Gaming World

[django 549]

Bardzo ciekawy artykul o GamesCom i posrednio o dziennikarstwie growym.

 

Where Journalism Goes to Write Itself

written by Casper Gronemann alias Grunker, edited by Infinitron

 

Gamescom is a place where journalism comes to write itself. The Big Publishers™, like Ubisoft, have gigantic halls with smaller booths for each game, where one or two guys from the development team walk about along with PR people, community managers and business people. Smaller publishers do the same thing on a smaller scale, with small booths no larger than dorm rooms to demonstrate specific games. In the larger booths, computers are placed all around, with playable demos of the newest games – the Might & Magic booth has Might & Magic X Legacy, Heroes Online and Duel of the Champions ready for any passerby to test. Other games, like Wasteland 2 or Watchdogs, have hands-off demos. Both demonstration methods have one thing in common: they are controlled. The playable demos are short, controlled bursts of gameplay that do not even show off most of a game's features. Hands-off demos have developers showing off a specific tailor-made piece of gameplay, which displays how their game works at its absolute best, and, perhaps more importantly, with perfect pacing between different styles of play.

 

The result is a conference where journalists are practically assaulted with potential content for their magazines, but without the conditions to filter them probably. There is no room for sitting down for a quiet talk with a developer, no space for contemplation, and no journalist here will need the capacity for critical thinking in any case. Hell, no journalist here needs to do any background research on the games he will write about later. When the two of us from the RPG Codex watched a demo of Wasteland 2 with a couple of journalists, I was at first surprised by the fact that Chris Keenan, Wasteland 2 project lead, started off with a bare-bones presentation of the game. “Wasteland 2 is a turn-based, party-based RPG” and so on and so forth. “Hopefully”, I thought, “any self-respecting games journalist will have gotten that far before scheduling an appointment to watch a demo of the game.” Farther into the demo, I was further astounded by the fact that only me and the other member present from the RPG Codex were asking questions. The other journalists were as silent as the grave from start to finish.

 

Thinking about it further, however, I realize that there is no need for them to ask questions to get the content they need for their articles. All of it is right there, ready to be plucked from the lips of PR guys and developers eager to tell pre-written tales about their games. As I walk into a showing of Watchdogs, I see game journos getting their pads out and starting to write. They write notes about what they see on the screen and hear from the show host, notes that will later turn into articles in their magazines. But the only things they see are specific segments of gameplay created to show off the very best parts of Watchdogs, and all they hear is the voice of someone who has rehearsed to death a speech designed to cast the game in the best possible light. I see the journalists taking notes on their pads, and I can almost see the golden stream of words coming out of the mouth of the host, trailing towards the audience of game journos, becoming text on a pad and, later, an article on a magazine website. This is a place where game journalists inform their audience based solely on what cannot be described as anything but advanced television commercials.

 

I cannot think of anything similar in any other field of journalism. I cannot conceive of a large industry of “film previews” where a bunch of critics write about a film's trailer based on the words of its producer and neither can I conceive of a silent press conference with a room full of journalists jotting down the words of the host and nothing more. Should you feel the need to make a sarcastic jab here – i.e. “that's pretty much what the White House press conference is, isn't it?” - then take heed: not even from the most politically or journalistically sceptical point of view is the comparison apt. No matter how passive you might think modern journalism, film criticism, or whatever are, they're nothing like this silent crowd of people, with their headphones switched on and their minds switched off.

 

Even if one of these journalists was hit with the sudden inclination to dig a little deeper, even if that journalist had done his research and came prepared with tough questions, he'd still be in the wrong place to do anything about it. In the large booths, you stand up among crowds of people, and the noise levels rise high. During the more private hands-off game demos, time is short and of the essence, and you barely have time for anything but the scheduled “program.” Both models of game demonstration allow little room for critical interviews or researching games in depth. For all intents and purposes, Gamescom is a seller's market, a place where the money finances an outlet for PR and community managers to communicate with reporters, who then communicate with potential customers. It is simply impossible for a journalist to get anything except the “official version” of game stories here. Almost nothing can be extracted except exactly what the PR departments want. It is a place where journalists get glances, which they will later name 'previews.' The stream of manipulated information flows freely, and anyone thinking he or she can stop the flow would probably be crushed by it instead.

 

I've always had a gut feeling that these conference previews all looked eerily similar regardless of the journalist who wrote them and the magazines who published them. After visiting Gamescom, there is not a shadow of doubt in my mind as to why.

