• 120 results
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
#101 Edited by AMyggen (3058 posts) -

@nodima said:

Also, as for putting a score on a console...

http://reviews.cnet.com/consoles/sony-playstation-2/4505-10109_7-30012264.html

It's a product review. If they want to attach a score, they can.

And while most outlets didn't attach scores to their reviews, Polygon are far from alone:

http://www.metacritic.com/feature/ps4-console-hardware-reviews

Yup, bitching about a site reviewing a console is hilarious. Tech sites review all kinds of hardware, and take into account the software lineup at launch (Windows phones always get a minus for the lack of apps). It might be a bit silly to give a score on such a review, but The Verge gives scores to all kinds of tablets and phones, so why not? I've got plenty of problems with Polygon, but them reviewing a console (when they've reviewed the Wii U and the Ouya, and will review the Xbone) should be the least controversial thing in the world.

#102 Posted by Shevar (136 posts) -

I don't have a problem with the hardware review, but a console isn't defined by it's hardware alone.

So if you would do a review of the hardware and grade it, I get that. But reviewing a console as a platform, I think it's a little early for that.

In the end, each outlet does what it does, and if one doesn't like the way they handle things, than don't go there anymore.

#103 Posted by TheLegendOfMart (247 posts) -

So I checked out Polygons PS4 review, and I can't help but wonder how the hell they have the budget to make an indie film and web 3.0 app for a single review.

I get a sense of Giantbomb, Gamespot, IGN, etc. It all makes sense. Polygon remains this bizarre outlier where I can't reconcile the production values with an almost invisible revenue stream. Who the hell is paying for this content?

Microsoft

#104 Edited by ProfessorEss (7376 posts) -

I love Giant Bomb's guerrilla approach but I also like Polygon's polished, professional approach. I also like that I can watch/listen to Polygon's video/audio content with my son in the room.

I like Polygon, and I'm going to post that I like Polygon every time one of these threads come up.

#105 Posted by Excast (935 posts) -

So wait...

Polygon was seriously given $750,000 by a major developer/console manufacturer? And they didn't believe that might lead to some questions about their integrity when it comes to covering that company?

#106 Posted by RuthLoose (816 posts) -

@shevar said:

I don't have a problem with the hardware review, but a console isn't defined by it's hardware alone.

So if you would do a review of the hardware and grade it, I get that. But reviewing a console as a platform, I think it's a little early for that.

In the end, each outlet does what it does, and if one doesn't like the way they handle things, than don't go there anymore.

It's never too early for a bit of that magical ad money.

#107 Edited by Deusx (1905 posts) -

The thing is, they're doing bad things with that money. Seriously? A review for a CONSOLE LAUNCH?! Jesus, they're like Kotaku on steroids now. They have the most cynical staff on video games right now and they don't listen to ANY feedback. They're basically the Pitchfork of video games. Doing whatever they want, not caring about people's opinion and shitting all over the industry. Fuck them.

#108 Edited by Chaser324 (6546 posts) -

While taking that MS money early on has certainly caused a bit of a perception problem, the accusation that it has led to an built-in bias throughout the site is ridiculous. The actual review numbers don't fully support the claim, and I'm confident that other people in the game media and industry with far deeper access than any of us would sniff out the conspiracy and expose it. People that take the job of game critic seriously wouldn't just sit on the sidelines if they had knowledge of someone making a mockery of everyone in their industry.

If you don't like someone's opinion, you're free to ignore it. Find other critics with tastes more in line with your own.

Moderator
#109 Posted by PXAbstraction (340 posts) -

Polygon has never made money, and there's no way they ever will in their current incarnation. Their budget is simply too high, and since people can't be bothered to pay for journalism (even GB users don't pay for that, we all pay for funny videos - which is fine) they never ever will make a profit. Eventually that site will die/heavily downsize and number of incredible games writers that lose their jobs because of it will entirely decimate the already decimating freelance world. I mean, if Kat Bailey and Bob Mackey can't find steady writing work that pays, who the hell can?

This to a certain degree. Vox Media may have a more long-form plan to make Polygon profitable that they haven't fully rolled out yet but if they're planning to just adhere to the same advertising model everyone else is, the site's not going to continue forever as it is. There is no money in purely ad driven web sites right now and possibly never will be again. They have some very expensive talent there (several of whom I don't care for but that's another argument) plus the insane amount they must be spending on design and video production and ads alone ain't going to pay the bills there. Jeff has hinted strongly before that Whiskey Media sold because they were out of money and even premium memberships weren't paying the bills so just asking your community to fund you isn't going to work either. And the crew here has a lot more cache and based on the Polygon comments, this place generates a lot more traffic. Vox's venture capital will dry up eventually and if they don't have a stable framework in place by then, stuff is going to get scaled back a lot. As impressive (if gaudy) as some of their production values are, Giant Bomb has proven that you don't need fancy motion graphics to make people consume your content so I really wonder if all that design is really necessary for them to be effective.

#110 Posted by Sinusoidal (1513 posts) -

I tried reading some stuff on Polygon a couple of times. They're to video game criticism as Pitchfork is to music: whatever merit they may once have had, it's fallen by the wayside and now they sound like a bunch of boring, pretentious twats. I just don't go there anymore.

#111 Edited by Marino (4705 posts) -

There is only one answer to the original question.

Staff
#112 Edited by BlamBlam (46 posts) -

They literally made a super team of pretentious assholes from the gaming press. Fuck Polygon.

