Meanwhile... http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=1143005
-
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
Anyone who has worked in ANY field of journalism knows that this goes with the territory. If you're not regularly pissing off your sources from time to time, then you're not doing your job. Too many game outlets are terrified of losing their precious "access."
Good on Totilo. He's really turned the ship around at Kotaku. He isn't saying that these publishers are doing anything wrong. He's simply explaining to readers a bit of the inside baseball of being a journalist, and why readers haven't seen certain coverage that they might expect. And he's tacitly suggesting that we as readers should expect the games media to regularly run into these issues. If our favorite sites aren't blacklisted from time to time, then that means that they're probably more interested in working for the publishers than they are in serving their readers. Again, good on Totilo.
Good on Totilo. He's really turned the ship around at Kotaku. He isn't saying that these publishers are doing anything wrong. He's simply explaining to readers a bit of the inside baseball of being a journalist, and why readers haven't seen certain coverage that they might expect. And he's tacitly suggesting that we as readers should expect the games media to regularly run into these issues. If our favorite sites aren't blacklisted from time to time, then that means that they're probably more interested in working for the publishers than they are in serving their readers. Again, good on Totilo.
Exactly. This is what it looks like when game journalists serve publishers over readers.
Maximus.
Member
It feels like game sites these days are just an extension of marketing, with their early live gameplay feeds and positive news about the game and features before the review embargoes are lifted. I still find it hilarious how reviewers acknowledge bugs in Fallout 4, but don't dock the game for more points due to the lack of technical polish.
TheSlySoul
Member
You do have a point.
I feel like publishers themselves should work on controlling leaks than blacklist those that report from a source, but that is me. Nintendo handled Smash Bros. quite well.
Are you serious?! Rockstar actually did that? WTF
Maybe that's what made them lift their game (for me anyways) with GTA V and GTAV:O
Anyway, back on topic:
Publishers should know that this will just somehow backfire on them, or maybe they just don't care that much since it's only Kotaku.
smokeandmirrors
Banned
corporate bootlicking is really something isn't it?
I really don't understand why there's such an intense focus on Kotaku here.
The issue here is that publishers are essentially demonstrating their ability to pick winners and losers within games journalism and media. That's wrong, and the only way that it changes is for consumers to hold those companies accountable. The only way for that to occur is for the issue to be raised.
Set aside your feelings on Kotaku and know that it could happen to any gaming publication that offers genuine and critical content.
The issue here is that publishers are essentially demonstrating their ability to pick winners and losers within games journalism and media. That's wrong, and the only way that it changes is for consumers to hold those companies accountable. The only way for that to occur is for the issue to be raised.
Set aside your feelings on Kotaku and know that it could happen to any gaming publication that offers genuine and critical content.
CambriaRising
Member
Unfortunately this shows that publisher interference and influence absolutely works on some people in this industry.
Disappointing to hear of blacklisting, it's definitely not in the pub's best interests. Kotaku will continue to work with ppl doing investigative /other reporting, only now without the pubs' input or comment. In addition, Kotaku gets to ding them with articles like this, that make these companies look like petulant children--while also generating what's likely to be a good amount of traffic and respect for journalistic integrity. Just so pubs can pout a little? It's absurd.
SensibleSucker
Member
Tough one this. If gaming journos wish to be treated in the same way as political or social ones, they should exercise good judgement. For example, revealing the exploitation of gamers or devs is in the public interest and should be encouraged, but publishing leaked images/concept art of new games or alpha footage of as yet developed games is just publishing things the public are interested in. That's just the gaming equivalent of publishing sex stories about footballers. Gossip and just people wanting to be the first to reveal stuff.
Not saying Kotaku have done it on this occasion but sometimes developers might not want to reveal a game because, well, it's better as a surprise? I hate it when e3 reveals get spoiled for example.
Not saying Kotaku have done it on this occasion but sometimes developers might not want to reveal a game because, well, it's better as a surprise? I hate it when e3 reveals get spoiled for example.