 

None of these people are stupid or malevolent, of course, and games journalists certainly aren't lazy by any stretch of the word. Being at Gamescom to fetch content is hard work. You walk for 10, 12, 14 hours among huge crowds of people, constantly trudging back and forth, juggling ten pages of notes along with maps to help you find your way around the giant conference center, while trying to pen down more notes when you meet someone interesting or play something worthwhile. Your head is assaulted by impressions constantly, and you become dizzy if you don't sort it all out in your head. You wait in line for people who are more important (read: make more money) than you and you say 'thank you' and 'amen' when they deign to make time for you. As with so many other things in life, people are not to blame here. Systems are. This particular system is one where the reporters are young and usually fans of what they're reporting on, and those who control what they're reporting on are rich people who know the business and have hired people to make sure the reporting is done "right". All the experience lies with the money, and little of it lie with the reporters. The same goes for the balance of power. In the middle of this are the developers, who just want to make the games they believe in. In their eagerness to realize their creativity, they certainly aren't the people who will break the system.

 

Yes, Gamescom is a place where journalism comes to write itself. Where overworked and underpaid journalists come with a massive workload and a short deadline to get told what to write. The mercy of the almost pre-written content flows from the cups of the PR departments into the greedy mouths of the tired journalists. Gamescom is where exclusive parties with good food and free bars are attended by serious business people who look like they've never played a game in their lives. They drink cocktails in the same room as geeky game journalists with long beards and t-shirts, and rarely if ever do the two groups interact. Both are attended to by an assortment of hired help, like the paid cosplayers who feel more out of place than anyone else simply because they, with their geeky outfits but astonishingly good looks, bridge the gap between the awkward geeks, the games journalists and the tidy business people. Perhaps I should stop saying 'games journalists', however, for not all writers here are journalists. Many are editors or administrators of fan sites or other such things, and it is often hard to distinguish between these two groups. The fact that both bring back roughly the same kind of content to their readers should chill any critical mind to its core. This is not a place for critical thinking. In fact, the very concept of a games conference seems to go against the notion.

 

As a fan here to write content for a fansite, my best moments are a long back-and-forth with Julien Pirou, creative designer on M&M X Legacy, a nice talk with managing director of Limbic Entertainment, Stephan Winter, a good discussion over a beer with Alexander Dergay, head of development on Legends of Eisenwald and a brief conversation with Michael Hoss from bitComposer. These quiet moments seem isolated from the rest of the busy conference, and Gamescom itself seems to strive actively to break them in half so that the show can go on. The interesting conversations with Julien and Stephan are halted partly by the rising levels of noise from the conference and partly by more people who see us talking and butt in, ending Julien's stream of interesting thoughts on Might & Magic and substituting them with the words of fans who want to talk about their favourite Might & Magic games and why they liked them. The talk with Alexander is interrupted by the fact that I have to go back to Ubisoft's invitational party so as not to seem rude to my hosts. The brief discussion with Michael is interrupted because I would otherwise be late to the continued program of the Might & Magic Fan Day.

 

As I have expressed in earlier articles, I had fun at Gamescom. My hosts were considerate and kind, I met tons of interesting people, and I played what I hope will be good games. But this article is not about whether I personally had a good time, but about my impressions of the relationship between Gamescom and gamers. The relationship between one of the largest venues for new information on games, the journalists who write about that information, and the fans who read it. As it stands, it seems to be yet another part of the gaming PR industry designed not to rock the boat. The system itself strangles any chance of elevated discussion. It leaves me with a strange feeling that so many deals about potential games are struck here, and so much reporting takes place here. The future of games is, in many ways, decided at conferences like this, yet any communication from here to the rest of the world is bound to be, like so much games journalism today, shallow and toothless.

 

Addendum

 

It seems I am not the only one who has issues with the way that Gamescom and other conferences handle journalism. Richard Lewis, e-sports journalist, writes here about how the companies at Gamescom barely pay attention to journalism anymore, as if they no longer need games journalists. All this tells a particular tale, a tale about the vaining importance of reporting in the world of games. PR departments communicate directly with their customers. No filter is applied to the bullshit. Why should RIOT care about Richard Lewis and his needs when the users can get their ”e-sports journalism” straight from the source, polished by the PR machine into glistening brilliance? The reporters on the LCS – RIOT's own e-sports league – are hired by RIOT. In effect, modern gaming journalism is becoming a commodity of game producers. Why should anyone respect someone like me, or even a professional games journalist, no matter the quality of their content, if they no longer need us/them to market their games and inform the consumer? The games journalist cannot write quality articles because he has no venues for solid information, and the people in charge have no interest in providing him with such. The system is to blame, then, the system we have all constructed for the transmission of information about games from companies to consumers. Companies are encroaching on the field of journalism, journalists lack integrity and consumers consume without asking questions. In a healthy world, business would need to rely on brilliant critics to 'yay' or 'nay' their game, and consumers would need to trust these critics, to know that their integrity is unquestionable. Unless that happens, neither business nor consumer will have any need of the critic, and the remnants of criticism will dissolve until PR bullshit sieves unfiltered through major sites directly into the eyes and ears of consumers who will have no other choice but niche media if they want critically angled information about their hobby. And then, dear sirs and madams, then, we will all be fucked. Perhaps we are already.

