170°

E3 2013 Reveals Gaming Journalism Is Bulls#!t And Other Secrets You Didn't Know

FleshEatingZipper writes: "So you run a gaming web site. You have a decent following and good traffic and while you’re not an internet celebrity, you are willing to travel halfway across the country (or further) on your own time and dollar to cover the latest and greatest games for your readers. But even after building a network of contacts, you’ll simply be shut out by the biggest companies, even lied to. Coverage of the expo’s biggest events are ruled by an exclusive few, an inner circle – the IGNs, the GameTrailers and the Giant Bombs – and everyone else is shut out entirely. Unless you’re in the business of covering indie titles by small developers, gaming journalism boils down to being in an established circle of friends – the touted 300-400 full-time gaming journalists that this industry can support – having a lot of financial backing to kick your way in or being a major news outlet like ABC or Fox News. If you’re not any of those, you’re iced out of coverage at the highest tiers. Let me explain how getting your gaming site into E3 works."

Read Full Story >>
flesheatingzipper.com
kellykarnetsky3962d ago

It sucks being low on the totem pole.

TFXR3962d ago

Yeah, it does. Yet so many people make the trek and get treated so badly.

Abriael3962d ago (Edited 3962d ago )

Sorry, but there's only one solution to this. Instead of complaining about being treated unfairly, put your head down and work, work, work until you either burn out or get the recognition you think you deserve.

If you burn out before you get there, then maybe you simply aren't as good as you think. If you work on your site less than ten hours a day, you probably aren't doing enough.

(and I'm using "you" as a generic you, I don't know you, so don't take it personally).

Yes, game journalism is not a huggly, easy, friendly place for the faint of heart or the easily discouraged, and yes, some people have more access than others. Guess what? Most of those people earned it the same way everyone does. By getting doors slammed in their face over and over and over.

I've done it for 16 years, both on print and web, up and down, and I still get doors slammed in my face at times. It's entirely normal.

We're dealing with companies that are at E3, Gamescom, Tokyo Game Show and other conventions to gather visibility and ultimately make a buck. Their time is limited. Their developers can't see everyone in four days. So they'll give access to those that will give them the most visibility in return first, and then the others if there's room left.

Sounds cold and harsh and unfair? It is. It's called the reality of business.
Roll with the punches or don't roll at all.

jsslifelike3962d ago

@Abriael

What a cop out. If you're a company and you accept appointments, you should be held to keeping them. Actually, more articles should be written/published like this so then end-consumer can learn to avoid the products of companies that can't even help being shady at the middle of the process. Now, if we could just get gamers to have any kind of balls to skip over these products out of principle, maybe this would change.

Abriael3962d ago (Edited 3962d ago )

@jsslifelike: if you think the "end consumer" cares about the woes of a few writers, you're naive. Even more so to the point of avoiding getting the game they want.

That's an entirely laughable statement.

"hey gamers! boycott the game because they didn't let me into the booth!"

Please...

As much as I can sympathize with the predicament, part of being a professional also involves accepting that problems happen and taking it in stride, instead of taking it personally and shaking one's angry fist at the "privileged!", while thinking that saying " I'm media!" should open all doors.

DragonKnight3962d ago

@Abriael: Have you ever once worked in gaming journalism? It has little to do with hard work today and more about partnerships and contacts which is why it sucks. Seriously, don't talk about what you don't know.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 3962d ago
Garethvk3962d ago (Edited 3962d ago )

While it is true the big guys get special treatment, we had EA, Microsoft, Activision, Bethesda, Konami, Disney, Sega, Sony, and a few others extend us invites to their events and well as proivides us booth tours. If you build a good reputation the invites will come.

But they are dead on. Not just at E3 others shows as well. I remember one company who promised and interview and full review. So we did site, radio, magazine and other coverage. Only after they got coverage did they say oh we cannot do that the person at the booth at no right to offer that. So I cut them off from all reviews and promotion. A year later they asked to meet with me at PAX. I sent an intern.

TFXR3962d ago (Edited 3962d ago )

It wasn't so much the invites, it was the malicious fibbing, thinking we had a chance of seeing stuff. Then not being able to get on the show floor early to make the appointments you do have? C'mon...

Garethvk3962d ago

You are dead on. We tend to make sure to do meetings with those who have treated us right in the past and new companies. I prefer drop ins for most but the top flight stuff. PAX is a good one to get to as it caters to press and fans. There are so many fans they often are more receptive plus being in Sep, this is often their last chance to get coverage from you before the holiday releases.

TFXR3962d ago

@Gareth Unfortunately, since this was a banner year with so many big unveilings, it was especially frustrating to not see many of those top games.

kellykarnetsky3962d ago

It's really tough building a rep sometimes with the bigger companies because they want you to email a general PR email and you get a new person responding every time.

