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?
Would you be interested in perspectives on it from developers themselves?
Very interested in the topics you point out, I think for myself I’d cover them mostly in writing. There’s a larger amount of that style of content popping up these days, but largely in longer video essays that end up being released more sparsely. I used to turn to podcasts for this sort of coverage, but I’m not as aware of gaming podcasts right now.
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.”
if you think you’ll be doing this for a long time, i think “should this be paid or free” is more a question for yourself to determine and not the hypothetical audience you think you’re writing for. at least for now, there is room in the medium for both paid gaming journalism and unpaid gaming journalism.
I think that 404 Media is a great example of a recent independent media organization that has a great user experience and a monetization strategy that doesn’t make me feel gross. A lot of their pull is the excellent journalism and writing, and the fact that the journalists that started it are respected and have a decent following. I don’t know how feasible this type of setup would be without that head start.
Some people might argue it’s a different thing but for me individual YouTubers have replaced the role gaming magazines / websites took in the past. I follow a few who tend to enjoy the same games as I do. They usually do not release their videos right when the embargo is lifted but take a bit more time - which I enjoy.
That said, I could see how a fediverse focused gaming outlet might fill a niche. I don’t think anything like this exists yet and existing outlets barely have a presence here (or I didn’t notice, I haven’t exactly been looking for this).
Your list of ideas meshes pretty well with what I’d like to see: something that’s independent and not just shilling whatever their sponsors are selling; something that presents various perspectives to give an overall view of a game, rather than one influencer’s opinion; and coverage of a wide variety of games beyond the AAA titles. Loving the idea of covering mods and older titles, and don’t forget the indie games.
I’d definitely be more inclined to follow such an outlet if it was in a written format on the fediverse. Maybe I’m just really old, but following influencers and streamers on Twitch and YouTube has never clicked with me. Too much self-aggrandisement, not enough on-topic discussion. For that matter, the other thing I really miss is written guides to games. That’s probably beyond the scope of what you have in mind, but it’s another area of games coverage where too much is on YouTube and Twitch.
Just… more games, less capitalism please?
(Personal finances permitting, I’ll happily support an outlet with good quality content, especially if it’s freely available and not put behind a paywall. I’m so much more amenable to “donate if you like my content” over “you can’t see this until you cough up some cash”.)
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.
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”.
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
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.
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.
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.
When doing game reviews, I’d like to see an outlet who doesn’t prioritise getting out a review on day one or before a games release.
I don’t think it really makes a review more objective if you invest tens or even hundreds of hours into a game before you review it if all of that playtime is done in the space of a few days. This gives the reviewer little time to reflect on their experiences, little time to discuss their experiences with others, or to let their initial “hype” die down so they can step back and look at the game as objectively as it’s possible for any single human to do.
I would call myself a “patient gamer” these days. I do not preorder anything. I don’t get anything on day one of release. I’m not in a rush. Therefore there is no value to me in reviews which are rushed out, if anything I’m less likely to trust it. I especially do not trust any review where review copies are involved.
Therefore, your idea of covering “older titles” gels with me. I’m usually buying older titles on Steam sales anyway. I also like the idea of having numerous potentially conflicting perspectives regarding a game presented together like Giant Bomb does.
Totally agree with you. The hype cycle has killed a lot of interest in recently released titles for me as well, the first 2 weeks it’s the best thing ever, then the tide begins to turn.
Also agree on the Steam point. I’ve been trying to check out more indie games on Steam since it’s maybe the only platform that has decent discovery for them now, outside of Itch. It’s also so hard for indies to get any traction with how journalism and marketing functions outside of paying for it in one way or another.
Does not accept free copies/codes for game or early copies of the games. Access journalism is a plague.
Brings in guests to the show/podcast/whatever who are proficient and knowledgeable about the games being discussed. I don’t expect the hosts to be experts, but I’m tired of hearing layman’s takes on games that I’m interested in.
Would you be interested in supporting an outlet financially? If it’s a good product, I’d support a Patreon or whatever.
Do you have any preferred platforms? Would you be interested in an outlet that prioritizes the Fediverse over Twitch, Youtube, etc.? I think it would be best to post content cross-platform otherwise you risk having a dead community or, worse, a circlejerk community.
Do you have a preference between written content, video, audio? I think video and written are a minimum nowadays with audio being a nice bonus.****
I agree with you on keys/access. Part of why I think being beholden to the release calendar for content is such a problem. It was one thing when previews meant something, now that every publisher/developer promotes directly to their audience and being critical gets you on their bad side, there’s not a huge point to it.
Guests are a good point! That’s been something I’ve wanted to focus on, similar to Giant Bomb at Nite and the Interview Dumptruck. Doing post-mortems with developers could be really interesting.
I hear you on the dead community point as well. Kind of want to encourage discourse happening outside of the big platforms, but using the larger ones to help build an audience.
I’d be interested in an outlet that has reviewers actually finish the game before writing their review. I get the perceived need to release a review as early as possible, but personally I’m willing to wait if it means a more accurate, thorough review (I’m more of a “patient gamer” these days anyway).
Inviting guest reviewers could also be a good idea I think. Always good to get different perspectives and voices.
As for mediums, I prefer video for reviews as it allows for demonstrations of different aspects of the game. This is especially helpful when talking about a game’s performance and artistic direction.
