@Moreau_MD: "I guess the reason I wrote what I did very much comes down to the Patrick interview...that pissed me off. He acted as if he was somehow in a position to offer pearls of wisdom, not just about games journalism, but about the whole idea of journalism itself...Some of my relatives work in journalism and the picture he gave of it was just plain wrong in most cases, not to mention rather cookie cutter...The problem is, is that a number of young aspiring writers may listen to what he's saying and actually take it on board- damaging their chances and leading them to make uninformed decisions as a result. His advice is both too basic and unrealistic."
---
So I managed to re-read the entire thread just to find out why all this back-and-forth between forumites. And honestly, I see Moreau_MD's point. When someone argues as fervently as he does, I try to make it a point to develop an informed opinion of what was written, because everyone has a frame of reference and a rationale for why they wrote what they did. Sometimes these people are just loons, but the man makes a fair, if not unpopular, point.
The reason why I love GB is I was a fan of the editors back in the GS days (through their video features/reviews/etc.) and this thread's interviews are interesting to me because I think it's interesting how GB came to be: How Jeff managed to found the site, do it 'his way' (however good or bad), attract his fellow buddies to join, and make it as popular as it is now. (How financially successful they are, I have no idea.) Just to have the balls to go out there and make something out of nothing is notable in my eyes and pangs of a certain sense of entrepreneurialism. Greg's interview should be attractive to many as well. Most will not go into games development here, but to see his trek from editorialism to the games development track is kinda inspiring. Not everyone dares to pursue their dreams.
Jeff and Greg's positions are not deity-like, but yeah, I hope most recognize that. Anyway, the above are MY reasons for enjoying the interviews, whether Moreau_MD thinks they're legit or not.
ANYWAY -- getting back on track, I can see Moreau_MD's point on the Patrick interview. I like Patrick, I didn't necessarily at first, but he's proven himself to be a knowledgeable, clever, and entertaining face on GB *to me*. As stated, Moreau_MD's trying to say people worship GB more than they should, and Patrick's advice might actually be harmful to people that take their word for more than they should. Makes sense. The impression I get, anyway, is that in this industry, some can simply 'fall' into it by being at the right place at the right time (true for many things, but seems really relevant with something as 'new' as videogames, as the interviews pointed out as well). Therefore to speak as though getting a position at GB was a very intentional, standardized process and offer advice based on this might seem...too much for what it actually is. I would assume Moreau_MD would rather Patrick make his statements with a little more humility?
But the way I see it, Patrick's answer is fair. It's what he did to get to where he was, and when asked a question, he responded genuinely. We don't know Patrick's credentials, he could be far more than what he shows off at GB, I don't think it's great to make too many assumptions. But Patrick alone (or whoever) should not be responsible for ensuring that all that ask, receive good career advice. So then it goes back to Moreau's earlier point, that we should treat these interviews appropriately and that ultimately we're responsible for not taking their words further than they should go. Part of that involves not putting them up on a pedestal. So Moreau's point makes sense to me.
However, and he should know this already, when Giant Bomb's competitive edge is its PEOPLE, it's difficult to expect the community to, as a whole, do this. We saw a recent thread in the General Discussion asking people why they come to GB (Wiki, Reviews, News, what?), and MANY responded it was simply the dudes that made GB, GB. If you take even one editor (say Vinny) out, but keep the structure of the site the same, the site will have lost out *big-time*. It's a blessing and a curse. A blessing in that, since it's the quality of the people that make people subscribe, the editors can do just about anything, and people will come. A curse in that, when editors inevitably leave (you can't expect these guys to stick around *forever*), what happens to the site? GB will hope to have spent this time building an enduring culture of talking about videogames freely, openly and in such an entertaining manner that it extends beyond the duration of its current editors.
But Moreau_MD, while I see your point -- bro, you could have been nicer about it to everyone. If you wanna be like that to everyone, you can do what you like, but don't be surprised if people fixate more on the ways you expressed your point over your point itself, however correct or incorrect. Maybe you're not surprised and already know this. In that case, as Vinny might say, "Tsssh!" (How's that for worship?)
@qraham: Yeah man, I'm up for you making more of these threads. Think it's a good way to get the word out. (I've seen at least one other thread link back to yours already.)
Log in to comment