http://www.rpgcodex.net/content.php?id=9132

[Paliodor 1 761]

Dałbym plusa ale nie mogę, naprawdę dobrze opisany problem który jest w tej branży.No ale co my możemy poradzić haj$$$się zgadza, masy są uradowane więc pewnie wiele się nie zmieni.

[Blue 245]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0NZAiQiqh0A

 

Posłuchajcie dlaczego najlepszy recenzent w necie ma najbardzije nieregularne recenzje w necie...  

[django 549]

Szkoda chlopa. Jego recenzje z pewnoscia naleza do najbardziej rzetelnych. Cóż, życie każdego dogoni.

 

A tymczasem, recenzenci IGN obniżają ocenę Divekicka gdyż poczuli sie urażeni przedstawieniem jednego z bohaterów. [*]

[Suavek 4 652]

Twórcy Yatagarasu Attack on Cataclysm nie mogą dostać zebranych z IndieGoGo pieniędzy ze względu na poronioną politykę PayPal - http://kotaku.com/paypal-wont-give-indie-devs-their-money-1281013215

 

Czyli zebrali 120tys. dolarów na PRODUKCJĘ gry, ale całość kasy dostaną dopiero po jej wydaniu...

 

Coś podobnego spotkało już developerów Skullgirls, ale nie jestem w stanie znaleźć informacji o tym, jak tamta sprawa się ostatecznie skończyła. Zakładam, że kasę wywalczyli, ale mimo wszystko żałosna sprawa.

[Paliodor 1 761]

@Blue: akurat jego recki bardzo lubiłem mało ich jest ale każda za to bardzo konkretna z celnie wypunktowanymi plusami i minusami,a wszystko okraszone dużą dawką humoru. Szkoda, że główne media growe nie są choć w małym stopniu tak dobre jak on. No ale wiadomo $$$

Edytowane 18 września 2013 przez Paliodor

[django 549]

Bardzo ciekawy artykuł o judaszu generacji. Polecam.

 

 

Opinion: The tragedy of Grand Theft Auto V

September 20, 2013 | By Leigh Alexander

    53 commentsMore: Console/PC, Design, Exclusive

 

With all the talk about "open world," "mayhem," and "power fantasy," it's easy to forget how confining the Grand Theft Auto series now feels, writes Gamasutra's Leigh Alexander.

I wanted to do something nice for Michael. He'd been rejected in turn by each member of his family, as it seems he is every day. Even with medication and therapy he can't seem to deal with his anger or find a sense of purpose, and his doctor is hiking up the treatment rate again.

I'm controlling this guy Michael, standing on an LA sidewalk at sunny midday. I pull out his phone and I go through his contacts and I dial every single one.

The only one who answers is accidental pal Franklin, a young car thief trying to go legit. The bewilderment in Franklin's voice is palpable -- why is Michael calling? We just saw each other, man.

Michael is standing on a sidewalk, graying hair, dorky polo and cargo shorts, peering down at his phone as cars whizz past on some bleak LA highway. The sky takes on a late-day tinge and if I don't press anything he will stand there forever, looking sad, waiting for someone to call.

[][][]

With all the talk about "open world," "mayhem," and "power fantasy," it's easy to forget how confining the Grand Theft Auto series now feels: All of that endless vista, and you with your eyes too-often glued to the mini-map. Orbiting missions and objectives that dot your map like bites to be scratched. You have to shoot. For a game defined by its attitude to freedom and openness, it gives you very little liberty to escape its structure. You can go for a drive, or play tennis or do yoga, but you're delaying the inevitable.

To make progress, you eventually submit to going to a place, and you drive there, and pull up, and you're in it, and only after a long pause do you realize nothing begins until your car touches, precisely, the indicator halo in the middle of the sidewalk.

I feel for the characters in this game: They're living lives on rails, and they can't seem to get out, nor reconcile how to be happy and secure given the directions they've chosen. As Franklin, I drove for miles and miles away from the neighborhood where I've been taking over my cousin's tow truck shifts to keep him and his awful girlfriend afloat while they struggle with crack addiction. I drove what felt like forever, and I rode my bike the wrong way down a train tunnel and emerged on a railway bridge at dawn.

