Support NeoGAF

[Deleted member 20415]

Yeah it has nothing to do with the history of articles that these people wrote at their old places. I'm just jelly I can't write about games, you got me!

That's right, all of them. Every single one of them has written horrible, horrible articles. I'm not a fan of every single guy on staff, trust me I'm not, but I want to see what these guys are up to. I'm more than willing to see a new site pop up... competition is a good thing.

All I'm saying is, give this thing time. Let the slate be washed clean for a bit and wait to see what happens (we could all dig up comments we've made on this site that are horrific, poor, misdirected). Editorial direction and editing on a site isn't exactly done with one person... let's see how these folks function under new overlords.

 

[crecente]

Very.

Hope you guys have some excellent reviews, the "3 months later" review idea sounds like a fantastic idea. If there's been one thing that I've noticed about a lot of games it's that their multiplayer, while fun, has a community that is almost completely barren in a matter of a few months, and that's worth noting. Also worth noting when a game is basically transformed through patches (big content patches and the like). I don't mean running a story on "Hey, Witcher 2.0 is out", I mean rereviewing the game, "then and now" style, how does it hold up, etc.

Best of luck, crecente, look forward to it!

Thanks man. As you may know, I'm a big fan of tinkering with review formatting.

 

[rockman zx]

So a bunch of non journalist from shitty game/blog websites.

 

[LiK]

Thanks man. As you may know, I'm a big fan of tinkering with review formatting.

you didn't answer my question. gonna do a podcast?

 

[MarkMclovin]

This makes GiantBomb even better.

 

[cjtiger300]

Seems like a pretty decent list of writers. Except Gies...... I avoid his work like the plague.

 

[dock]

Arthur Gies on the staff was enough to stop me caring about any of their content.

I hope that's not an indication of the type of content, but given Kotaku's 'lowest common denominator' style approach it'll be more about stirring upset and activity than delivering quality content.

 

[FrontalMonk]

Thanks man. As you may know, I'm a big fan of tinkering with review formatting.

I've noticed

 

[Curufinwe]

Pretty much. On the one hand I'd like to give them a chance. On the other hand....geis

Anything with him involved is poison to my ears. I'm so glad the Comedy Button has managed to stay Arthur-free so far.

 

[crecente]

you didn't answer my question. gonna do a podcast?

It's on the table, but nothing has been locked down yet. Should we?

 

[Gustav]

Little saddened that no Game Pro staff is on that list. Kat Bailey needs a new podcast!

 

[LiK]

It's on the table, but nothing has been locked down yet. Should we?

yes please.

 

[Corky]

Here's what my suggestion is.

Take every PS3 Skyrim review from all the major outlets and do everything opposite.

There, where's my consultant fee?

 

[The_Darkest_Red]

That's right, all of them. Every single one of them has written horrible, horrible articles. I'm not a fan of every single guy on staff, trust me I'm not, but I want to see what these guys are up to. I'm more than willing to see a new site pop up... competition is a good thing.

All I'm saying is, give this thing time. Let the slate be washed clean for a bit and wait to see what happens (we could all dig up comments we've made on this site that are horrific, poor, misdirected). Editorial direction and editing on a site isn't exactly done with one person... let's see how these folks function under new overlords.

Well said, I agree. Even though I'm not a fan of some of the work a few of these guys have done in the past I'm still excited about the existence of a new gaming site with some major backing. If nothing else it's worth waiting until it actually launches before passing final judgment.

It's on the table, but nothing has been locked down yet. Should we?

YES! The more podcasts the better. I actually liked the Joystiq podcast before everyone got all burnt out on it.

 

[sixteen-bit]

Here's what my suggestion is.

Take every PS3 Skyrim review from all the major outlets and do everything opposite.

There, where's my consultant fee?

Brilliant. Start your own site.

 

[ClosingADoor]

Good luck to you all, looking forward to it.

It's weird to me GiantBomb gets so much love, while in a lot of their video's they don't seem to know what they are doing either, and these guys are written off before even launching their site. Maybe you didn't like their earlier articles, but with a website like Kotaku or Joystiq, you are locked in a certain format. If this website goes with a different format, maybe these guys get the freedom to do better quality articles.

 

[Oppo]

Jeez yu guys are harsh. They're asking for advice...

What I would say is...

