PandaBear's forum posts

#1 Posted by PandaBear (1479 posts) -

@mrwakka said:

@chrissedoff: Yeah, how dare coke try to have an uplifting marketing message, and in an ad campaign that sells their product to boot!

Coke: Lets make the internet a little less hate filled and sell some product at the same time!

Gawker: Screw that, were going from 0-Hitler in record time! Take hate filled tweets and turn them into happy ASCII art? Not on our watch, the hate must flow!

Yeah.. coke is a real bunch of jerks in this scenario. Of course it isn't like Gawker is itself a faceless amoral company who uses clickbait articles and incendiary tactics to drive their business or anything...

Dude do just the tiniest bit of reading about Coca Cola and you'll see they're not a company that needs or deserves your valiant attempts at protecting their stupid message that would do nothing to help anyone.

Their water usage in third world countries, aggressive campaigns to rid rural Asian regions of locally made drinks in favour of their own, proliferation of high fructose corn syrup and the use of GM crops, deadly pesticides used by their farmers (again often in very poor countries). I mean you're looking at this like Coke said "help let's help people" when really it's more "Internet bullying is a thing, let's ride that wave and show we hate it too or something".

Gawker has it's issues and Kotaku is barely worth reading, I agree with that. It's mostly garbage. But I mean clickbait stories are just fun stupid junk, they aren't literally polluting the water supplies of third world countries like Coca Cola are. I'd say let Gawker make fun of the big corporations (even though they are one themselves).

Also, I know using John Oliver/Jon Stewart/Colbert videos to prove a point has been done to death, but this one is very relevant.

#2 Posted by PandaBear (1479 posts) -

The potential problem I see developing is that single personalities like TotalBiscuit and PewDiePie, can basically form an army to fight for them when they come out with their opinion on an issue. They make their success and income as entertainers, but they aren't any kind of trained journalist or news reporter, just an internet personality who plays and talks about video games for an audience. They are perfectly allowed to have an opinion and speak it, I just don't trust their many fans to think enough for themselves before attacking any opposition like fire ants. If the two streamers I mentioned were it, then it would be no big deal, but there are A LOT of people making a job out of streaming their video game playing.

Why do people attack these guys so much? Look sometimes they are dicks, but you know, I'm just jealous of PewDiePie. He loves his job and became his own boss on his own terms. As for his fans? Who cares, what are they supposed to do? Tell their fans to stop and think about what exactly?

Secondly, speaking as a (going to sound like a wanker here) university qualified journalist who has worked in the newspaper industry for over a decade a degree does not make you a good journalist and most old school reporters cut their teeth on doing news with zero qualifications. This idea that journalists are like doctors and they have to be qualified to work is bizarre.

Lastly, this is video games. I mean if it was a matter of reporting on the Iraq war or something yeah you want to know you can trust whoever's work you're reading. And truthfully I have a selection of gaming identities whose opinions I trust... I mean ethics in reporting should be expected from anyone reporting on any industry. But I think you're over-thinking this. It's just video games... it's not life and death stuff.

And Nintendo trying to control the message on YouTube is counter-productive for one thing (I mean it is free promotion after all) and won't work anyway. Fair use laws may be vague, but I think if they try and take this to court they'll lose. Or people just won't talk about Nintendo games as much and they can continue to enjoy third place.

I see your point about wanting better game coverage though. There's a lot of shit out there.

I think we can all agree that most streamers have absolutely no obligation to stay objective in what they say

Dude, NOBODY does objective reviews. That's why reviews have bylines. Seriously, every review or stream is an opinion. News should be objective -- report the facts free from bullshit. But anything beyond that is subjective opinions. That's not just games writing -- that's movies, music, technology... you name it.

My advice is just follow the people's whose work you like, support them and let everyone else enjoy their chosen sources. The Internet is big enough for everyone surely, and with any luck the cream will rise to the top.

This is just my two cents of course...

#3 Posted by PandaBear (1479 posts) -

But I only have about a million other places I can do that stuff!! I dunno ... I've had a Vita since launch and frankly I wish I could delete all of the required apps except the settings and the PSN. The rest is useless... Email and maps on my Vita? Never touched them.

#4 Posted by PandaBear (1479 posts) -

@acidbrandon18: I have a BA Communication and I've worked in the newspaper industry for over a decade now. You'll learn more on the job than at university, trust me. The degree will just get you in the door but from there it's all up to you.

Print is dying, I know that as well as anyone, but it ain't dead yet. There's jobs around, but you have to be smart. Working at some smaller paper would give you the chance to revamp their social media presence and add that to your portfolio. The biggest problem I've had over the years is fucking intern coming in and thinking they deserve to be writing cover stories on day one. I mean no matter where you want to end up you have to work for it. And I mean work for years not months.

Since working in this industry I've written a few news stories, some feature stories, been the assistant editor on a few products, had photos published, written heaps of reviews, learned graphic and page design, developed PhotoShop, InDesign and Illustrator skills, done a bunch of interviews... look trust me there's a lot of roles in the media. You just have to be versatile. Hell I started writing about video games freelance a few years back and it's gone well for me.

tl;dr My point is you feel like you know nothing, but you know enough to get in the door. The real learning starts on your first day of work in the media and doesn't seem to end. You'll find your place in time. Just don't be a lazy/entitled dickhead intern and you'll be fine.

#5 Posted by PandaBear (1479 posts) -

I've driven a heap of California (I'm from Australia and done two road trips). Highway 1 from San Fran to LA is an incredible drive, and you go through some cool places like Big Sur and those old redwood forests. There's good places to stop too, but I found that in all parts of America the difference of a few blocks is monumental.