I had Franklin take out his phone to snap the view. It was the first time I'd used the phone in the game, and I noticed I could click the right stick to make Franklin turn the camera around on himself. The character model's position, expression -- phone at arm's length, slightly angled, the selfie-expression open, bewildered, positive -- was perfect. Innocent, even. I don't belong to Rockstar Social Club, the social network membership required for me to be able to save photos, but I took it anyway, pretending Franklin could show his unhinged friend Lamar back home, the one who claims his "Apache blood" forces him to escalate dangerous gangland conflicts.

Then the train came. It struck my parked bike, and then me. I saw Franklin's stunned and mangled body. Then I saw him dazedly exit some small town hospital, as if the adventure had all been a dream. There really wasn't anything else for me to do but drive back. Find another mission. Probably kill some more faceless gangsters, in a game where the best compliment you can give to its third-person shooting is that it's practically automated.

This game gives me everything, and yet I can't stop feeling sad. Trapped.

[][][]

The "mayhem" thing, the freedom thing. I remember when that was an actual feature of Grand Theft Auto: I've always said Vice City was my favorite game in the series, drenched in the mad, manic excesses of 1980s Miami. You killed every gyrating bunny in a dance club because you could: not just because there was a freshness to the gesture, a newness, a transgressive excitement, but because the garish world felt so silly, so impermanent. You never even dirtied your awful polyester. I'm sure I died again and again and didn't mind. It wasn't a real world, not really. It was a story of a set of values in a certain time, just like San Andreas, a hyper-textured early-90s hip-hop video -- where you could also drive weary and wary through the fires of the L.A. race riots. That was a thing.

Punching out a stranger for cash is something I could do in pointy-collared Tommy Vercetti's blocky world, or even in C.J.s, as a way of asserting control, of taking ownership of whatever bleak expectations people had of me. It's important to me to tell you that, in Vice City I chased down a prostitute in the rain and beat her to get my money back. I mean, I think I did that a lot -- hired and beat a lot of prostitutes -- just the one in the rain is the one I remember, cackling madly because Foreigner's "I've been waiting for a girl like you" was on my car radio. These were the times GTA felt illicit, rebellious, guilty, challenging.

I had to confide about the prostitutes, because I'm one of the people who said I thought it would have been better if GTA V let you play as a woman, and that I thought the game was misogynistic. I still feel that way, but it's not because I'm offended, or because I'm sensitive, or because I want to intervene upon anyone's vision, or because I regret the things I did in older games. It's because I want new monsters. It's because I want to be shocked again.

When Vice City came out, we had a young man doing heists and punching upward against expectations, misconceptions and the traditional boundaries of "permissible" game content. It's more than a decade later, and we have all grown up, and we're given an old man shuffling around his expensive pool in a dorky polo, doing the same heists. We have yet more characters who cannot get out.

I remember old Grand Theft Auto: You're driving around, and you see a car you've never seen before, and it looks expensive, and you want it. And when you fight for it and you shake the cops and you bring down the helicopter and you repair and re-paint the car, and you finally, wincing every tiny turn, drive that fucker to your garage because you worked for it? You felt the needle move.

In GTA V you shoot down a police helicopter within the first couple of hours, with no consequences. I feel gluttonous and bored. I start the game with a gorgeous car because I am a car "reposesser." And if I see another car I want, I pull over and I get it. When my fender gets too banged up, I pull over and I get another car. Nobody ever even really stops me. Neither GTA IV or GTA V have ever given me, personally, a Wanted Star for stealing a car.

I throw some poor guy into the street and I take the car. Some poor lady. I always like to know what they were listening to on the radio when I drive off, unpunished.

Am I coming up in the world, or am I just throwing terrified people into the road?

The thing that feels the most "correct" in GTA V is to drive within the lines, to stop at red lights, to try to do the right thing. To try to call people for Michael to hang out with. To make sure he goes to his doctors' appointments.

[][][]

Where do I go from here? Edge concluded its GTA V review with the quote "Beat that." Do I have to? What constitutes "more" when you have enough? What constitutes transgression when you're some mean, over-the-hill bully?

GTA V is that character -- the $800 million man who doesn't know what to do next. Who used to be a rebel, who pulled the same damn tricks until they stopped working, and then kept doing it.

I know that's not what Rockstar wants. I read all the Dan Houser interviews that are parceled out so rarely, always about vision and never about execution. Always about games and Hollywood, as if there's a competition, and about how interactivity offers us the potential to tell better stories than we did before. In that regard, GTA V is profoundly disappointing: One of the earliest jokes in the game involves a dog doing another dog in the butt. The game is constantly grating you with frat humor whenever you're trying to Have a Moment with it.

