumer driven more than something like painting or sculpture... it's much younger. As younger art forms, maybe more younger people are into them. I definitely think video games 100 years from now will be considered higher than today. As they broaden into different niches, they'll definitely be held in higher regard, but I don't know if this will affect how they're ranked."
Want more analysis of the video game journalism industry? Visit my blog at http://vgombud.blogspot.com
Wednesday, July 2, 2003
The Ombudsman Had Landed
Since I'm busy working on my next JS101 column tonight, I thought I'd crank out a quick post detailing what some of you thought about my first article about the whole Half-Life 2 debacle.
"Nice piece and a good idea, you should cover the gameing [sic] magazines as well, they could use a good dose of oversite on the PR vs. Journalism
issue."
-Trister Keane
Thanks Trister. I plan on covering the gaming magazines soon. As for the PR vs. journalism issue, see my latest article about the "innovative" new Mario game.
"perfect buddy, just awesome. I'm gonna go link to it right now:)"
-gabriel
Obviously I'm not above a little name dropping. This link subsequently shut down the Joystick101 servers for about a day, and led to most of the responses in this post.
"Dear sir,
In your article about how misinformation spreads through the misguided gaming news sites out there you mention that the PSBJ reporter writes for a local business publication and "(...) not a national video game web site." thereby, as far as I can tell, implying that some of the other sites you mention (GameSpot, GameSpyDaily, etc.) are national video game web sites. They may also be designed as such, but I believe that they are more than that - that they are actually international video game web sites. Sure, they mainly quote American release dates and seem to focus most on American titles, or at least titles released in America and/or Canada, but their readership is certainly international.
As I am sure you have understood by now, I have no education within journalism. I do not know what, by definition, makes a "local", "national", or "international" publication just that, but it seems to me that the readership is what matters.
As I'm sure you've also understood, my command of the English lanugage is less than perfect (being a life-long Norwegian citizen). Also, I have no
idea how to write an e-mail that is not a personal letter. Please excuse any glaring errors in form due to this."
-Terje S. Bø
I apologize, Terje. I indeed should have said international news sites. I will strive to be more correct in the future.
"Hi,
About your article and the pack journalism of news sites. I think you are trying to connect the sites to the wrong traditional standards that they should be held. News sites aren't the equivalent of a broadsheet newspaper which researches the news and strives to bring it's viewers the facts. They definitely have nothing to do with the once a week/month magazines where there is more than enough time to research all quotes. They are the tabloid press of the games industry, printing everything that is and isn't worthy of public consideration.
In the instant delivery system that is the internet you want to get any potential story first and bring it to your readers, even if it is nothing more than a rumour. Then you can research into it and get back to your readers about the issue (in the HL2 case within 8 hours) and give them the official word from the people who really do know.
In the UK this is how the tabloid papers often work and follow the leader reporting means most stories of interest are across all the papers before anyone has got any solid information. If one paper will print it and there are rumours floating around then everyone will. As you can retract anything in the next days paper it isn't that much of a problem. The same holds for online news sites. If you want to get just the truth then there are other sources that will only be researched material (like print enthusiast magazines) but the news sites are there to give you the heads up about anything that might be a news story in the next few days as well as reporting the actual news."
-Geoff "Shivoa" Birch
Freelance Journalist
Hey Geoff,
I think you're right that video game news sites are currently more comparable to tabloids, but there's no reason it has to be this way. Just because they have the ability to be up to the minute and post information without checking it doesn't mean they should do this. Posting the right story late is better than posting the wrong story early as far as I'm concern (even if you correct it later). Floating rumors around the broadsheets might be how it's done in the U.K., but here in the states we strive for a higher standard (Jayson Blair notwithstanding) =P.
"Before I journey forth into the land of standing ovations for your site, I have to give due mention of the gods that brought me to you; Gabe and Tycho of Penny Arcade. It's damn nice to see another site out there that hasn't fallen under the sway of corporate sponsored commercialism. A journalist with the balls and common courtesy to tell me when my leg is being pissed on instead of telling me it is raining. A new favorite has been born in my list. I can't wait to see what you go after next."
Jay-El
There's a land of standing ovations now? Uh, yeah, Penny Arcade is great. Whoo! Go PA! Uh, I hope you keep reading =)
"Kyle,
I wanted to let you know that your article is up at so many cut and paste websites that our server is too slammed to maintain it. This seems to be more traffic then the slashdot effect.
We hope to get a better server soon, but until then I think the story is going to make the site a bit sluggish/unresponsive.
Thanks for the traffic and the healthy dose of irony!"
Jon, Joystick101.org
Oh, the irony!
"Kyle,
I found your article by the way of Penny Arcade and I have to say it was an interesting read. But being a game "journalist" myself (I write for http://gamingtarget.com) I have to take issue with your problem with link and quote news. Many game sites are volunteer efforts, we do not have sources at the company or the time to treat our writing as a full time job. Link and quote is often the only way to get any news. You're right though that this does not excuse the corporate sites like GameSpot and IGN who do have the time, money, and contacts to get this right. But to label the whole industry as "sloppy, lazy, biased, and unethical" when the industry is often just college kids with a strong enough passion for games that they created a website to write about them is a little unfair.
But I did enjoy your column, I hope to see more, and I'm actually working my way through Masters of Doom myself. As I think every gamer is. And it might sound self serving, but in your call for story ideas I bet a look at some of the amateur websites that are run by college kids would be an interesting read."
