What do you guys think of 'listicle' sites?

I don't mind lists but websites that are nothing but lists are generally terrible and unless the entire list is on one single page it can get bent.

I almost never read articles that start with crap like "Why You Should..." or "X Reasons Why..."

Top Five Reasons Dark Souls Will Eat Skyrim's Face

That said, I rarely read gaming articles outside of release date or delay news, I don't really need any "deep" gaming comment.

I don't care what manner the content is presented provided the content is good. I do hate misleading headlines though.

I don't mind as long as the content is good and that I don't have to go to a new page for every item in the list. Really, that's the worst, especially since so many of those sites run the most intrusive/lag-inducing ads. That right there is why people use Adblock.

I really like Cracked, it's my second most-read site for articles (after the BBC, and before Giantbomb). Though Cracked has had some rather annoying Ads lately (which I try not to just block because I want to actually pay the writers) and they do have some laughably miss-named articles. The list format is really effective at delivering information also allowing reading of an article to be paused part way through to come back to later if I need to do something else (though, this does make the content slightly more hollow than a longer read not limited to a list format).

I should also say that I find the more interesting part is clicking on the sources from which the points in the article are branching from, (like actually reading the studies which they butcher in summarising).

Edit - Also, I'm not a child - if the "article" has more pictures than prose, it's worthless to me.

the problem with 'listicles' (as you call them, which kinda sounds like a medical disorder) is that the pretense is paper-thin. the form often dictates the depth and content of the work- and i suppose that's fine if you want the literary equivalent of empty-calories, but if something is presented in a format designed with the implicit message of "this will require a bare minimum of your time and attention," i'm less likely to invest ANY time.

I'm not a big fan of them, but if the subject matter is really interesting and the writing's good then I can get over the presentation.

Edit - My last job was working for a website that would actively encourage click-baiting or misleading headlines and quick list articles. I was never a big fan of that part of the job.

I sometimes don't mind a well made list but when it's a top 10 with minimal text and they put 2 entries per page, thats pretty rotten.

That's always been my thing is I don't mind providing the content is good, and i don't think I'm being taken for a ride when I've clicked in. Providing the ads aren't screen-filling 'where the hell is the X to close this thing?!' reloads every page I don't mind either, but I think it's interesting to talk about the idea that a headline should be as enticing or attention-grabbing as the content.

I think it's a common reactionary response to get away from list-based content in general, especially when there's PLENTY sites giving it a bad name, or doing something like what Buzzfeed do and breaking down what became a string of 'articles' on Leo DiCaprio's beard.

Say it's a 10 point list on core things Ubisoft need to fix for Assassin's Creed, I'd rather get stuck into a concise presentation of that information, than a rambling rant about the game in general. I know Polygon gets a pretty bad rap already, but there's something about some of their articles - and guys like Vice - that just go on WAY too long, rambling and diverging from the point they're supposed to be delivering.

I like how you include the Guardian in that even though the only lists they do are end of year top 10s, same as every single thing ever. But I agree with everyone, sites that are nothing but lists, with each entry on the list as a different page = satan.

I love a list format if it's done well. Not a huge fan of having to click through to a new page for every item. Also not big on the "top 5 reasons..." articles (which just, for example, list the ways X game improves on Y game), but I'm all about "the top 10 things..." (ten best horror games of 2013, ten most disturbing skyrim mods, etc.) - providing there's some writing behind it and not purely a header and picture for each entry.

I also don't want to see every site doing it. But I think there's merit to the format.

Don't say listicles! Ever! It's a list! It doesn't need to be characterized as an article too. They're just lists!

Fuck this generation and their need to combine words into cute vomit inducing idiocy!

(none of this is directed at the poster. I'm yelling into the cosmos hoping for justice)

Does Wacomole approve of these sites? Find out Wacomole's shocking reaction exclusively on page 3 of these comments. You may be surprised at what you read.

I thought you were talking about those sites that lists generated links from what you searched. You know, when you go to search for some obscure keywords and the first few results you get are sites that's just another layer of search result links?

@spraynardtatum: lol i thought it was a play on testicles cause those kinda articles suck balls but i think what you're saying makes more sense.

The vast majority of them are absolute garbage. If I stumble upon something I find mildly interesting and it turns out to be a list with every item of that list on a different page, I immediately abort. That shit just annoys me to no end.

I don't click on lists, unless it's the Giant Bomb GOTY lists. I tend to not even visit sites that put up lists regularly. For me it's a sign that they are desperate for money and have nothing interesting to say. I stopped visiting the CBC because they started doing top 5 CBC articles you may have missed. Talk about lazy and desperate.

I enjoy the idea, but the reason that I have a negative knee-jerk reaction to them is that they are often lazily put together. The format would be excellent for providing trivia on the subject matter, but more often than not, you just see a picture and two sentences. You don't see any of the reasoning for why one item goes in a particular spot in the list. I still click them sometimes if I have a rooting interest, like, I want to see something show up on the list.