Always prescient, the game aims to lampoon the modern obsession with smart devices, social networks -- none-too-subtle "LifeInvader" subs for Facebook, and "Bleater" for Twitter -- and internet politics, but is mostly heavy-handed about it: any elderly pundit at a middle-American local paper can skewer Twitter as an outlet for narcissists' boring snippets. "Information isn't about imparting knowledge anymore," gloats Bleater obtusely, "the internet changed all that."

This is watching your sharp, witty father start telling old fart jokes as his mind slows down. And as much as the internet is habituated to defending GTA as "satire," what is it satirizing, if everything is either sad or awful? Where is the "satire" when the awful parts no longer seem edgy or provocative, just attempts at catch-all "offense" that aren't honed enough to even connect?

Here's a series that has been creating real, meaningful friction with conventional entertainment for as long as I can remember, and rather than push the envelope by creating new kinds of monsters, it's reciting the same old gangland fantasies, like a college boy who can't stop staring at the Godfather II poster on his wall, talking about how he's gonna be a big Hollywood director in between bong rips. You call the trading index BAWSAQ? Oh, bro, you're so funny, you're gonna be huge.

Everything it seems you'd want to compare GTA to, from The Sopranos to Breaking Bad, includes interesting and antagonistic women. GTA is not brave. Anna Gunn gets death threats for her incredible performance of Skyler White, the primary antagonist to Breaking Bad's Walter. You can't avert your eyes from their scenes in this last season. That is brave.

Whenever cinema and dialogue start happening on GTA V, I check Twitter. What am I doing this mission? I don't know, chasing the yellow dot, as always. Killing the red ones.

All a video game had to do to be seen as brave, edgy, risk-taking again would be to give it a shot: Try to write a monstrous woman, a frustrated woman, a hungry, opportunistic woman, and treat her frailties with nuance. This isn't something even TV and cinema regularly knock out of the park.

Instead, we have another GTA. It is so big, and so beautiful, and it's fundamentally just another GTA. It's good. I like it. It's fun to mess around in. It's like an SUV through a glass storefront, declaring that you cannot ignore video games.

We can't help but acknowledge what Rockstar has wrought: No one has ever seen a game world this size, this lifelike. If you squint a little, it almost looks completely real, creepy-real. It approximates the absurdist fantasies futurists have always had about video game, it is like what a movie about the future thinks video games are. Can you do this? Yes. Can you do this? Yes. Yes. Yes.

Sometimes it's too smart for video games, and too cool: The impeccably-curated music selections for the game's radio stations, or the way the game's light behaves, warm, slow haloes flickering across a low-riding luxury car. It understands cool-hunting, power-hunger.

And it's ruthlessly researched that you have to be dazzled, as if in the presence of a mothership of a mind much more observant, much more well-traveled, possessed of much more social wisdom than you, some chump holding the controller.

And still: so confined, so trapped, so tragic. A shame.

[][][]

I drive my shiny car around Los Santos and I kind of wish I had a turn signal. Stranded in traffic, I honk the horn over and over again, and nobody moves. I am triangulated by some missions, none of which I really want to do, stuck in the city's web of repetition. I want to do something nice for Michael. I want to get him out of this sad, sad cycle. It seems to be what he really wants. I can hear it in every note of his pained, excellent voice performance.

My son and daughter have ditched me at the beach. I ride the roller coaster all by myself, a slow, cotton candy sunset-tinged arc across a neverending beach vista. Walking along the beach, I press the wrong button by accident and swing my hairy fist impotently at the sunset, at nothing.

It's dark, maybe. But it's not brave. It's not that funny. It's not a power fantasy, it's not your escape. It's just sad.

 

 

http://www.gamasutra.com/view/news/200648/Opinion_The_tragedy_of_Grand_Theft_Auto_V.php

[Nemesis 1 268]

Nie żebym bronił ale takie coś to zwykłe szukanie dziury w całym i próba "błyśnięcia", nie sądzisz? O byle jakim sandboksie czy innej grze można takie rozkminy wypisywać. A ludzie czasem zapominają, że gra to wciąż tylko "gra".

[django 549]

Jasne, zgadzam sie. Fajnie by bylo zagrac w GTA "dobrze", ale ciezko tego oczekiwac. Bardzo spodobal mi sie fragment o szukaniu nowych demonów w GTA i o tym jak gra tak na prawde przestala byc kontrowersyjna. Ciekawa rzecz.

[Nemesis 1 268]

I zauważ, że to w sumie jej największa zaleta bo i bez tego jest (prawdopodobnie) najlepszą odsłoną. Przypomnijmy sobie co było przy San Adreas. I za to też należą się Rockstar wyrazy uznania. 

