• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Any interest in a NeoGAF editorial site?

Would you be interested in reading a NeoGAF editorial site?

  • Hell yes

    Votes: 207 41.8%
  • Yes

    Votes: 153 30.9%
  • Maybe

    Votes: 82 16.6%
  • No

    Votes: 53 10.7%

  • Total voters


Expansive Ellipses
Staff Member
Lately it seems as though we're lacking sane and reasonable voices in this industry who are not polemics or activists on either side of the fence but still have an interesting perspective worth hearing. I think there is intrinsic value in well-written essays and articles on a platform that is not at all interested in clickbait, outrage-bait, or shilling.

At a few points in our site's history we've had an editorial section where we occasionally posted thoughtful features, interviews, and podcasts. It received a good amount of attention the last time we had it around, many moons ago, but the forum became so enormous in comparison that it didn't make that much sense to focus on anymore. These days, though, most people post on GAF from mobile and there isn't as much room for slower-paced longer format reading. Maybe it's time to circle back around and create a dedicated space for that content to shine.

An editorial site would be a place for reflecting on current events, conducting interviews and posting features, highlighting underrepresented indie games, technical breakdowns from devs, and whatever else seems worthwhile. Could maybe start up a podcast, time permitting, at least for long format interviews when opportunities arise to do those. The focus of the site would be gaming, gaming industry, and gaming culture, but from the perspective of mature, level-headed adults (with humor allowed!). I'd be EIC and would write some of it myself as well as accepting high quality submissions from the community and other guests.

Any interest? Thoughts?
I would like that. However I don't want this place to turn into a messy news aggregate site. I used to participate in one of those and getting to content that your interested in can be a bit tricky. Also the debates over multiple article that say the same thing can get confusing since each article can contain different information.

A place where contributors can add their own pieces to the site. I'm definitely up for that but of course we need to make sure it's good content otherwise we will have those Paul Tassi kind of people for example.


18+ Member
I thought about this some time ago, I used to write articles and editorials in some sites and for other projects. Sadly my english is not that good so I can't make any valid contribute, but I would love to see a site with articles and other stuff linked to Neogaf.
Maybe not a real site, which is hard to manage, I think a blog is good as well.
In this era where videogame portals are just unverified copypasta from other sites, and youtube and tiktok are full of shit like "5 facts about Sonic you won't believe we have just copied from Wikipedia", a site with articles would be very valuable.

There is just one problem, though: valuable contents are not easy to make, they take time and effort, and not everyone can do it. So if you want something like this, prepare to open your wallet. People shouldn't do it for free.


Gold Member
Some of the users here already have made great posts that are longer and better than most of what can be found in the internet. I am 100% in favor to allow them to have a separate place to do even more elaborate submissions.
Yeah agree with this. There are some posts buried in threads that could be better split out just because they are interesting.

It doesn't have to affect the the boards, can just be a tab at the top. Most sites nowadays are just the same topics anyway. Social media made a competition to see who could post 'news' quickest and a lot of opinion pieces just fell by the wayside.

This would be a good trial at least but I think it would stick round


I cry about SonyGaf from my chair in Redmond, WA
We already do that on the forum. I would fear losing the threads on the forum if we started did editorial thing, and take the focus a little away from the threads.
Last edited:


I kinda like Fextralife, but they only review some games, don't do many interviews and focus little on the tech breakdown.
I guess it could work, as long as reviews are honest (no bullshit like a site I worked for that kept reediting my texts because "publishers won't like that, and we want them to like us so we keep getting review codes....")


I don’t remember how it used to be in the previous attempt, been here since 2005, was it before that?

But insightful and deeper talks and interviews is always fun.
So, yes! 👍

Just make sure to not fall into bias/preference traps though. And staying unbiased with no real preference is increadibly difficult, shilling is obviously annoying but listening to someone with a strong preference can be equally tiresome. Unless you do it like 1UP and just embrace it, listening to Luke and Shane going at it was the highlight of the show! 😁


I'm not sure how the "highlighting underrepresented indie games" would go here....
A chunk of GAF acts like they have a broomstick up their ass and snivels and disdains at anything that doesn't have a AAA budget, they don't even consider them to be "proper" games (and miss out on some of the best gaming experiences with their attitude).