Princess Carl
Member
Changes like that only come when there are rules and regulations in place to outline proper behavior, providing oversight and accountability to those charged with following those rules. And sadly, these rules only work when everyone believes that everyone else can be held accountable if they fuck with the rules.
God I'm wasting time and text wishing that real life systems were actually fair and held accountable. Thanks a lot video games.
I'm personally not a huge fan of leaks at this point, because yeah it can fuck the team over. But at the same time, its not on Kotaku to keep the companies secrets. If they have a source giving them info, or even unsolicited info, that is news that they have the right to report on.
What looks like one thing to one party, looks like another to the other. Case in point: the leaked box art to Far Cry 4.
Corronchilejano
Member
Talking about leaks is the same as invading someone's private life? What?
Not just the right; they have a fundamental duty to do so. It is literally their jobs to do so.
Like they would give up the swag bags and "insider" status.
As I've already said, I don't feel the need to comment on whether or not leaking or blacklisting are ethical, but I do think it's funny that people feel the need to berate some people for defending a for-profit company in order to defend another for-profit company.
Like it or not, Kotaku's a business. They can have good intentions, but they're still putting food on the table, just like publishers are. Kotaku puts out some good articles, but they also put out the same cream-puff interviews everyone else does. That's what they do: they're entertainment. They need that marketing-arm money.
It's important to note that I have no sympathy for Bethesda or Ubisoft either, should they receive blowback. Business is business. I just laugh at the silly posturing Kotaku is doing to be all "we're the ethical bastion of games journalism!" They leaked a fucking city for a video game, which probably just built hype for said video game. They put out good articles, but those aren't the reason they were blacklisted. This is marketing, plain and simple. It's business.
Like it or not, Kotaku's a business. They can have good intentions, but they're still putting food on the table, just like publishers are. Kotaku puts out some good articles, but they also put out the same cream-puff interviews everyone else does. That's what they do: they're entertainment. They need that marketing-arm money.
It's important to note that I have no sympathy for Bethesda or Ubisoft either, should they receive blowback. Business is business. I just laugh at the silly posturing Kotaku is doing to be all "we're the ethical bastion of games journalism!" They leaked a fucking city for a video game, which probably just built hype for said video game. They put out good articles, but those aren't the reason they were blacklisted. This is marketing, plain and simple. It's business.
I feel the same way. I'm not a Kotaku reader at all so I haven't followed any of these developments, but this seems a little shady. If Kotaku apparently has plenty of buckets to catch these leaks then these companies need to do a better job of controlling their own employees.
This isn't anything new though; every game preview PC Gamer did in the 90s was glowing with praise (didn't read console magazines back then.)
Like the poster you quoted said; it's all insestuous. And it's demanded by the gaming public.
What is the alternative? Gaming sites get copies of games after launch, and accurately report on / review the game as it runs "in the wild." But that's not what the gaming sites want to do, they want review copies.. they want to be invited to marketing events, they want to be part of the marketing.
And that GAF is siding with the publishers. It's like Opposite Day up in this piece.
Hoho for breakfast
Member
That's why it seems so childish to me. The publishers are punishing the wrong people. They're just lashing out at the journalist who's hopefully just trying to do their job to the best of their abilities. It's ridiculous.
WanderingWind
Mecklemore Is My Favorite Wrapper
And we all know why that is, the same reason people preorder digital games and season passes before the developers know what the content in them will be. The same reason why non-affiliated consumers care deeply about NPD numbers and console wars.
We, the consumer, made this mess.
Y0j1mb0
Member
A fucking MEN.
That is actually pretty funny. Bunch of sexist man babies inventing stories in their head about indy developers sleeping with journalists to get reviews. A simple search of their site would indicate... said journalist never wrote a review for said developers game lol. Really sad people those Gamergaters.
If all they'd focused on was "early review copies and the insenstuous nature of games journalism" they'd have had a point; but it would really be nothing new.. and nothing gamers aren't demanding anyways. Gamers are the ones that create the environment where a review only matters if it comes out the day of the game or before.
Took the words right out of my mouth! I can't say much more than this, to be honest.
SensibleSucker
Member
What journalistic ideal did that achieve? Someone just showing that they'd found out a secret and wanted to show they knew.