 

I czy na pewno nie jest? Wystarczy spojrzeć na niektóre akcje z Trevorem.

Edytowane 20 września 2013 przez Nemesis

[MaZZeo 14 183]

To jest kolejny "mądry" artykuł, który można skwitować tym obrazkiem.

 

[django 549]

I zauważ, że to w sumie jej największa zaleta bo i bez tego jest (prawdopodobnie) najlepszą odsłoną. Przypomnijmy sobie co było przy San Adreas. I za to też należą się Rockstar wyrazy uznania. 

 

I czy na pewno nie jest? Wystarczy spojrzeć na niektóre akcje z Trevorem.

 

Ciezko mi sie wypowiadac bo w gre pewnie zagram dopiero ja wyladuje na PC. Ciekawi mnie ta pewna zaleznosc pomiedzy GTA a popkultura. Gdy wychodzily VC i SA (glownie VC) wydaje mi sie, ze popkultura byla bardziej niewinna wiec ostra satyra serwowana przez serie szokowala. Teraz po wszystkich Hostelach, Pilach a takze rozrostowi internetu ktory teraz jest pierwszy do sarkastycznych przerobek wychodzi nowe GTA ktore jezeli chodzi o pastisz idzie dalej ta sama linia co poprzednicy i niejako wpisuje sie w nurt zamiast stawac okoniem.

 

Ciekawi mnie wlasnie na ile gra ogranicza sie w szokowaniu stawiajac na realizm a na ile przestalismy zwracac uwagi na te szokery bo sa obecnie powszednie.

 

@Mazzeo

 

Jezeli nie interesuje Cie dyskusja to po cholere sie odzywasz? Wracaj na szauta krzyczec GOTG GOTG i daj porozmawiac ludziom.

[MaZZeo 14 183]

A czemu sądzisz że nie interesuje mnie dyskusja? Ja widzę kolejny artykuł, w którym autor ewidentnie na siłę próbuje znaleźć argumenty dla których nie bawi się dobrze przy grze, szczególnie fragment z kradzieżą aut mnie zmiótł - bo teraz jest bardziej realnie i policja nie widzi wszystkiego w każdym zakątku ulicy i nie rzuca ci helikopter na głowę jak ukradniesz auto, i to jest źle tak? Nostalgiczne przywoływanie Vice City, uczuć związanych z przechodzeniem tego tytułu dziesięć lat temu i jednocześnie ignorowanie nowości i zmian której ta seria zaznała przez tą dekadę. Na dodatek sam tytuł artykułu "Tragedy of Grand Theft Auto V" brzmi jak błaganie o kliki.

 

Tu nie chodzi nawet o to że dotyczy to GTA V, po prostu to jest kolejny przykład tego o czym ostatnio mówiłem - dowalanie się do wszystkiego na siłę, szukanie minusów, krytykanctwo, po prostu zastanawiam się czy ludzie reprezentujący gejm żurnalisym w ogóle mają frajdę z grania, czy tylko zaliczają kolejne tytuły po to, by potem błysnąć internetowym grafomaństwem.

 

Szczerze mówiąc to czytanie sieci może skutecznie obrzydzić granie w cokolwiek. Człowiek zamiast usiąść z padem w fotelu i samemu zapoznać się z tytułem to tylko czyta opinie i artykuły mówiące to i tamto, a ty tylko przytakujesz "no, rzeczywiście to jest zje.bane...".

 

Człowiek sobie grał za zasrańca w GTA III i cieszył się tym co gra oferuje, dzisiaj beszta się GTA V (i nie tylko) za to czym grą nie jest. #internet

Edytowane 20 września 2013 przez MaZZeo

[raven_raven 12 013]

Co jest ciekawego w tym artykule? Co powininem odczytać spomiędzy narzekania na brak niemożliwego a nostalgicznym przypominaniem gier z młodości?

Edytowane 20 września 2013 przez raven_raven

[django 549]

A czemu sądzisz że nie interesuje mnie dyskusja? Ja widzę kolejny artykuł, w którym autor ewidentnie na siłę próbuje znaleźć argumenty dla których nie bawi się dobrze przy grze.

Niezbyt dobrze czytałeś więc tekst.

Instead, we have another GTA. It is so big, and so beautiful, and it's fundamentally just another GTA. It's good. I like it. It's fun to mess around in. It's like an SUV through a glass storefront, declaring that you cannot ignore video games.

 

 

Na dodatek sam tytuł artykułu "Tragedy of Grand Theft Auto V" brzmi jak błaganie o kliki.