I can't even type the word listicle without blushing.

Gamesradar is full of those; i like them most of the time.

Liszt's testicles?

Giant Bomb does them right. There's something inherently interesting about the lists posted here by virtue of them being authored by interesting people. We're curious what these people think. And they're straightforward lists, not overtly click-baity, and only one time a year.

Fuck websites like Buzzfeed. I mean, I'm happy for people who enjoy that stuff, I guess, and it's allowing some folks to put dinner on the table or whatever, but it's just not for me. I've been loving Clickhole for being the Stephen Colbert to Buzzfeed's Bill O'Reilly. And I've had a handful of friends think that website's articles are genuine when I post about it which is both hilarious to me and a depressing reflection on the state of writing.

Clickhole is great

Review headlines should be "You won't believe what these 800 words say when read in order!"

When a headline goes out of its way to be evasive so that I have to click on it to find out what the hell it's trying to tell me, I get annoyed.

I think part of it is that falling for clickbait if turns out to be trash or misleading, is that it makes us feel bad about ourselves and that makes us think badly about the website Similarly, we might click on dumb lists but sometimes because they're a bit low brow, dumb, or meme heavy we feel a bit guilty especially if we enjoyed a picture or something, and we turn that feeling on to the site.

Reddit is basically every clickbait and list article out there, except posted individually by different people. Most of it is trash and I feel bad for viewing most of it.

I actually really like reading lists. Don't even mind if there aren't any text blurbs, so long as there are at least some pictures accompanying each entry (or vice-versa; no pictures, just text). But multiple pages, link redirects, and vague/clickbait-y titles are a good way to get me to not read your list.

The word "listicles" is also quite disgusting.

I like lists. It's how i find out about a lot of the music/games/movies i enjoy.

Websites like buzzfeed are trash though. I'm more put off by the sassy writing than the list format however.

List articles have their place.

Sorry, I should say hadtheir place. In recent times the entire concept has been perverted and poisoned by awful sites and awful articles. I would advise any person or website against making them.

I think testicle when I see listicle

I associate them with bad writing, but I would also associate your average comic book with bad writing and yet there are brilliant comics.

I'm past sick of article titles that are just social prescriptions. Everyone today writes like they were making church newsletters. I really don't like it.

I've also really enjoyed a lot of Cracked's list articles. Really you could take away the numbers and they would just be articles.

I don't mind listicles, sometimes although very rarely they are insightful, it just makes me respect the site less.

Listicles are the reality TV of journalism, they are cheap, easy and of little value.

Dark Souls is Skyrim on bath salts.

I like Cracked a lot although it has within the last year started splitting its articles more than I would like. It used to be two pages per article on mobile but has now been divided into one page per list item. It's a cheap way of generating extra page view stats and I am not into that.

I always thought that readers love lists, numbered and otherwise, but maybe times are changing. I don't mind lists (I prefer them from writers I know and respect), but I absolutely hate it when I'm forced to have to click through multiple pages. Fuck that.

I just don't like those sought of articles as to me it feels too much like an act of desperation to get attention because they lack a diverse editorial range. Gamesradar is a site that bums me out about that as that site was recommended by a CVG editor before that site officially closed and every third article is a 'listicle' and it sucks that a genuinely good site like CVG closed even though it never did list articles.

I don't hate them. I don't actively seek out those websites but if I end up on one I probably will end up looking at a few lists, provided they have appropriately ridiculous titles.

I'm an adult and I understand what I am clicking on - I still need to know what 5 adorable things the kitten did that I won't believe though.

I don't mind lists as long as there's thought put into it. There's a reason why lists are popular. They're fun, easy reads but obviously, people exploit that in lazy ways. But I can't lie to you and say I don't occasionally scroll through one of those "11 Adorable Puppy GIFs That You Need to See Believe" lists and chuckle to myself.

I don't really mind personally. If there is no other interesting content on said site, then I probably wouldn't use the site because I can't see just lists keeping my interest. Although, I enjoy a good list now and again.

Buzzfeed is the wrong way to do lists. And forcing me to click through pages of your 10 item list is the wrong way to do lists.

Lists are not a bad format to present information in especially in the low attention span age of the internet. Unfortunately it is often a crutch for websites desperate for views. I think you can do plenty of lists and still provide meaningful content.

I like lists of things. Reading them, making them, whatever. Lists are fun.

You know what's not fun? Ads. And clicking through page by page for every item. And terrible formatting. And bad writing.

I'll include hyperbolic/overly-exaggerated headlines on that as well. Doing it in slideshow format is also another one.

It's easy to abuse a list format, but when done right it's not a bad thing inherently. It needs good writing and convenient formatting that doesn't come with bullshit amounts of clicking.

I wouldn't say that listicles are very informative, though. Whether it's Cracked or even Buzzfeed, My priority is to be entertained