• go for a high level of transparency in your editorial process, as if the making of the story is part of the story itself; that sounds wankerish but I think it is this transparency that lends an air of.. well not impartiality, but justified opinion, the best example of which would be Giant Bomb; they talk about and film and expose everything; the Socratic dialog is key to building trust in such a hilariously jaded and spazzy audience

• keep the Verge layout because you know that shit is hot

• take all of your editorial tools and spread them out before your team in a manner not dissimilar to the way Dexter lovingly unrolls his killing implements; don't make any assumptions about how blogging "used to be" but rather pick and choose each weapon for the appropriate kinds of communication; no reason you can't have a superstar site, AND twitter feed, AND linked Facebook and G+ communities AND podcast.... stay flexible

• you guys have been skulking GAF for years, take note of some of the things that are counterintuitive yet supremely sticky on GAF, like the easy delineation of forum topics ("Games" and "Everything Else", rather than a million sub forums that squelch cross-communication), and also the craigslist-like refusal to make radical changes to the site layout (which is both good and bad in GAF's case but it's always really familiar and I think people like that)

• obviously try and steer away from the trashy stuff like gamer tattoos and cakes

• I think there's a way to somehow combine a story and a lively discussion in the same web page that's very effective; Ars Technica sort of does this but you end up being teleported to a forum; Joystiq and Kotaku were/are overrun with snarky one-liners and knee-jerk reactions; the audience turns on a dime as you all well know so I'd just say spend some real time figuring out your communication strategy

• and I think almost above all, don't bury the writers, make them front and centre and let the personality clashes fly if they must, as long as it's all on topic; I think from the old 1UP Yours crew you could see how team dynamics can really work, almost like the 3-editor reviews which I also liked form the older gaming mags; I like seeing a little image even on each story so I can sort of put a face/icon to the "voice" of each story... much like GAF

sorry this ended up being all tl;dr but there you go

 

[FrontalMonk]

yes please.

piggy backing on this, if at all possible avoid a skype production...I would love to see more podcasts with a fair amount of professionalism (decent recording equipment and mastering). I realize that this sounds redundant, but if you end up with a video podcast, please have an audio-only variant so I can listen to it in my car. Downloads much faster than just playing the video on my ipod while driving (I'm looking at _you_, OneMoreGame.tv)

 

[Corky]

Brilliant. Start your own site.

Nah wouldn't be fair towards other sites...

Also no companies would send me their games.

 

[The Dutch Slayer]

It's on the table, but nothing has been locked down yet. Should we?

YES !!! you should do that 100% the more I HEAR about what you write the more I'm going to visit you and understand why you wrote up what I read.

 

[crecente]

Little saddened that no Game Pro staff is on that list. Kat Bailey needs a new podcast!

This is the beginning, not the end.

 

[More Fun To Compute]

I've always donated all of my swag for charity. I've done an annual charity fundraiser every year for the last five or so with 100 percent of the proceeds going to Child's Play. (Tehcnically more, since I pay for any expenses out of pocket.)

Well that's good of you and I've got no reason to personally attack you but games blogs that post "look at this stuff we got delivered to us" or "look at this cool place the publisher sent us" just seem to be on the wrong side of a divide to me.

 

[Deadly Cyclone]

If I wanted to do that, I would have done my own thing. This is a chance to try something new and, I hope, interesting.

The best part is that this is a site we're building as a group from scratch.

For those of you not fans of where some ( or all of us) have come from, this is also a chance for you to offer constructive advice. We're just starting to build this now. We'd love to get input from a lot of great communities, including ones like NeoGaf.

Crecente speaks!

Anyways, I respect most of these guys and am excited to see what comes out of it. I like The Verge so far and it will be cool to see what the new gaming site is. Good luck to all.

 

[terminallyChill]

If I wanted to do that, I would have done my own thing. This is a chance to try something new and, I hope, interesting.

The best part is that this is a site we're building as a group from scratch.

For those of you not fans of where some ( or all of us) have come from, this is also a chance for you to offer constructive advice. We're just starting to build this now. We'd love to get input from a lot of great communities, including ones like NeoGaf.

So it's going to be a full site like the Verge, not just a blog? If so, I hope you take some cues from the Verge's layout. I've really warmed to that magazine style with the massive images. The jumplist and reviews in general are pretty good too.
Their recent interview with Microsoft's Steve Kaneko was great too. Would be interesting if you had similar interviews / had a closer relationship with developers

also, is there a name yet?

 

[Dr Frasier Crane]

Thanks man. As you may know, I'm a big fan of tinkering with review formatting.