Garethvk3962d ago

Big issue now is that so many use PR firms and they have their list of must sends and then their favorites. They are famous for oh we do not have enough to go around. So thats why if they pull that three times in a row, they are out until it changes. No matter if your small or not, if you stop covering them they will come around. But the way the pr reps change so much makes it tough. When I started, even before the site you dealt with one or two people at the company directly. For some I have two or three agencies and about 6 contacts so its a pain to get things done.

TFXR3962d ago

Yeah, it's frustrating when even different games have different PR agencies at the same studio. It's just weird how they buffer all that now.

HarryMasonHerpderp3962d ago

I don't know why you had those problems. You would think they would be eager for EVERYONE to see their games and get as much exposure as possible, it makes no sense. Some of the suits running things behind the scenes just have no clue what they're doing and have no place in the videogame industry.

Garethvk3962d ago

I had started a Orginization/Union of sites for film reviews years ago. Big and small present a united front, share resources and such. Those who took part did well but sadly many took the resources, would not share and oddly enough, are all gone now. I would be up for doing this though for games.

TFXR3962d ago

Would be interesting to even set up an "indie media" booth, but I know those are crazy expensive.

Garethvk3962d ago

The key would be getting some sponsors who would pay to be shown. Like how some games or hardware share a space. See our new game X while taking a tour of the Y hardware booth.

You could always do what some indies do and hold meetings in a hotel near the venue.

clank5433962d ago

Do we need that many more gaming journalists? I mean, I get everything I need to out of either Giantbomb or IGN. I never really go wanting for much else, honestly.

Virtual_Reality3962d ago

Just saying, but Giantbomb and or IGN does not cover entirely all the details in the industry of gaming.

MikeyDucati13962d ago (Edited 3962d ago )

lol man when it comes to IGN and Giantbomb, I rather have the little guy. You know why? Cause I know IGN is getting treated nicely and paid nicely to be nothing more than a big advertising site for the games they cover. An IGN editor get all pissed at me for comments I made about his co worker (or co-editor, however you want to call it) review on Dust 514. I felt he judged Dust 514 unfairly due to him being used to easy, pick up and play shooters like COD. This guy begins nitpicking my posts as if I was some 13 year old child. No, I've been around since Atari and it was quite apparent he had prerequisites for Dust that were formulated through previous FPS titles who follow each others' trends. He didn't judge it upon its own merit. So yes, I can appreciate a little variety instead of having the "big dogs" sell me a dream just so they can still get insider industry access and perks.

HarryMasonHerpderp3962d ago

Yeah you can't trust the big sites anymore.
There's just too much money involved for them to be 100% honest.

nismo153962d ago

Xbones reveal was Bulls#!t know that much having to edit in clapping for its conference , desperation is a stinky cologne

Bathyj3962d ago

that wasn't necessary at all. totally off topic.

but I do like the super troopers reference.

Show all comments (31)
110°

Why The Game Industry Needs In-Person Shows Despite The End Of E3

Skewed and Reviewed kick off 2024 with a look at the need for in-person game conventions with the End of E3 and compares the cost-cutting methods of Hollywood who still value in-person events.

gold_drake109d ago

so, this article didnt tell me why we NEED to have in-person shows like e3, other than the authors nostalgia and remembrance of covering one of these shows.

but it also doesnt mention everyone outside of america who have never had the chance to see it in person either haha
we had to watch the darn livestream, if they had it available, at 3am in the morning haha with lags amd crashes (not all the time)

while i think these shows are great and all, i dont really "need" to have them. people are busy, im busy. id rather watch a livestream than to book a flight, a hotel etc.

but theres still pax and all of that.

Garethvk109d ago (Edited 109d ago )

I did mention that you cannot have hands-on and meetings with key people and the excitement. Europe has Gamescom and had Paris Games Week and N.A
Needs an industry event again.

A Livestream does not even come close to what was lost. I much prefer seeing and playing the games in person and asking questions to developers and marketing people versus watching talking heads doing shtick on a scripted showcase with a carefully edited video.

gold_drake109d ago

"need" is a strong word for it, imo.

"good to have it" would be a better way to describe it.

and sure, gamescom is in se germanland, paris week in .. paris.

most people dont rly care for it anymore. they either tune in to a livestream or vod or read about it online.

but opinions are opinions. if u think we Need them, then there ya go.

Garethvk109d ago

I think the industry needs them. The rank and file public not as much but our coverage is greatly limited via livestreams compared to what it was to say nothing of streams. Hands on previews Re very limited as well as we used to play big games months before release.

ApocalypseShadow109d ago (Edited 109d ago )

I get what you're saying. In person is always preferable with a hands on. Because there are those like myself that like to try before buying. That likes physical mostly over digital.