Also I've used AirBNB a lot and fully recommend it. You can rent entire apartments or a single room. And you get to stay in cool areas that you may miss on tourist routes.

Also as mentioned above, Yosemite is like a painting it's that pretty.

Vegas is fun. Then it becomes not fun. It's like there's millions and millions spent on make some giant fire-spewing volcano and next to it is a dude injecting heroin with his family (I actually saw that). It's a hell of a town and well worth seeing, but I found the poverty overwhelming at times.

All that said, I've been planning on moving to LA this year. California is brilliant...

#6 Posted by PandaBear (1479 posts) -

They can't be trademarked. For example, neither can "look-see" or "fleeting look"

Why can't Quick Look for video game videos be trademarked?

#7 Posted by PandaBear (1479 posts) -

@tuxfool said:

@topshelf211: Geez, I hope not. Polygon seems to be the place where fun goes to die.

That's the most succinct way to describe Polygon I have ever heard.

Also, I liked Joystiq. But unless there was a story linked from somewhere else I rarely checked it. I read it everyday for about a year when they're iPhone app worked (until about 18 months ago), then they killed it and said "hey the website works great on mobile", which was half true. That was it for me after that...

#8 Posted by PandaBear (1479 posts) -

@fisk0 said:

@pandabear said:

@ch3burashka said:

Looks like there's enough talk for the GB team to record, produce and put up a Quick Look. Now don't you feel silly for your hyperbolic title?

It's like 2 steps down from a "You Won't Believe What Happened Next!" title. Please restrain yourselves, people.

"I knew there was a new RTS coming soon, but nothing could prepare me for what I found out next"

Yeah, people need to stop with the "Why won't anyone talk about this game!" and perhaps say "Here's a game i think is worth knowing about"

But the thing is, this isn't a cool debut game from some unknown developers. It's a game by some of the people who created the RTS genre as we know it, and up until the Quick Look was posted, there hadn't been a single news article or trailer about the game posted on this site, nor any other sites I follow (which admittedly isn't all gaming sites out there, nor even a large percentage of the more popular ones). Even Brad mentioned in the Quick Look that he hadn't heard of the game until the day they sat down to record the video.

I stand by the statement that nobody was talking about the game up until the game's launch. I don't think that's hyberbolic in this case, judging by the amount of people posting here mentioning they hadn't heard of the game before either.

I did a cursory Google search for "grey goo" and only about half of it was related to the game; there's a Gamespot video, an Ars Technica article, but there's not a deluge of coverage, I'll grant you that.

However, I do not have an issue with the existence of the article itself. I had only seen it in the Steam store and wasn't all that intrigued. Thank you for introducing me to the history and personalities behind this game, and why they matter in this case. What I'm concerned with is the cliche'd, hyperbolic and overused attention-grabbing sentence "Why is no one...". I don't want to seem thin-skinned, but it is literally formulated as a passive attack on the reader, calling them out on their lack of knowledge. The reader doesn't come for the information - they come to defend their honor.

@pandabear got it spot-on - the preferable approach would be "Here's a cool game" or "Westwood alums are making a game."

Just to add to this, Grey Goo is a fucking awful name. To me it sounds like a physics-base iPhone puzzle game. Total Annihilation, Command & Conquer, StarCraft (obviously building off the WarCraft name), Age of Empires, Rise of Nations ... I mean I know that you don't judge a book by it's cover, but when you hear one of those other names it sounds like a war game... Grey Goo is evocative of nothing to me.

Also "Westwood alums are making a game." would actually draw me in... I mean out of all the studios I miss those guys are right up there.

#9 Posted by PandaBear (1479 posts) -

Looks like there's enough talk for the GB team to record, produce and put up a Quick Look. Now don't you feel silly for your hyperbolic title?

It's like 2 steps down from a "You Won't Believe What Happened Next!" title. Please restrain yourselves, people.

"I knew there was a new RTS coming soon, but nothing could prepare me for what I found out next"

Yeah, people need to stop with the "Why won't anyone talk about this game!" and perhaps say "Here's a game i think is worth knowing about"

#10 Posted by PandaBear (1479 posts) -

@lawgamer said:

@michaelbach said:

@pandabear: I don't know if this model has been tried before with MMO's, but the only comparison I can think of is Destiny which is kind of an MMO. You just pay for the game and you have all the content in it. But will then have to pay for any expansions that comes after it. A real free 2 play game will not have the upfront fee and will earn it's money with micro transactions often making the best gear pay for only hence the "play to win" saying.

In their live stream today they were very careful never to say "free 2 play". You could look at it as buying a regular game where you pay 60 bucks and get all the content minus future expansions.

Exactly this. The closest analogy is probably Blizzard games like Diablo with funny money cosmetic transactions included; $60 bucks for the base game, followed by periodic expansions you have to pay for.

The closest MMO comparison is probably LOTRO; you get a base game followed by needing to spend real money to buy funny money that you use to purchase additional content (seriously, how are we not passed having fake currencies with dumb names yet? Don't charge me 50 "crowns/platinum/turbine points," or whatever, just say it's $2.00). A subscription just gets you some small buffs and an allowance of funny money per month.

Hmmm... well I think I am looking at it wrong then. I mean if it has enough content to justify a $60 purchase then the rest is just like ongoing DLC...

I think I'll give them the benefit of the doubt and grab this when it comes out.