Nie sadze, aby typowo branżowa Gamasutra w której znajdziesz in-depth relacje z kształtowania gier musiała błagać o kliki. Pomyliło Ci się troszeczkę z Polygonem czy innym Rock Paper Shotgun i ich krucjatami social justice.

 

Tu nie chodzi nawet o to że dotyczy to GTA V, po prostu to jest kolejny przykład tego o czym ostatnio mówiłem - dowalanie się do wszystkiego na siłę, szukanie minusów, krytykanctwo, po prostu zastanawiam się czy ludzie reprezentujący gejm żurnalisym w ogóle mają frajdę z grania, czy tylko zaliczają kolejne tytuły po to, by potem błysnąć internetowym grafomaństwem.

I znowu. Nie mam pojecia dlaczego wychodzisz z zalozenia, ze rozwazanie pewnego aspektu gry jest szukaniem na siły minusów, krytykanctwem ludzi którzy nie czerpią frajdy z grania w daną pozycję. Odwroce troche uwage od serii do ktorej jestes emocjonalnie przywiozany i wskaze chociazby na artykuly Zaxa w PE (jedna z niewielu dobrych rzeczy w tej gazecie ostatnio) a szczegolnie ten o FFXV. Pojawiaja sie pytania o taktykę, pewną kontrolę pola walki znaną z poprzednich części i pare innych elementów. Czy to znaczy, że Zax uważa, że FFXV będzie beznadziejne i czepia się na siłę?

 

"Gejming żurnalizm" nie musi się ograniczać do wlepiania oceny od 7-10, wypisania plusów i minusów w stylu "super grafika", "ale troche tnie" i tyle. Z takim myśleniem to mamy właśnie "Console Wars" a nie "Gaming World".

[Gość _Be_]

 

I zauważ, że to w sumie jej największa zaleta bo i bez tego jest (prawdopodobnie) najlepszą odsłoną. Przypomnijmy sobie co było przy San Adreas. I za to też należą się Rockstar wyrazy uznania. 

 

I czy na pewno nie jest? Wystarczy spojrzeć na niektóre akcje z Trevorem.

 

Ciezko mi sie wypowiadac bo w gre pewnie zagram dopiero ja wyladuje na PC. Ciekawi mnie ta pewna zaleznosc pomiedzy GTA a popkultura. Gdy wychodzily VC i SA (glownie VC) wydaje mi sie, ze popkultura byla bardziej niewinna wiec ostra satyra serwowana przez serie szokowala. Teraz po wszystkich Hostelach, Pilach a takze rozrostowi internetu ktory teraz jest pierwszy do sarkastycznych przerobek wychodzi nowe GTA ktore jezeli chodzi o pastisz idzie dalej ta sama linia co poprzednicy i niejako wpisuje sie w nurt zamiast stawac okoniem.

 

Ciekawi mnie wlasnie na ile gra ogranicza sie w szokowaniu stawiajac na realizm a na ile przestalismy zwracac uwagi na te szokery bo sa obecnie powszednie.

 

 

No własnie tak btw tego szokowania to dzisiaj trafiłem na artykuł Koso na ten temat 

 

Najbardziej brutalna scena w GTA V. Rockstar przekroczył granicę?

 

http://polygamia.pl/Polygamia/1,96455,14638983,Najbardziej_brutalna_scena_w_GTA_V__Rockstar_przekroczyl.html?bo=1

 

Polecam lekturę. 

[Shen 9 620]

Ziew. Nadal jest to dla mnie niepojęte, że coś co można zobaczyć w filmach nadawanych w tv po godzinie 20 w grach jest uważane za szokujące.

[Gość _Be_]

Może dlatego, że branża growa istnieje 4 razy krócej niż filmowa?

[Nemesis 1 268]

Po prostu Gamasutra chciała błysnąć filozoficznymi rozkminami nad mainstreamowym tytułem. A jak chcą zadawać pytania o sens gier to niech lepiej zajmą się badaniem i ogrywaniem gier indie a nie biorą masówki pod lupę. GTA V jest po prostu zayebiste i tyle. Wyszukiwać na siłę jakichś motywów typu "policja wie lub nie" w grze wideo to absurd jakiś. 

 

To ja proponuję napisać felieton o tym jak to zabijając każdego żołnierzyka w Call of Duty niszczymy czyjeś wspomnienia i sierocimy rodzinę. Ehh...

[Suavek 4 652]

 

Główna sprawa o bezprawnym usunięciu z YouTube wideo przedstawiającego wrażenia z gry, ale przy tym sporo innych przykładów powszechnych w branży przekrętów.