Do you plan to have a dedicated group of regular contributors, like an editorial staff, to provide articles on a regular basis?


Gold Member

The Last Word with ....thelastword



Targeting terrorists with a D-Pad
Could be something if it's well-integrated with the forum. The whole point of GAF, for me, are all the different views on matters that single articles/editorials can't give. Don't mind a well written text, it's just that it would benefit greatly if the content were open for discussion in its place of origin.

Would I be interested in reading? I'd at least give it a try.


I'm on gaming forums cos gaming sites have nothing to offer.
Perfect first post.

I used to hit Eurogamer, IGN, and Giantbomb religiously. Slowly but surely, their content stopped being informative, educational, or insightful. I came to NeoGAF around the Xbone reveal, when a good number of sites starting shilling for Microsoft's DRM. After that, I gave them up entirely. I'm still here because those sites have literally nothing to offer. I'd rather argue with the average GAF user than endure one more of their poorly written and badly researched pieces of clickbait.

If NeoGAF wants to try and do better, go for it. If it ends up manufacturing the same kind of clickbait that's drowning the gaming landscape, I'll just stay here, shit posting in the gaming side. Now, back to the Microsoft acquisiton thread...


Yeah, why not. Sometimes it's difficult to find valuable pieces of gaming articles these days. If members can also pitch articles, I might have some ideas to go for.


It sounds like a great idea, with the way gaming media is going. I dont know how much I could contribute to it but I would love to read more in-depth stuff and maybe reviews on GAF instead of most other places now.


I'd love to see (hear) podcasts with the forum members around here. The ones who clearly have a good head on their shoulders. I think there could be some nice verbal discussions. Just have topics set up in advance with multiple forum members who apply if they're interested in the topic and give them time to prepare for the conversation so it stays as focused and smooth as possible.

I really feel like we have some members here who could greatly contribute and help elevate GAF beyond what it is now. I'm certainly interested in this place becoming a voice of reason in the current landscape. Might be able to draw attention from some names out there who would want to interact with us. Maybe even bring back some who left for whatever their reasons were.

One thing I'd hope GAF stays away from is video game reviews. If anything I think reviewing the reviews out there would be an angle the site could take. Like speaking out against that Wired article giving Hogwarts a 1/10 and why we might think the industry should be eager to drop publications like that for allowing that kind of trash "journalism" to come out of it. There aren't many places out there willing to combat the rampant stupidity out of fear of some kind of dogpile. I think this is one place that has the balls to say what so many people are thinking but not being given a voice for.


Tears of Nintendo
I'd love to participate in this endeavor whenever possible and if I've something meaningful to say / write, whatever it may be related to video game industry and video games. I also think that there should be an option (if possible of course) for personal blogs and for other members to sub (for free) if they like the author's work etc.
Last edited:


I cast a maybe vote, because the general discourse on this site isn't really of the quality I'd like to see editorialized. Maybe the reasonable voices are lurking.
Last edited:


I do wonder where do you draw the line between good/mid/bad content and or political enough or not.

Despite some people still reading well written stuff, the biggest chunk of the public will just go into quick easy to digest clickbaity stuff. There's a reason social media replaced forums.


I think having something like Fextralife would be great. That could include reviews/articles, guides, wiki's etc.


Gold Member
I would definitely read the content on a GAF editorial site, but I'd probably want to understand more about the goals and direction of things before deciding to write anything. I like the idea of serious articles that examine issues from all sides, and don't exist just to push anger for clicks. I think there's almost none of that in gaming journalism today.


Yeah, would be fun.

There is always space for a highly-opinated article discussing a game or the industry. It's always fun to write about how impactful a game is, how you think it impacted the devs or industry, or why you think it should or shouldn't be regarded as the next messiah.

At least it wouldn't hurt to try. And I think that, in the long run, not only it wouldn't take discussion away from the forums, but it would also enrich it, make people think more about the topics it brings to the table, and maybe create topics to discuss it further.


Im 50/50.

On one hand it sounds nice to have more intelligent and grounded gaming discussion, considering we dont get too much of that anymore here. The forum needs content and right now the content is pretty low level repetitive shit.

On the other hand gafs a forum and thats what im here for, not superior editorial content. Any info i get is up to me to gather everyones thoughts and facts and make my own conclusions. Not really looking for more pages to navigate or long winded know it all crap. Dont want it to detract from the forum side of things.

