Nicked

Thought it was a good show, just way too long.

Plus the awards are kind of the least exciting part to me. I mostly just want to see the trailers for new stuff, which I think ends up undermining the rest of the show. Game of the Year awards have been built on a publication-by-publication basis, so it's tough for an Oscars-style show to gain credibility. The real test of prestige isn't an individual reward, but the number of total awards, e.g. The Last of Us winning over 200 game of the year awards.

I'd hoped for a little more from Nintendo and thought that Zelda fell completely flat. Besides the brand there is nothing that looks interesting about what they've shown. Stupid question, but you don't gain exp in Zelda games, right? So why would you ever stop to fight stuff in the open world? Maybe for crafting mats or rupees? I thought it looked really bland, but maybe there's something I'm just not getting.

Some people really like the Phantasm series, which I was never able to get into. I love horror, but broadly speaking I've never gotten into serialized horror except for Hellraiser and Poltergeist.

I genuinely think all 3 Poltergeist movies manage to succeed at doing their own interesting thing. It is kind of refreshing since a lot of horror is about just about bringing Freddie, Jason, Michael, et al back. While the Poltergeist movies do drop in quality by the end, each deals with a discreet theme and has discreet motifs.

That's good that he apologized, though personally I would probably be too vindictive to reverse the action Valve took. It's super unfair of me to critique the guy's grammar, but the apology doesn't read well. Both in terms of its simple errors and communicating regret/personal growth. When "rightfully so" is a parenthetical you aren't doing a great job at apologizing.

Cutting ties with his partner was the right move, but the idea that his reaction to all this is to pursue a development role as part of a "shitty corporation" seems, for lack of a better word, petulant.

Here's what I understand: Some people want less marketing fluff. They want total honesty, but not insofar as that honesty reflects a subjective view about politics (i.e. They want apolitical content). They want 'more integrity'.

On the surface these are all OK things to want. I'd even point out that there is plenty of content and coverage out there that abides by them. Quick Looks in particular are presented as critical and honest looks at games. They don't (or they very very rarely) get political. They are trustworthy or at least let you make up your own mind. Moreover, this exact type of content that people are clamoring for is also available all over YouTube or Twitch.

But at face value, isn't all preview coverage suspect and unethical? Preview coverage requires a working relationship with a publisher/developer. If an outlet or YouTube channel gets a game early, for free, aren't they indebted to that company on some level? To achieve a truly unbiased point of view, every outlet should go to the store and purchase a game on the day of release.

If an outlet does do preview footage of a game, what can they reasonably say? If the game is unfinished they must give it the benefit of the doubt, yet this might convey the sense that they're just marketing the game. At some point, you will always have to place trust in the content creator. Disclosure is irrelevant if you can't trust.

Here's my take: Critical, apolitical coverage, done with integrity and honesty, is already available all over the internet. These are all virtuous qualities and people should seek out the content creators that exemplify them, rather than berate established outlets into conforming to the nebulous type of coverage they so desire. I'm frustrated by these folks because they don't realize that they've already won.

What I like best about death in Dark Souls is how well it's incorporated into the story. Almost all games have 'Prince of Persia death/fail states': "No, no, no, that's not how it happened". The narrative stops and resets when the player dies.

Dark Souls operates in the same way mechanically (everything resets and you go back to a checkpoint), but the narrative itself is very much about overcoming this exact mechanic.

The game's story incorporates the traditional game design idea of dying and resetting, yet the narrative isn't rewritten when the player dies. It merely continues. Pretty brilliant!

Thanks staff for a reasonable and well-articulated response to all this, and thanks mods for doing your best to let both sides be heard.

I think 'ethics in games journalism' is kind of a goofy thing to get riled up about. At the end of the day I have a billion resources through YouTube, Twitch, or 'professional outlets' (whatever that means these days given how big some YouTube channels are), to hear opinions and critiques of games. As a consumer, in the absolute worst case scenario, I'm out $60 if I order a game I'm not happy with (and hey I can always return it).

I guess I just kind of feel that we are 'beyond ethics' given that there's so much raw information about games out there these days. At some point it seems like it's less about ethics issues and more about subjectivity complaints (like: "get your political/social beliefs out of my reviews!").

I think everyone - not just traditional press, but YouTube folks too - has an obligation not to mislead their audience, but I can't really point to significant instances in the traditional press where that trust was truly violated. Although that said I pretty much only visit Giant Bomb, so I'm not really equipped to argue that point. They do a pretty good job here of keeping things honest and straightforward.

Still, I hope the people with rational concerns can solidify their message and goals. Some people do seem really passionate about this and like it or not their ideology has been co-opted by hate.

I think it's a borderline AMAZING game that totally drops the ball with its characters and story. Nothing develops, stuff just happens.

And although I love the art direction, it feels too much like a mishmash of tropes and references. It doesn't have the restraint of something like Silent Hill 2 or The Last of Us, instead always going bigger and grosser.

I know that's a harsh standard to hold it to, and that it isn't trying to be those games, but I feel like they squander so much potential when it comes to the story. They did a ton right with the art direction and general premise and didn't follow through with the narrative.

Kill List is really, really great.

If anyone's looking for more suggestions, I would highly recommend a movie called Resolution. Both Kill List and Resolution cultivate a good sense of dread, without resorting to too many jump scares.

Or if you're looking for some campy horror, Lair of the White Worm is on Netflix in the US.

Kiloblaster, NightHunter (which, holy shit, apparently Ubisoft made way back in the day), a bunch of Apogee stuff like Crystal Caves or Secret Agent. Also Jill of the Jungle.

I'm sure other people played this stuff, but I kind of feel like history has forgotten them, whereas I feel like people remember, say, Commander Keen.

Seems like a weird thing when the long-tail sales on the previous game were what helped make it successful. Plus when a game like Ryse (and Forza too, I think?) comes to the PC eventually, it's hard to look at this and not feel like you're being lied to a little bit. You get the feeling they'll announce a GOTY edition or something down the line that comes to everything (or at least PC) given these precedents.