Just because you can reveal something doesn't mean you should. It's nowhere near things like revealing the names of victims of certain crimes but that's why one gets a snub and the other a prison sentence.
It didn't expose any wrongdoing but if it annoyed someone and showed a lack of discretion, then the publisher is within their rights to not give them preferential treatment over other gamers. If you want to review the game, buy it.
stephentotilo
Behind The Games
Yep
Well said. These major publishers are in the business to sell lots and lots of games. That's basically it, which doesn't have anything to do with gaming sites. I don't love the blacklisting, but it doesn't shock me one bit to be honest. I'm actually surprised this isn't more widespread.
DICKS AHOY
Banned
I can understand the feeling some posters have that revealing a new AC game right before Ubisoft themselves do is dumb, just serves as a quick and easy 'first' article and it's not particularly surprising that they'd eventually blacklist Kotaku over doing it more than once.
Defending Bethesda over doing the same when stuff like Prey 2's development story deserved to come out however is moronic.
SoulUnison
Banned
Eh, being seemingly willing to roll over for developers was the reason I stopped reading Kotaku, like, 5 years ago.
Yeah! give them hell Kotaku. Buy the games like the rest of the people out there. That is TRUE journalism no biases. And the cool part? The games are cheap for you because if all the staff of Kotaku put a dollar o two in a jar BAM you can go and buy the game.
Morrigan Stark
Arrogant Smirk
Sarcasm right?
Prophet Steve
Member
MikeE21286
Member
Dat blacklist cred
Don't be naive. Of course they won't go 100% positive despite getting freebies. How else are you gonna sell the review as reviews without peppering some negative words?
But that criticism would have more weight and free of the publishers' rule if they don't get freebies.
Scientist Supreme!
Banned
Explain.
wild wild rice
Member
Yep. Kotaku just got a little cooler in my eyes.
Sarcasm, right?
Adam Tyner
Member
...but there are tons of negative reviews out there! More indifferent/negative reviews than positive ones, even. You've arrived at a conclusion without any data to support it.
For instance, no midsize-to-large publisher on Metacritic had an overall rating of 80% or higher last year. If game critics were predisposed to writing glowing reviews -- only nefariously sneaking in a bit of negativity to sound credible and objective as you claim -- why was the average Ubisoft rating last year only 74%? Why did Activision average a measly 67%?
I'm sure the movie reviewing world is very different from games, but I've been writing reviews for 16 years, and I've had borderline-zero contact with any of the studios directly. My editors have always served as a buffer.
Morrigan Stark
Arrogant Smirk
I'll take that as a no. So uh... can you explain what is scummy about Kotaku?
So why are they writing an article complaining about it? Sad how people are falling for a transparent PR puff piece.
So what? As mentioned elsewhere in the thread if games journalism wants to be taken seriously it should be actively cutting these sort of ties with publishers. Publishers arent picking winners and losers theyre picking people to get in and out of bed with. You're essentially arguing that all games news outlets should receive preferential treatment from the business they report on, and thats worked out so well so far.
Ah, we call that gaping expanse the excluded middle. It's almost as if people can critique the behaviour of both sides while "siding" with neither.
Fucking over publishers and marketing representatives. It's already been explained a dozen times in this thread by people far more eloquent than me. Kotaku wants to have their cake and eat it too.
I'm glad that that's not the case anymore. I'm glad that things have come to a head and now you either support a mutually beneficial relationship with publishers or you go for truth at all costs, not some weird ass middle road.
Teletraan1
Banned
I can never forgive Kotaku for leaking that Sturges is a cross between Buddy Holly and Vin Diesel. They deserve to be blacklisted from earth for revealing such an important life altering fact about a cornerstone of the Fallout 4 game. Bethesda will probably have to shutter their doors and pack up. Their age is over.
Bethesda and Ubisoft are pretty unique. It's not a journalist's job to give a shit about PR and Marketing.
Perhaps you should just read press releases instead of gaming web sites if that's all you care about?
Re-posting:
I don't think Kotaku said they were blacklisted for writing negative reviews.