As The Words Turn
Brian Hook has a really nice article about what Game Journalism is (and certainly isn't) right now. He says that gaming journalism is weak. That is lacks substance, style, and god knows any sort of attitude.
And he's absolutely right.
There is such a chasm between actual content and smoke blowing that when you read a gaming article with substance (or a good gaming journalism site), you are flabbergasted at how good it is. And this is true, as most to all gaming journalism is crap.
I found another very recent example: Do Trade Shows Benefit Gamers?
That is one of the most worthless pieces I've ever read. It's a pompous history lesson, and a tells us absolutely nothing. So E3 has turned to booth babes. The PC is leaning toward the console arena. Some shows died because tech is more evolutionary than revolutionary.
Big fucking deal. This is the game industry. These shows were always meant to showcase new wares and new ideas. Whether they are evolutionary or not. Whether they are flashy or not. And usually, they are there for simple networking. They do not provide Joe Gamer with much of anything. Were they ever meant to? They are trade shows. That means you must be in the trade to even attend them. Why does this article exist?
I have no idea why. It doesn't tell me anything as a gamer. It doesn't tell me anything, even in my distant way, about the game industry that I am of but a drop in the ocean of talent.
This type of article, showcased on a good site (AVault really does have some good reviews), shows what kind of fluffiness passes for gaming journalism. There are no hard questions, or answers, merely denoument from a guy who wants to write how trade shows die and what goes in to killing them. People lose interest.
Tits are more interesting than a server box. Oh lord, stop the presses.
Do Trade Shows Benefit Gamers? Not directly. There's your 2-word answer, turned into 3 pages of bullshit.
And he's absolutely right.
There is such a chasm between actual content and smoke blowing that when you read a gaming article with substance (or a good gaming journalism site), you are flabbergasted at how good it is. And this is true, as most to all gaming journalism is crap.
I found another very recent example: Do Trade Shows Benefit Gamers?
That is one of the most worthless pieces I've ever read. It's a pompous history lesson, and a tells us absolutely nothing. So E3 has turned to booth babes. The PC is leaning toward the console arena. Some shows died because tech is more evolutionary than revolutionary.
Big fucking deal. This is the game industry. These shows were always meant to showcase new wares and new ideas. Whether they are evolutionary or not. Whether they are flashy or not. And usually, they are there for simple networking. They do not provide Joe Gamer with much of anything. Were they ever meant to? They are trade shows. That means you must be in the trade to even attend them. Why does this article exist?
I have no idea why. It doesn't tell me anything as a gamer. It doesn't tell me anything, even in my distant way, about the game industry that I am of but a drop in the ocean of talent.
This type of article, showcased on a good site (AVault really does have some good reviews), shows what kind of fluffiness passes for gaming journalism. There are no hard questions, or answers, merely denoument from a guy who wants to write how trade shows die and what goes in to killing them. People lose interest.
Tits are more interesting than a server box. Oh lord, stop the presses.
Do Trade Shows Benefit Gamers? Not directly. There's your 2-word answer, turned into 3 pages of bullshit.
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
Links to this post:
Create a Link
<< Home