John Scalzo, Gaming Target
Hey John, glad you liked the column. To clarify, I don't have a problem with all link-and-quote sites, just major sites with full-time employees and payrolls that are too lazy to do actual reporting. Obviously volunteer journalists who are full-time students or have other jobs (two categories I fall into) shouldn't be expected to spend the extra effort to get the story every time. But when I go to a site like IGN or GameSpot, I expect a little bit more for the money I'm paying for my premium membership.
"Nice piece and a good idea, you should cover the gameing [sic] magazines as well, they could use a good dose of oversite on the PR vs. Journalism
issue."
-Trister Keane
Thanks Trister. I plan on covering the gaming magazines soon. As for the PR vs. journalism issue, see my latest article about the "innovative" new Mario game.
"perfect buddy, just awesome. I'm gonna go link to it right now:)"
-gabriel
Obviously I'm not above a little name dropping. This link subsequently shut down the Joystick101 servers for about a day, and led to most of the responses in this post.
"Dear sir,
In your article about how misinformation spreads through the misguided gaming news sites out there you mention that the PSBJ reporter writes for a local business publication and "(...) not a national video game web site." thereby, as far as I can tell, implying that some of the other sites you mention (GameSpot, GameSpyDaily, etc.) are national video game web sites. They may also be designed as such, but I believe that they are more than that - that they are actually international video game web sites. Sure, they mainly quote American release dates and seem to focus most on American titles, or at least titles released in America and/or Canada, but their readership is certainly international.
As I am sure you have understood by now, I have no education within journalism. I do not know what, by definition, makes a "local", "national", or "international" publication just that, but it seems to me that the readership is what matters.
As I'm sure you've also understood, my command of the English lanugage is less than perfect (being a life-long Norwegian citizen). Also, I have no
idea how to write an e-mail that is not a personal letter. Please excuse any glaring errors in form due to this."
-Terje S. Bø
I apologize, Terje. I indeed should have said international news sites. I will strive to be more correct in the future.
"Hi,
About your article and the pack journalism of news sites. I think you are trying to connect the sites to the wrong traditional standards that they should be held. News sites aren't the equivalent of a broadsheet newspaper which researches the news and strives to bring it's viewers the facts. They definitely have nothing to do with the once a week/month magazines where there is more than enough time to research all quotes. They are the tabloid press of the games industry, printing everything that is and isn't worthy of public consideration.
In the instant delivery system that is the internet you want to get any potential story first and bring it to your readers, even if it is nothing more than a rumour. Then you can research into it and get back to your readers about the issue (in the HL2 case within 8 hours) and give them the official word from the people who really do know.
In the UK this is how the tabloid papers often work and follow the leader reporting means most stories of interest are across all the papers before anyone has got any solid information. If one paper will print it and there are rumours floating around then everyone will. As you can retract anything in the next days paper it isn't that much of a problem. The same holds for online news sites. If you want to get just the truth then there are other sources that will only be researched material (like print enthusiast magazines) but the news sites are there to give you the heads up about anything that might be a news story in the next few days as well as reporting the actual news."
-Geoff "Shivoa" Birch
Freelance Journalist
Hey Geoff,
I think you're right that video game news sites are currently more comparable to tabloids, but there's no reason it has to be this way. Just because they have the ability to be up to the minute and post information without checking it doesn't mean they should do this. Posting the right story late is better than posting the wrong story early as far as I'm concern (even if you correct it later). Floating rumors around the broadsheets might be how it's done in the U.K., but here in the states we strive for a higher standard (Jayson Blair notwithstanding) =P.
"Before I journey forth into the land of standing ovations for your site, I have to give due mention of the gods that brought me to you; Gabe and Tycho of Penny Arcade. It's damn nice to see another site out there that hasn't fallen under the sway of corporate sponsored commercialism. A journalist with the balls and common courtesy to tell me when my leg is being pissed on instead of telling me it is raining. A new favorite has been born in my list. I can't wait to see what you go after next."
Jay-El
There's a land of standing ovations now? Uh, yeah, Penny Arcade is great. Whoo! Go PA! Uh, I hope you keep reading =)
"Kyle,
I wanted to let you know that your article is up at so many cut and paste websites that our server is too slammed to maintain it. This seems to be more traffic then the slashdot effect.
We hope to get a better server soon, but until then I think the story is going to make the site a bit sluggish/unresponsive.
Thanks for the traffic and the healthy dose of irony!"
Jon, Joystick101.org
Oh, the irony!
"Kyle,
I found your article by the way of Penny Arcade and I have to say it was an interesting read. But being a game "journalist" myself (I write for http://gamingtarget.com) I have to take issue with your problem with link and quote news. Many game sites are volunteer efforts, we do not have sources at the company or the time to treat our writing as a full time job. Link and quote is often the only way to get any news. You're right though that this does not excuse the corporate sites like GameSpot and IGN who do have the time, money, and contacts to get this right. But to label the whole industry as "sloppy, lazy, biased, and unethical" when the industry is often just college kids with a strong enough passion for games that they created a website to write about them is a little unfair.
But I did enjoy your column, I hope to see more, and I'm actually working my way through Masters of Doom myself. As I think every gamer is. And it might sound self serving, but in your call for story ideas I bet a look at some of the amateur websites that are run by college kids would be an interesting read."
John Scalzo, Gaming Target
Hey John, glad you liked the column. To clarify, I don't have a problem with all link-and-quote sites, just major sites with full-time employees and payrolls that are too lazy to do actual reporting. Obviously volunteer journalists who are full-time students or have other jobs (two categories I fall into) shouldn't be expected to spend the extra effort to get the story every time. But when I go to a site like IGN or GameSpot, I expect a little bit more for the money I'm paying for my premium membership.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)