#113 Posted by CrystaljDesign (152 posts) -

Polygon got a buttload of cash from MS when they started up. No wonder they're so damn biased.

I watched some of their 12-hour PS4 stream and they definitely got ad money from Sony as well. Must be nice to get it both ways!

#114 Posted by CrystaljDesign (152 posts) -

As a graphic designer, I can't stand how over-designed the site is. When you take the time to discuss at length how you made the PS4 review page, you know something is wrong with your priorities as a video game website.

#115 Posted by Fredchuckdave (5488 posts) -

@chaser324: SB Nation is a solid site all around

#116 Posted by Sanj (2390 posts) -

#117 Posted by Veektarius (4837 posts) -

I kind of like their layout. I wish I liked their coverage better. Alas, there is probably room for only one video game site that doesn't take video games super seriously.

#118 Posted by Tidel (360 posts) -

@joshwent said:

Pretty sure they've developed a form of Alchemy that turns smugness into gold.

Amazing.

#119 Posted by Cybertification (203 posts) -

I have no idea why people are acting like them having money is a bad thing, and I have pretty much never seen their site.

#120 Posted by Wrighteous86 (3782 posts) -

I love Giant Bomb's guerrilla approach but I also like Polygon's polished, professional approach. I also like that I can watch/listen to Polygon's video/audio content with my son in the room.

I like Polygon, and I'm going to post that I like Polygon every time one of these threads come up.

Those are the exact things I liked about 1UP, but I don't like Polygon because I don't think the staff is nearly as appropriate or skilled to pull the professional thing off, unfortunately. I wanted to like it, but I couldn't.

#121 Edited by wjb (1662 posts) -

@spaceinsomniac said:

@karkarov said:

@triviaman09 said:

Yeah, that seems like a pretty dumb thing to say in retrospect. Not to get all defensive about this, but a lot of the time I think he's just responding to a level of discourse in the gaming community that's super reactionary and frankly unreasonable about a lot of stuff. Before the SimCity debacle, for example, I had no reason to think twice about anything Maxis said or did, and everybody did kind of sound like tinfoil hat crazy people. Turns out, this time, they weren't.

Gies flies off the handle sometimes, no doubt, but I still don't find him to be a corporate apologist or a fuckwit.

The problem dude is he admitted at some points in his tweets he hadn't even played the game, yet sat there arguing against the opinions of people who had. He clearly had no idea what the hell he was talking about and while I won't call him a corporate apologist he certainly isn't the sharpest knife in the drawer. If you don't at least have a basic understanding of a subject then you shouldn't spout an opinion on that subject. Maybe it would have helped if he had admitted he was wrong?

I think that's the part that really kills me when it comes to any of this, and it's not just Gies. I'm happy to admit my mistakes whenever I make them, and I'm even happier to admit when something is just my opinion, and not objective truth. For people who never can seem to be able to do that, I view that as a rather large character flaw.

Patrick talking about the mistake he made with his "die in a fire" comment directed at people who use add block is a great example of this. We all do and say stupid shit from time to time, but it doesn't make you a weak person to own up to it. It makes you a weak person to ignore it, or to blindly continue defending it.

Even after all this time, if Gies displayed some humility over these issues, my opinion of him would be considerably elevated. This isn't something that is ever off the table.

I think we all would normally come to a better understanding with each other if we weren't all strangers on the Internet. Sometimes the Internet needs late night, drunken heart-to-hearts.

I enjoyed Arthur Gies for a while, ever since the first episode of Rebel FM. Granted, I thought, "Who is this asshole rubbing elbows with all my 1UP favorites?" at first, but I had grown to really appreciate his insight on video games over the years.

It's gotten to a point, though, where I don't particularly care for him lately. My opinion of him has slowly declined, ever since the Polygon gig, probably. It made him more known to the public, which meant more opportunities dealing with the masses (something he was never good at -- obviously!). It got so overbearing that I've been seriously considering the idea of not listening to Rebel FM anymore. Like, I'm kind of upset about it, and I'm struggling to quit because it has become a routine of mine for almost five years (although, to be fair, I don't think that show has been the same for months now).

That being said, I don't hate him. I don't think he's "the worst" or a "fucktard" because of what he said regarding Sim City or whatever insignificant tweet he made a year ago. For what it's worth, Arthur has corrected himself and/or apologized before. It has happened. I think the issue with Sim City was he got so much shit for it -- and still does to this day, apparently -- that apologizing would only mean saying sorry to a lot of people who already fucking hate him for so many other things, I guess? I suppose I wouldn't necessarily go out of my way to say I'm sorry to people who find every little excuse to hate my guts, either. He interacts with a lot more unreasonable people than the reasonable ones, like @triviaman09 mentioned. He's an asshole, but he gets a ton of shit for every little thing, sometimes unfairly. Yesterday, I just got done defending him to someone here who said they thought Arthur was negative and unenthusiastic, and gave several reasons as to why I disagreed. Even argued that Arthur is more positive about certain video games than Giant Bomb is at times.

It would help if he cut it out, though. I agree. He needs help with a lot of things, actually; probably needs a PR rep or assistant to screen his tweets. Ha. I pity him mostly, but the best thing I (or anyone) can do is to avoid his presence. I already stopped following him on Twitter weeks ago and I rarely visit Polygon after the initial buzz died down.