Doc Holliday
SPOILER: Columbus finds America
How is that facism? They can still report whatever they want, they just have to rely on what every other journalist uses....journalism.
-
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.
Kotaku has been blacklisted by Bethesda Softworks and Ubisoft
- Thread starter Nirolak
- Start date
How is that facism? They can still report whatever they want, they just have to rely on what every other journalist uses....journalism.
NipplesAndToes23
Member
Wow, this is something. It gets me really thinking about how it is to run or work in games journalism.
PhilGPT
Member
Cool, I was just wondering. Thanks for answering.
You guys put out good stuff sometimes, shame this is happening.
I don't believe anyone should be blacklisted... media, developers, publishers, etc...
Banjo-Kazooie
Member
It is a funny thought when you think about all the emails Kotaku sends these publishers and their PR companies and they likely just see who it's from, and hit delete without even opening it. Provides for some amusing mental imagery
HP_Wuvcraft
Banned
Bingo.
Gentleman Jack
Member
Is someone collecting posts like this for the 'poe's law?' drinking game later tonight?
Interficium
Banned
That.... doesn't explain anything? What are you even talking about?
Obliterator
Member
Someone should just send Kotaku next years Assassin's Creed details now so they can just leak it lol
Anoregon
The flight plan I just filed with the agency list me, my men, Dr. Pavel here. But only one of you!
Kotaku just shot themselves in the foot.
shinobi602
Member
I like Kotaku for the most part. I think folks like Stephen and Jason are great people and I love reading their pieces, but on the same token, I'm looking at this both ways and playing devil's advocate for the sake of it. Going ahead and publishing excerpts from a script of a project still in development, or spoiling a stage announcement a half hour or a few days before its going be announced, are legitimate reasons to be fairly upset in my opinion.
There is another type of leak, however. These are leaks where they're informing the consumer about practices or subversion a group of people are trying to get away with.
If Bethesda comes out & lies to consumers that Arkane is not working on Prey 2, when that is in-fact what they are doing, then I do think you can and should run that story. You're setting the record straight for the consumer. Running a story about how the OS for a console is actually not working properly behind the scenes, or how the internal machinations of how a publisher feels for its consumers is something you should report on. Or hell, reporting on negative business practices that go on is perfectly fine. That should be encouraged.
These blacklists don't seem to arise from any sort of story of ethical or moral violations from Bethesda or Ubisoft though. Has Bungie blacklisted them for running that article a month ago about how difficult stuff was/has been on Destiny? From what I know Bungie likes Kotaku, or at least Jason. Did EA blacklist them for continuously running stories on the poor release state some of their games were in in recent years, or how bad the work conditions have been within EA studios at times? No, they haven't. Did Sony around the time of the PS4 unveil? No.
From devs that I've talked to, there is a reason why publishers and developers want secrecy around their projects - when they show something/anything to the public, those things BECOME promises, even if its still in development, even if its non-final, even if its early. They have to deliver after that point. And its been something that has bitten quite a few devs in the ass in the past.
So yes, devs have certainly become more reclusive, but with admittedly good reason. Their dev times have become way, way longer, which makes the spoiling of surprises even more of punch to the face than many realize. It's one thing for an insider to go on a forum and say a few details on a game or say someone they know that knows this one thing is in development said a thing, and entirely another when you are showing excerpts from a leaked script, or gameplay footage/assets of a game that doesn't even exist yet. Trust me, I WISH publishers and studios were more transparent in their development process more than anyone. 100%. But I also at least see where they're coming from as well.
That's my two cents anyway...
There is another type of leak, however. These are leaks where they're informing the consumer about practices or subversion a group of people are trying to get away with.
If Bethesda comes out & lies to consumers that Arkane is not working on Prey 2, when that is in-fact what they are doing, then I do think you can and should run that story. You're setting the record straight for the consumer. Running a story about how the OS for a console is actually not working properly behind the scenes, or how the internal machinations of how a publisher feels for its consumers is something you should report on. Or hell, reporting on negative business practices that go on is perfectly fine. That should be encouraged.
These blacklists don't seem to arise from any sort of story of ethical or moral violations from Bethesda or Ubisoft though. Has Bungie blacklisted them for running that article a month ago about how difficult stuff was/has been on Destiny? From what I know Bungie likes Kotaku, or at least Jason. Did EA blacklist them for continuously running stories on the poor release state some of their games were in in recent years, or how bad the work conditions have been within EA studios at times? No, they haven't. Did Sony around the time of the PS4 unveil? No.
From devs that I've talked to, there is a reason why publishers and developers want secrecy around their projects - when they show something/anything to the public, those things BECOME promises, even if its still in development, even if its non-final, even if its early. They have to deliver after that point. And its been something that has bitten quite a few devs in the ass in the past.