 

Nie wiem tylko co jest bardziej przykre - takie oto powszechne wbrew pozorom praktyki, czy fakt, że działalność ta żeruje właśnie na fakcie, iż ludzie są bezmyślni i leniwi. Nie ważne co jest rzetelne i rzeczowe - ważne są cyferki i to co jest "na topie"...

Edytowane 20 października 2013 przez Suavek

[raven_raven 12 013]

Heh, naprawdę jest drama. Chyba naprawdę biorą się za usuwanie filmów, które zarabiały na "copyrighted content". Choć jest trochę dużo naprawdę słabych let's playerów i sprzedawczyków i mam w nosie czy znikną czy nie, to jednak to jest niezłe ograniczanie wolności słowa i kolejny krok w stronę kontroli wszystkich materiałów jakie puszczane są w świat o danej grze. Już niedługo tylko piraci będą jedynym źródłem informacji o gierce zanim ona wyjdzie [*].

 

Tutaj dyskusja o Sasslerze, wypowiadają się też niby inni "jutuberzy" dotknięci tym problemem. http://boards.4chan.org/v/res/215502752

 

TAK WIEM 4CHAN, SĄ ARCHIWA TAKICH STRON WIECIE

 

Edytowane 27 października 2013 przez raven_raven

[Paliodor 1 761]

Cóż TotalBiscuit ma rację w tej sprawie ale takie teraz właśnie czasy, SE też podobno coś tam kombinuje z blokowaniem treści zawierające materiały z ich gier. Wystarczy wspomnieć, że nawet dema coraz rzadsze teraz są, no bo przecież jeszcze ktoś ogra taki kawałek softu i okaże się , że gierka jednak szału na nim nie robi i anuluje pre-order bądź w ogóle nie rozważy zakupu. Dodać do tego cały ten rozdmuchany marketing i mamy idealny przepis by opchać sporo pudełek jakiegoś syfu. Chcesz krytykować jakąś grę? Jasne, ale tylko po premierze, a najlepiej jakbyś w ogóle się nie odzywał, co za chora sytuacja.

Edytowane 27 października 2013 przez Paliodor

[Suavek 4 652]

To już się ciągnie od miesięcy i jest w dużej mierze nadużywane przez japońców. SEGA, Nintendo i Squeenix (oddziały japońskie) kompletnie lecą sobie w kulki jeśli chodzi o youtube'a. Sega usuwa cudze filmy, żeby wpłynąć na wyniki wyszukiwania swoich nowości, Squeenix usuwa lub przywłaszcza sobie dochody z filmów, które zawierają choć odrobinę materiału z ich gier, a Nintendo oprócz powyższych posuwa się do takich absurdów, że bodajże z nowego SSB usuwa tryb Story, bo "ludzie oglądali cut-scenki na youtube".

 

A to tylko uzupełnienie tej całej szopki jaka od lat ma miejsce w komercyjnych mediach, czy innych nagminnych przykładów wciskania ludziom kitu oraz skupiania się nie na dostarczeniu porządnego produktu, lecz na marketingu i/lub "tworzenia gier bardziej przystępnych dla wszystkich".

 

Najbardziej smutne jest to, że ma to miejsce tylko i wyłącznie dlatego, że się sprawdza. O rzetelność coraz trudniej, bo liczy się liczba odwiedzin czy kliknięć oraz ogólna popularność. Działa to na zasadzie podobnej do brukowców, co tylko potęguje ilość fałszywych informacji krążących po sieci pod przykrywką "profesjonalnego żurnalizmu". Osobiście nie jestem już w stanie czytać zdecydowanej większości dużych portali internetowych, bo szlag mnie trafia gdy widzę te wszelkie marne hasełka, gigantyczne bannery reklamowe, newsy sponsorowane, cycki na głównej, plotki i ploteczki, albo inne kontrowersyjne artykuły do nabijania klików. Całość zaś napędzają ludzie, którzy to łykają, włażą, komentują, albo sugerują się świecidełkami lub innymi cyferkami znalezionymi na metacriticu, gdzie z jednej strony mamy nierzadko opłacone media komercyjne, a z drugiej oceny użytkowników, dla których zdaje się nie istnieć nic poza 0 i 10. A jednak, ma to aż takie znaczenie, że w niektórych przypadkach premia pracowników studia jest zależna od noty metacraptica.

 

A potem wchodzi się nawet na takie forum i czyta opinie "hardkor gejmerów" którzy to "profesjonalnych żurnalistów" traktują jak wyrocznie, a noty na MC jako definitywny wyznacznik jakości produktu.

[Stunik 1 402]

Ile ja bym dał, żeby twórcy minecrafta ściągali cały hajs z filmów na YT.

[MaZZeo 14 183]

Że niby Notch to biedny jak mysz kościelna jest?