If you do start doing reviews of games. Just dont rush them out for pre release/day 1. That way you dont have to worry about early access review codes and can focus on being subjective. And when the reviewer is done the game can be given away on the forum, or sold at a discount on the marketplace …

Making articles anonymous might help infighting about the articles on the forum, and save the authors from future witch-hunts. Maybe can just have a staff contributors page with everyone listed.

Anyways, nice to see this place trying to innovate and push progress on itself and its business model.


hide your water-based mammals
I'd be interested in contributing in terms of discussion. Depending on the direction and what is needed, I think there is something worthwhile even if my plate is full with family life.

Podcasting has always interaction me as I have that 'gift of gab".

There is a place for this to counter the majority of editorial content which is restricted and unbalanced more than ever.


Absolutely yes, as long as it doesn't become the opposite or REEEE and in general of gaming media.

It should aim to be impartial and just deal witb games without politics of any kind, unless you're willing to have both sides of an issue discussed


There's certainly a void to fill, I do miss going to one website or reading one magazine that I can 100% trust to have in depth review by passionate gamers who really know their stuff and are specialized in one particular genre, rumors or great interviews, updates on news. The woke and virtue signaling politics era we are now just alienates individuality and stop creativity.

One of the fault game reviews had back in the day and are laughable when you read them today is most of the time the site or magazine staff gave a game of a particular genre to review to someone who was supposed to know enough about the game genre to properly review it and compare it to others in that same genre, off course you can't have that many people available or really knowledgeable and that was a problem, it's easier too to judge games in retrospect without having to compare it to other games and judging it only on it's merits and innovations.

For the retro stuff Hardcore Gaming 101 is my jam and it's pretty much perfect in my opinion but for current game reviews, news, podcast, interviews etc, I have to go watch some youtubers, news sites, forums, I do miss the early EDGE magazine, for those who want to know what I'm talking about read some of theses.

My preferred podcast format is retrospectives, in France we had Gameblog who did some great stuff initially and was truly good to listen to, talking about a game series in depth with guests who were huge fans of a particular game, podcasts about a game creator or trends / idea in games.

I'm thinking about combining the professionalism and clarity of early EDGE with the advantages of having game genre / series experts available thanks to internet could bring to the format.

How about 3 different takes for each game review,That would need 3 reviewers for one game, the first will by an expert of that particular series or genre for the hardcore fans (highly subjective) , the second a regular gamer who appreciate the genre / series but will stay a little more objective and finally at last, the third would be someone who want to get in for the first time in that genre / series and is somewhat reluctant or don't like this genre.


What about neoGAF review? Some sort of checking if the user really have the game before he review, staff check if the user review don't have troll behavior and can have recommended by the site.
A better version of metacritic/opencritic, idk. Old neogaf users can participate, if they really have compromisse to help in this stuff.


Interest? Hell yes. The plan / goals seem solid, and I would read sober drama-free (as much as possible) game news articles. Not devoid of humor mind you. And certainly not giving the impression that it's walking around eggshells, while at the same time not coming off as venting for this side or that side.

I don't think it will be hard to be different from the "pack", at least these days.

But I do believe it will be difficult to pull this through.

Edit: Some fun reviews back in the day used to offer two takes, usually distinctly different, and sometimes even within the same review text (in the form of "dialogue", "co-editor's notes" or a lengthy "footer"). Most of the time, they kind of leaned on the humor side and pointing out hyperboles on the text, but other times they would offer full commentary from a different perspective.
Last edited:
Yes. 100 times, yes. We’re in desperate need of it. I think it’s also important it doesn’t become yet another droning anti-woke rag either that’s just responding to crazies, but a genuine gaming enthusiast site that isn’t compromised. That would be amazing.
Last edited:

Maiden Voyage

Gold™ Member
It would be cool IMO. It would also help get some additional eyes on the site & differentiate it from other gaming forums.

Depending on word count and such, maybe I can dust off my writing shops and put something together for the indie space in terms of a review or trying to highlight smaller titles.


Not sure. I mean, it could be usefull for information and helping people decide to buy things...but it could result in practices in favor of a game because of preference instead of relying on being honest. Also, we have alot of member types that disagree just for the sake of disagreeing.
Top Bottom