But having said that, I think it's more *your personal need* than a need for the industry itself. You need to be the middleman giving your point of view, possibly your own personal bias or subjectivity or objectivity to the equation. *We* as gamers don't actually NEED it. We can come to the same conclusions, positive or negative about a game as you can.

Companies like Sony or Nintendo used to sit back and watch others give their take on things that were negative to the message or had an agenda. Especially during the PS3 era of website bias, swag bags, advertising hand shakes, biased video, free laptops, etc.

Companies like Sony took the reigns and decided to let their base see for themselves what the games look like, than through the eyes of some journalists, bloggers and vloggers looking to cash in on click bait and advertising.

Delivering their message directly to the consumer killed a lot of that nonsense. You see the developers, you see the game, and in many cases, you can speak to these developers on discord than worrying about some article's take on something.

It's not that I want you to become obsolete. But for some, I'm glad it killed their business practices. Also, we live in an era where these games could be streamed directly to the consumers after the presentation from Nintendo, Sony and Microsoft that gives that hands on of a game. They just have to implement that technology and make it high quality without latency. And *WE* as gamers can speak to each other on a preferred media platform and give our opinions on the gameplay we just experienced. Many journalists have not been fully honest on games before release because they fear losing their backstage pass and free gifts. We would know just by playing if a game is something we want. Remote play is possible now without lines, without expensive trips, etc.

To close, Sony has sold mostly 50 million PS5 consoles, over 110 million PS4 consoles and Nintendo has sold over 120 million consoles without a journalist take. They delivered their message and it's still reaching the consumers they are targeting without spending the millions of dollars on in person setup at a venue

I get what you're saying. I lived through the whole era when E3 was created and watched. But I don't need it and never been to one. And really don't need a journalist to tell me what to like or dislike.

EvertonFC108d ago

The ques for 1 game were 4 hours long for the most part, that's NOT fun.

S2Killinit108d ago

The problem with live shows was that it became all smoke and mirrors and a show of things not related to gaming. Therefore I would argue that it added a new layer of cost to the game developers and console holders that necessarily will need to made up for. Either we the consumer have to pay for that cost or the developer/manufacturer will have to bear the cost thereby taking away from profits leading to smaller studios dying out.

Remember xbox buying celebrities to make appearances? Thats a good example of unnecessary cost.

+ Show (2) more repliesLast reply 108d ago
JackBNimble109d ago

You don't need to go to the movies either, you can sit on your ass and watch any number of streams but that doesn't make it any better then actually going out.

This generation has become so spoiled and lazy.

gold_drake109d ago

booking a flight and a hotel aint the same as going to the movies, but pop off i guess ha.

Garethvk108d ago

Streaming cannot replace the communal experience of event films.

EvertonFC108d ago (Edited 108d ago )

Actually it does, for one it's cheaper eating my own snacks at home than over priced pi** take cinema prices. 2 it's About £150 to take the family to the cinema or £15 for a new cinema release and watch at home on my awesome 4k TV.
3 We can pause the film when needed, sit in the warmth of our home and have no di*kheads talking through the movie.
That's called using your brain, not being lazy or spoiled dude.

TheColbertinator108d ago

I'd rather publishers send out closed betas to garner gamer concern and interest like how we had demos back in the day.

I don't miss E3 as much as I loved it at one point but that era is long gone.

Garethvk108d ago

There is a need but refinement was and is needed.

Zenzuu108d ago

Sad to see it go. It was a great event for gamers and developers all around the world getting together and celebrate gaming as a community.

The announcements of new games/hardware, hype, surprises and seeing live audience reactions, it's something only events like E3 are able to bring. It will be missed...

hombreacabado108d ago

if its going to be anything like the game awards where celebrities that dont even play games are there and its just full of fluff and commercial crap than no we dont need in person shows. we just end up watching the trailer montages the next day anyway.

Shiro173108d ago

To be honest E3 was one of my favorite times of the years when I was younger. I couldn't wait for all the big conferences and new announcements. It was hype even if nothing good was announced we had cringe moments to laugh at.

Show all comments (18)
50°

The Rise and Fall of E3

Rest in peace, E3. It may be easy to understand why you wasted away, but you will be missed.

Read Full Story >>
gamingbolt.com
Terry_B127d ago

Nah..it won't be missed. Times changed.

mastershredder125d ago (Edited 125d ago )

E3 pre-2005 will be missed, everything after than ain't even close or worthy of mention to be missed. Late 90's E3's were phenominal, especially the after parties.

Dwarrior125d ago

Those that scoff and hand-wave it away are kids that were never there. Peak E3 was peak gaming.

It already IS missed.

darthv72125d ago

"$299".... and the rest was history.

jznrpg125d ago

It’s been dead for a good while so I don’t miss it. Things change

30°

Remembering the most chaotic trade show, E3

Pour one out for E3; it's finally deader than the dodo.

Read Full Story >>
knowtechie.com