What would you be interested in out of a modern games focused journalism outlet? - eviltoast

Hey Fediverse -

I’ve been seeing a lot of discussion around the lack of game outlets that people like to follow nowadays. I used to follow a decent amount, but with how many of them have changed - Giant Bomb, PC Gamer, RockPaperShotgun, Game Informer - I also have been looking for a new outlet/community.

I’ve been working towards starting an outlet myself, and I’m wondering what folks would like to see out of one. My list:

  • Independent, or more so. Referral links make it hard to trust an outlet being unbiased if they have a financial incentive to promote things.
  • Discourse focused: Modern coverage, especially from influencers, is a lot of a singular person speaking. Giant Bomb especially had great dynamics between the various perspectives when covering a game.
  • Diverse Coverage: By this I mean, not just focused on AAA titles and the yearly release calendar. Covering mods, older titles, different communities (speedrunners, small multiplayer communities, etc.)

Other questions:

  • Would you be interested in supporting an outlet financially? Would you even if all content was available freely, eg. public media as opposed to “premium access.”
  • Do you have any preferred platforms? Would you be interested in an outlet that prioritizes the Fediverse over Twitch, Youtube, etc.?
  • Do you have a preference between written content, video, audio?
  • RandoCalrandian@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    The crux of this issue comes down to trust.

    Do I believe the “journalism” whatever outlet you make produces, that it’s what it pretends to be: an unbiased, honest, authentic, and objective opinion piece on a game? Or is it going to be (now or in the future when you sell out) marketing garbage whose purpose is to try and get me to spend money, no matter what lies it needs to tell to do so?

    So classic User Value versus Profit motive conundrum.

    It’s not a conflict that’s easily resolvable, and I’m far more stingy these days of allowing myself to be profited off of without concrete (to me) value in return, and tbh I don’t see how any type of game review service could avoid the temptations of profit enough for me to trust a damned thing they say.

    Good luck, tho

      • RandoCalrandian@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        You can have an unbiased and objective opinion, pretty easily, in fact
        You simply don’t pretend your own opinions are facts everyone should take wholesale, and say as much

        • Poopfeast420@feddit.de
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          An opinion is always subjective, the opposite of objective. Reviews are also always subjective. There is no such thing as an objective review. This also means it can’t be unbiased, because a reviewers’ opinion will of course always be influenced by their experiences and stuff going on in their lives or the world.

          • RandoCalrandian@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            which is why you clarify your opinions as such, removing the subjectivity from the objective parts.

            ffs, it’s called journalism

      • luciole (he/him)@beehaw.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Nah mate. I took a minute to search “objective opinion” and I’d suggest you do the same. It may look sort of oxymoronic but it’s definitely a time-honored expression. Opinions may be based on facts and analysis. An expert’s judgement is one valid definition for “opinion”.

    • houseofkeb@lemm.eeOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Like the other commenter discussed, I think objective when it comes to reviews is a very tricky idea. My ideal solution to it is having multiple perspectives on a game from an outlet, not necessarily in a review score, but in other formats. That’s part of what I loved about Giant Bomb, I’d typically like what Jeff did, but might not be as into a Brad or Dan game all the time.

      I don’t think the idea of objectivity makes a ton of sense at this point, but an authentic perspective can serve that role.

      I think a large part of why so many outlets sell out is due to the idea of infinite growth and/or revenue dropping from Youtube/Twitch/etc. taking more of a cut. Ideally this would be solved by remaining small, focused, and less dependent on revenue sources that can change on a whim.

      • RandoCalrandian@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        it really is as simple as being able to distinguish opinions from facts, and clarifying each in the revew.

        Facts: This game has X combat, Y selectable characters, the crafting looks like Z, etc.

        Opinons: This game is amazing! 10/10! Best story of all time! GOTY!, etc

        You absolutely can have an objective game review, it’s just that no writer wants to do that. They’d rather make it more about their opinions of the game than of the game.