Just as a further to this GT5 post 2.0 patch for example and Burnout Paradise back in the day. Develops should be commended for not firing and forgetting and this should be reflected in the ability to adjust up (or down) a review score (with full disclosure on score at release). Obviously a time limit should be set to cap it but I'd love to see it. Would also make old reviews more relevant.

And absolutely understand this is a start-up hence trying to get something across I've felt is wrong with reviewing in general for a long long time. It feels like the reviews are rose-tinted and at times aimed at please the developers and publishers (I know that's not necessarily the case...) rather than the man in the street that goes into HMV and pays £40 for a game.

Sorry I'm rambling a bit here.

 

[DaBuddaDa]

Regardless of my personal feelings towards the hires for this site, my general advice is: do stuff that nobody else is doing. If you just have a front page with some news, some previews, reviews and some message boards, nobody is going to visit your site. Do something exciting, creative, different. It seems every video game website models itself off of the mold that IGN/Gamespot created originally well over a decade ago now.

I have no f-ing clue what that would be, but I'm not a website designer or editor.

 

[Bumhead]

I'm curious to know how many of the people criticising this idea are usually part of the "games journalism sucks" brigade.

I know I am. Most gaming specialist media coverage is a bad joke. But surely that's reason to welcome this venture more than criticise it? Whatever you think of these people as individuals, this seems like a pretty exciting opportunity to me. A real chance to present something new and interesting. Especially as they seem intent on listening to feedback and embracing new ideas, if crecente is anything to go by at least.

Some here are lambasting the project before its even off the ground. I'm not saying this is absolutely going to be the new standard in gaming journalism - although it would be nice if it was - but if people slag off attempts at change before they've even got going, then where do we go from there?

 

[Deadly Cyclone]

Oh, and Crecente, let me know if you're hiring. I'm down.

 

[Neuromancer]

Because dudes are behind their computers and wish they were working at a game site. Be happy for people (who are well aware they are lucky sons of bitches)... be interested in what's going to happen, hold judgment until you see the damn site.

Man...

Yeah that must be it. Grrr I'm so jealous!

 

[crecente]

Jeez yu guys are harsh. They're asking for advice...

What I would say is...

• go for a high level of transparency in your editorial process, as if the making of the story is part of the story itself; that sounds wankerish but I think it is this transparency that lends an air of.. well not impartiality, but justified opinion, the best example of which would be Giant Bomb; they talk about and film and expose everything; the Socratic dialog is key to building trust in such a hilariously jaded and spazzy audience

• keep the Verge layout because you know that shit is hot

• take all of your editorial tools and spread them out before your team in a manner not dissimilar to the way Dexter lovingly unrolls his killing implements; don't make any assumptions about how blogging "used to be" but rather pick and choose each weapon for the appropriate kinds of communication; no reason you can't have a superstar site, AND twitter feed, AND linked Facebook and G+ communities AND podcast.... stay flexible

• you guys have been skulking GAF for years, take note of some of the things that are counterintuitive yet supremely sticky on GAF, like the easy delineation of forum topics ("Games" and "Everything Else", rather than a million sub forums that squelch cross-communication), and also the craigslist-like refusal to make radical changes to the site layout (which is both good and bad in GAF's case but it's always really familiar and I think people like that)

• obviously try and steer away from the trashy stuff like gamer tattoos and cakes

• I think there's a way to somehow combine a story and a lively discussion in the same web page that's very effective; Ars Technica sort of does this but you end up being teleported to a forum; Joystiq and Kotaku were/are overrun with snarky one-liners and knee-jerk reactions; the audience turns on a dime as you all well know so I'd just say spend some real time figuring out your communication strategy

• and I think almost above all, don't bury the writers, make them front and centre and let the personality clashes fly if they must, as long as it's all on topic; I think from the old 1UP Yours crew you could see how team dynamics can really work, almost like the 3-editor reviews which I also liked form the older gaming mags; I like seeing a little image even on each story so I can sort of put a face/icon to the "voice" of each story... much like GAF

sorry this ended up being all tl;dr but there you go

Wow this is all great stuff. I appreciate you taking the time to write it up. I'm a firm believer in community. It's easily as important as the writers and the tech. I think we're going to be spending a LOT of timing on trying to find a system that works well.

ps. But I LOVE cakes. (jk)

 

[The_Darkest_Red]

Honestly my biggest piece of advice (and this is really my personal opinion, I have no idea where others fall on this issue) is to avoid putting trashy "babe" stuff all over your site. It's one of the biggest reasons why I like GAF so much and it's also one of the biggest reasons why I stopped going to IGN.