So yes, devs have certainly become more reclusive, but with admittedly good reason. Their dev times have become way, way longer, which makes the spoiling of surprises even more of punch to the face than many realize. It's one thing for an insider to go on a forum and say a few details on a game or say someone they know that knows this one thing is in development said a thing, and entirely another when you are showing excerpts from a leaked script, or gameplay footage/assets of a game that doesn't even exist yet. Trust me, I WISH publishers and studios were more transparent in their development process more than anyone. 100%. But I also at least see where they're coming from as well.
That's my two cents anyway...
Acerac
Banned
I dislike a website, so fuck everything that happens to them no matter what potential consequences it may have on my hobby!
Rawr!
BruceLeeRoy
Banned
Of course you do cause you guy actually have made some progress for gaming journalism. You and GB are the only two sites I go to outside of gaf.
Some good points there bro.
GillianSeed79
Member
You're right that it's not their obligation, but it's in their best INTEREST to respond to press inquiries even if said press outlets have leaked info or have been critical of said company. The days of a publisher controlling the "message" and every bit of information regarding one of their games has long since passsed. Hypothetically speaking, say, for example, Fallout 4 for the PS4 or Xbox One all of sudden ran into the same game breaking issues that made the PS3 Skyrim port an unplayable train wreck. I imagine that Kotaku, a major gaming press outlet, would report that, hey, this port of Fallout 4 sucks because it has game-ruining performance issues. I'm sure they would reach out to Bethesda for comment. Bethesda could offer their side of the story, release some sort of positive PR spinning the thing, or, hell, even take the opportunity to announce that players' feedback had been taken into consideration and a patch is forthcoming. If they just ignore the press in that situation, the story would simply read that this port of Fallout 4 sucks and Bethesda won't address it publically. It's a no-win situation for anyone. Kotaku can't report information to its readers, and publishers refuse to engage with their fans/consumers.
pinkurocket
Member
Not unexpected.
Gawker as a whole is a mess in this regard. The iPhone 4 leak incident with Gizmodo a few years ago for example, they took possession of a 'stolen' prerelease model that someone sold to them and then broke the news about it. It's such a tabloid-like mentality. Kotaku isn't much different. I used to read them often (like, years ago), but now I avoid them. Even if they have decent articles from time to time, and a good review system.
Gawker as a whole is a mess in this regard. The iPhone 4 leak incident with Gizmodo a few years ago for example, they took possession of a 'stolen' prerelease model that someone sold to them and then broke the news about it. It's such a tabloid-like mentality. Kotaku isn't much different. I used to read them often (like, years ago), but now I avoid them. Even if they have decent articles from time to time, and a good review system.
I don't know why people are reading this as Kotaku 'whining'. If an outlet is blacklisted by a a major corporation that seems like something worth letting readers know.
Also Kotaku does quality games journalism, the stupid stuff they also post doesn't take away from that. Schreier especially does the sort of reporting gamers are always claiming that they want.
Also Kotaku does quality games journalism, the stupid stuff they also post doesn't take away from that. Schreier especially does the sort of reporting gamers are always claiming that they want.
I see it less as "Whining" and more a statement about their perceived integrity as a journalistic website. They're basically saying "We don't give a shit, if we feel it's worthy of reporting, we're not afraid of repercussionsfrom publishers"
That's not whining, that's a good thing. Kotaku's been a lot better in the recent years, I feel.
I don't know what Assassin's Creed Liberty is, but assuming you're talking about Victory, I believe this is one of the false rumors Ubisoft sent around to dissuade their employees from leaking. The person who leaked me the Victory video is doing just fine.
I've also heard that a manager at one of Bethesda's studios told the devs there that he had a friend in Kotaku upper management who would tell him the names of anyone who talked to us about anything. This is nonsense, of course. Typical video game industry scare tactics.
Bitmap Frogs
Mr. Community
That's rich coming from Polygon.
Ehhh, I still dont get why the Gaming Industry need this ultra secrecy behind every project (of course I know E3 and marketing, but why do i Want to wait for an E3 to know that X game is on development?) So, Yeah, Kotaku is just a medium for the leaks, the ones who should be punished for the leaks are the insider that are leaking, not Kotaku that its doing its Job.
Gravy Boat
Member
I wonder how many of the people who are on the publishers side here shit themselves with excitement everytime there's a new Batman V Superman leak.
Real_Madrid
Member
Do you really believe that?
Try asking a few critical questions when actors promote a movie.
Eh...forums and YT/Twitch celebs can help suss out views and opinions of games and systems after the fact, but there is a larger amount of bias in both and most of the time we wouldn't get the kinds of articles detailing the process of both successful and failed projects in the industry. This includes any negative or positive stories out of the industry and those working in it.
Not allowing legit sites to do any kind of serious reporting and leaving it up to those who aren't paid to do some legwork or online celebs who are both beholden to their viewers and sponsors means we might as well not have any hard news in gaming. Publishers and game creators shouldn't be granted some sort of immunity because they hold the keys to the industry.
I read that post the other way. Gamers got a gaming media which is bullied around by big publishers because they've been allowing (and sometimes even encouraging) the big publishers to do so.