 

[Gustav]

Some things I would love to see on a new gaming site:

1. Make review scores binary: Play or Don't play
That is all I want to know when looking at the scores. I do not care for separate graphics, sound and gameplay scores or any other breakdown.

2. High level of transparency.
I want to know on which system the game has been played, for how long, if the copy was supplied by the publisher and whatever swag and perks you have gotten with the game. Also if reviewing took place at an review event.

3. If you do a Podcast do not make it about "News" or "What happened in the last week". There is already a shit ton of those and we do not need more. Make it about specific topics or something.

4. Have Arthur review the next Pokémon game

5. Hire somebody that knows a little more about Japanese/European games.

6. When stuff like Skyrim on PS3 happens, call developers out. Do it.

7. Some behind the scenes/making of features would be nice. I know this will never happen though. 1UP and even IGN tried it and it always fails to generate traffic.

 

[Dr Frasier Crane]

I'm curious to know how many of the people criticising this idea are usually part of the "games journalism sucks" brigade.

I know I am. Most gaming specialist media coverage is a bad joke. But surely that's reason to welcome this venture more than criticise it? Whatever you think of these people as individuals, this seems like a pretty exciting opportunity to me. A real chance to present something new and interesting. Especially as they seem intent on listening to feedback and embracing new ideas, if crecente is anything to go by at least.

Some here are lambasting the project before its even off the ground. I'm not saying this is absolutely going to be the new standard in gaming journalism - although it would be nice if it was - but if people slag off attempts at change before they've even got going, then where do we go from there?

Far from it I see it as an opportunity to potentially influence future game reviews for the better. Make them less self-serving and more honest and consumerist. However actual journalism is always welcomed and I believe can be integrated into a site that leads on reviews.

Be tough in reviews (use the whole scale...), be tough in your questions and don't take shit.

Job done.

 

[texasairhead101]

Jeez yu guys are harsh. They're asking for advice...

• and I think almost above all, don't bury the writers, make them front and centre and let the personality clashes fly if they must, as long as it's all on topic; I think from the old 1UP Yours crew you could see how team dynamics can really work, almost like the 3-editor reviews which I also liked form the older gaming mags; I like seeing a little image even on each story so I can sort of put a face/icon to the "voice" of each story... much like GAF

this is one of the biggest things that bothers me about some sites. i want to know your writers, what they like, how they feel about certain topics etc. something as simple as a picture can do a lot for a reader to give it personality.

and yes I would love a podcast. this falls in play with what porttwo said. I feel with most writers its hard to "know" them until you hear them. and there's certainly some experienced people on staff at vox now that know about pod-casting.

 

[DaBuddaDa]

5. Hire somebody that knows a little more about Japanese/European games.

This x1000. Expand it to include handheld and 'indie' games too (including smartphones). Every site on earth covers Uncharted 3 and Arkham City and Battlefield 3. We don't need another publisher dumping ground website. If you cover stuff nobody else is covering you'll gain a more dedicated following and stronger community. If you cover the same AAA bullshit as everyone else, nobody will have any reason to go to you instead of IGN where they already go anyway.

 

[erpg]

FORCE your staff read this book so they can prevent the dangerous act of choking on their own hot air whenever they have to ad-lib (in a podcast or editorial): http://www.amazon.com/dp/1551111632/?tag=neogaf0e-20

 

[TangoAlphaLima]

Isn't Frushtick the retard who said that Halo: Reach needed a Call of Duty-like unlock system?

 

[Technosteve]

Have Joanna Stern in all your video reviews, with a laptop. These are my demands

 

[Pie and Beans]

Not a particularly stellar list of names there. Sort of reads like a who's who of gaming article producers I actively avoid. Get Jim Sterling and I'm sure someone out there will get to call out BINGO.

 

[WickedCobra03]

looks like a train wreck cant wait to see what comes of it

I dunno, with that big list of names, I really hope that they have a plan up their sleeves. For whatever reason I had no doubt that Giantbomb would work when they were podcasting from Jeffs living room eating McDonalds breakfast and gatorade, but this I worry about. Giantbomb duders were basically hanging out, and it felt like they were in an okay spot with just that... and now I go to Giantbomb, Tested and Screened on a daily basis.