Honestly, as despicable as it is, I can't help but view it as a sign that Kotaku's doing a good job.
Pathfinder
Member
Comment of the thread.
Stormhammer
Member
just according to kotaku
translator's note: kotaku means journalism
translator's note: kotaku means journalism
Acerac
Banned
People really REALLY dislike Kotaku. I know almost nothing about the site, I could not tell you why. Because of this, anything that Kotaku says is worthless to them. Even if they were to make an entirely valid criticism, people will discuss it solely because of the source.
It's fascinating to watch, really.
Hot Coldman
Banned
(I'm an expert)
YianGaruga
Banned
Same here. Oh I also read Polygon for Kuchera's ""opinions"". They're a great source of comedy.
DeepEnigma
Gold Member
The article says otherwise:
You weren't cut off for your harsh reviews or revealing some terrible secret about working conditions or such.
You were cut off for publishing leaks about upcoming games. That's not "real reporting" that's just posting information that was obtained by questionable means (breaking NDAs and such) for the sole purpose of getting more views. It didn't reveal anything that would improve the gaming industry, it's just for clicks.
Leaking pre-release game information is not serving your readers - that's what reviews and critiques are. These kind of leaks are just serving yourself.
No. Responsible journalists decide what should and what shouldn't be published based on the importance and content of the leaked information. A responsible journalist doesn't just publish every piece of secret information that falls into his hands.
If you got a leak about something bad or revolutionary happening in the games industry - of course you should publish it without the company's permission. But this is not even remotely the case here.
So please explain to me what was the ethical justification in publishing those specific leaks. What was so important in those leaks that you had to publish them despite knowing that it shouldn't be public yet.
Not all leaks are equal and the ones mentioned in the article aren't some groundbreaking reveals. You just decided to screw over those publishers for more viewers. That's absolutely fine - it's your choice. But don't come crying later when those publishers no longer want to cooperate with you.
If it was about blacklisting for bad reviews (like Jim Sterling) or revealing some horrible working conditions than I would agree with you. But it's not.
Seems to be a common misconception in this thread. Also, I shouldn't have called it a crime. No one is doing jail time for it- my bad there for using the wrong wording. It's open to legal action though.
Leaking internal, confidential information for a business has potential affects on stock prices, R&D, release schedules, public perception, etc. etc. There's a reason laws are there to protect this from happening. It's going to be very bad for the person leaking it, but it would likely only have legal implication for the media if there were damages as a result.
There is acting as publishers' marketing arms, and then there is having a profession relationship with publishers. You don't want to keep to the publishers' schedule then great, having sites willing to report leaks is a good thing. But don't make it out the publishers in question are in the wrong for blacklisting you for that; and don't make back hand slight against game journalists who are okay with keeping to embargos as an extension of "publishers' marketing arms."
Aren't most media outlets about games? There's not much journalism to be done about games in the first place.
Man Called Aerodynamics
Member
Eh... I mean I'm not sure how one is supposed to react to something like this. I'm glad Kotaku is breaking news without worrying about the publisher's approval. Good for them.
On the other hand, if a publisher doesn't want to play ball with Kotaku, they have every right to make that choice and I'm not going to get mad about it. Kotaku doesn't have some special right to access. They're not a victim here.
On the other hand, if a publisher doesn't want to play ball with Kotaku, they have every right to make that choice and I'm not going to get mad about it. Kotaku doesn't have some special right to access. They're not a victim here.
NormalFish
Banned
Man that second bit is maddening. What utter bull.
So this poster only wants shills in gaming journalism.
LiegeWaffle
Member
Stephen Totilo said:
I feel like this is somewhat of an oversimplification, though. A journalist is responsible to minimize harm to all parties involved, sometimes at the expense of not informing the reader.
I am a software developer myself (though not in game industry), and I know that early leaks can have a devastating impact on a project. Having something released publicly about the project makes people have expectations about it. Remember how Darkside was shocked when they saw an E3 trailer for their game and it was clearly not the message they wanted to send? What if you've inadvertently done the same to some other studio?
Jason, I'm sure that since you've talked to many of the game developers, you know better than I do. Are actual game developers (engineers, artists, writers...) happy about you leaking stuff? Do they feel disrespected when that happens?
We have a warrior here.
For those interested, no the location of ubisoft's next stabbing simulator is not a trade secret because a fundamental requirement of a trade secret is that it provide a competitive advantage. New stabbing tech that gets players aroused? Trade secret. Setting a game in London? Not so much.
Haunted
Member
In a surely fully intended side effect, this also positions Totilo/Schreier as the de facto people to go to if you're a Bethesda/Ubi insider and are looking for a journalistic outlet to contact.
Future PhaZe
Member
It's not as though these companies owe Kotaku anything though. They can continue to do reviews, and will have to look to find sources for any stories regarding them rather than sit down interviews done in an official manner.
So yeah, journalism.
So yeah, journalism.