And I guess with the realization of Area 5 kind of only half-way finding a home. And I don't know whats up with EGMs actual magazine... I havent been able to find one around for a couple of months... but that could be just bad timing on my part.

 

[IrishNinja]

crecente, you had some talented writers at kotaku - i really dug Mcwhertor, Leigh, and some of Fahey & Owen, any chance of continuing working with them?

1. Make review scores binary: Play or Don't play
That is all I want to know when looking at the scores. I do not care for separate graphics, sound and gameplay scores or any other breakdown.

6. When stuff like Skyrim on PS3 happens, call developers out. Do it.

also, i like these.

 

[Gustav]

I just realized, I would love a site where a game like Ghost Trick could be GOTY. Do that!

 

[chrisgrant]

Sounds awesome, look forward to it.

Thanks!

I know there's no pleasing everybody but what we're trying to build with Vox will be different than what you're used to in a gaming site. I don't expect anyone here to take my word on that; instead, give us time to prove it.

Until then, VIDEO GAMES RIGHT?

 

[The_Darkest_Red]

This x1000. Expand it to include handheld and 'indie' games too (including smartphones). Every site on earth covers Uncharted 3 and Arkham City and Battlefield 3. We don't need another publisher dumping ground website. If you cover stuff nobody else is covering you'll gain a more dedicated following and stronger community. If you cover the same AAA bullshit as everyone else, nobody will have any reason to go to you instead of IGN where they already go anyway.

I could not agree more, this is seriously incredibly important to me. While everyone else is stuck talking about how dead handheld gaming is take some time to cover the gems that are constantly hitting the various handheld systems.

 

[Meier]

I'm happy for the people who are invested in this sort of thing and care... but why do you care? Most gaming sites get their news FROM GAF. Additionally, I just don't get the appeal of podcasts personally. Is that all that you're looking forward to from this new site? If I ever listened to one, it'd be 8-4 play I suppose and none of those guys are writing for these re-tread websites.

 

[crecente]

FORCE your staff read this book so they can prevent the dangerous act of choking on their own hot air whenever they have to ad-lib (in a podcast or editorial): http://www.amazon.com/dp/1551111632/?tag=neogaf0e-20

Great suggestion. Have you read Heracles' Bow?

 

[Deadly Cyclone]

As for my suggestions after being part of, and moderating officially for, many game community sites and company sites:

1. Build a community aspect to the site. Community is huge, you all no doubt know this. You need to have great forums, you need to have interaction with said community, and you need to remember that the community is what keeps your site going.

2. Podcast, podcast, podcast. The personalities behind the stories are what bring me to game sites. My favorite site currently is Giant Bomb. Why? Because they do great podcasts and videos and I can easily relate to their personalities and I actually SEE what they look like. I can't tell you the number of game sites that I know editors names, but have no idea what they look or sound like.

3. No shovelware. Yeah, that's a game software term generally, but I apply it to articles. I know Kotaku had to put X number of stories out per hour and all that, but with this new site focus on quality over quantity. Gamers like us, like Gaf, want in-depth stories and a look at things we rarely get to see or hear about (behind the scenes on production of games, behind the scenes in the industry, etc.). Of course you should keep up with the news itself as it happens, but take the time to show us more of this industry we love, show us things no one has even shown us.

That's what I got for now, I'm sure more will come.

 

[LiK]

I'm happy for the people who are invested in this sort of thing and care... but why do you care? Most gaming sites get their news FROM GAF. Additionally, I just don't get the appeal of podcasts personally. Is that all that you're looking forward to from this new site? If I ever listened to one, it'd be 8-4 play I suppose and none of those guys are writing for these re-tread websites.

GAF does occasionally get news from gaming blog sites. it's not a one way ticket.

 

[Meier]

GAF does occasionally get news from gaming blog sites. it's not a one way ticket.

And there are about 50 of them already providing the same info, sniping the same news from GAF or eachother. What is this going to offer that the others don't? Nothing. The writers aren't particularly good and completely interchangeable because these sites only offer snippets and bits and pieces. It's not like they're providing detailed, in-depth coverage that you'd see on The New Yorker or the Wall Street Journal or something.

The tech sites are all pointless 99% of the time outside of an Apple keynote. E3 has TV coverage and the companies broadcast their stuff online primarily now... so what is the use of a game "news" site outside of podcasts? And how many podcasts can you listen to?

 

[RedNumberFive]

"Incredible talent" seems like a disingenuous description.