Generally, what you have on the list is what I want to see from a gaming news outlet. I especially like the idea of focusing on older games, mods, niche communities, and that sort of thing. I guess if there was more of something I wanted to see in games journalism it’s more in-depth coverage of gaming topics and less rushing to cover the latest AAA release. I’d much rather be reading a long-form article about microtransactions or watching a video essay on the possibility of a video game actor strike than reading about where to find the best ship or weapon in Starfield. Of course, I’m just some random person on the internet, so take that all with a grain of salt.
You are not logged in. However you can subscribe from another Fediverse account, for example Lemmy or Mastodon. To do this, paste the following into the search field of your instance: !gaming@beehaw.org
From video gaming to card games and stuff in between, if it’s gaming you can probably discuss it here!
Please Note: Gaming memes are permitted to be posted on Meme Mondays, but will otherwise be removed in an effort to allow other discussions to take place.
deleted by creator
Would you be interested in perspectives on it from developers themselves?
Very interested in the topics you point out, I think for myself I’d cover them mostly in writing. There’s a larger amount of that style of content popping up these days, but largely in longer video essays that end up being released more sparsely. I used to turn to podcasts for this sort of coverage, but I’m not as aware of gaming podcasts right now.
deleted by creator
if you think you’ll be doing this for a long time, i think “should this be paid or free” is more a question for yourself to determine and not the hypothetical audience you think you’re writing for. at least for now, there is room in the medium for both paid gaming journalism and unpaid gaming journalism.
I think that 404 Media is a great example of a recent independent media organization that has a great user experience and a monetization strategy that doesn’t make me feel gross. A lot of their pull is the excellent journalism and writing, and the fact that the journalists that started it are respected and have a decent following. I don’t know how feasible this type of setup would be without that head start.
Drama. Just drama. Reviews about other video gamers drama.
Some people might argue it’s a different thing but for me individual YouTubers have replaced the role gaming magazines / websites took in the past. I follow a few who tend to enjoy the same games as I do. They usually do not release their videos right when the embargo is lifted but take a bit more time - which I enjoy.
That said, I could see how a fediverse focused gaming outlet might fill a niche. I don’t think anything like this exists yet and existing outlets barely have a presence here (or I didn’t notice, I haven’t exactly been looking for this).
Your list of ideas meshes pretty well with what I’d like to see: something that’s independent and not just shilling whatever their sponsors are selling; something that presents various perspectives to give an overall view of a game, rather than one influencer’s opinion; and coverage of a wide variety of games beyond the AAA titles. Loving the idea of covering mods and older titles, and don’t forget the indie games.
I’d definitely be more inclined to follow such an outlet if it was in a written format on the fediverse. Maybe I’m just really old, but following influencers and streamers on Twitch and YouTube has never clicked with me. Too much self-aggrandisement, not enough on-topic discussion. For that matter, the other thing I really miss is written guides to games. That’s probably beyond the scope of what you have in mind, but it’s another area of games coverage where too much is on YouTube and Twitch.
Just… more games, less capitalism please?
(Personal finances permitting, I’ll happily support an outlet with good quality content, especially if it’s freely available and not put behind a paywall. I’m so much more amenable to “donate if you like my content” over “you can’t see this until you cough up some cash”.)
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
I don’t think you know what those words mean.
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”.
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
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.
which is why you clarify your opinions as such, removing the subjectivity from the objective parts.
ffs, it’s called journalism
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.
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.
When doing game reviews, I’d like to see an outlet who doesn’t prioritise getting out a review on day one or before a games release.
I don’t think it really makes a review more objective if you invest tens or even hundreds of hours into a game before you review it if all of that playtime is done in the space of a few days. This gives the reviewer little time to reflect on their experiences, little time to discuss their experiences with others, or to let their initial “hype” die down so they can step back and look at the game as objectively as it’s possible for any single human to do.
I would call myself a “patient gamer” these days. I do not preorder anything. I don’t get anything on day one of release. I’m not in a rush. Therefore there is no value to me in reviews which are rushed out, if anything I’m less likely to trust it. I especially do not trust any review where review copies are involved.
Therefore, your idea of covering “older titles” gels with me. I’m usually buying older titles on Steam sales anyway. I also like the idea of having numerous potentially conflicting perspectives regarding a game presented together like Giant Bomb does.
Totally agree with you. The hype cycle has killed a lot of interest in recently released titles for me as well, the first 2 weeks it’s the best thing ever, then the tide begins to turn.
Also agree on the Steam point. I’ve been trying to check out more indie games on Steam since it’s maybe the only platform that has decent discovery for them now, outside of Itch. It’s also so hard for indies to get any traction with how journalism and marketing functions outside of paying for it in one way or another.
People Make Games is a channel that I would call game journalism. Look at their coverage about Disco Elysium, its really great.
I’d be interested in an outlet that:
Would you be interested in supporting an outlet financially? If it’s a good product, I’d support a Patreon or whatever.
Do you have any preferred platforms? Would you be interested in an outlet that prioritizes the Fediverse over Twitch, Youtube, etc.? I think it would be best to post content cross-platform otherwise you risk having a dead community or, worse, a circlejerk community.
Do you have a preference between written content, video, audio? I think video and written are a minimum nowadays with audio being a nice bonus.****
I agree with you on keys/access. Part of why I think being beholden to the release calendar for content is such a problem. It was one thing when previews meant something, now that every publisher/developer promotes directly to their audience and being critical gets you on their bad side, there’s not a huge point to it.
Guests are a good point! That’s been something I’ve wanted to focus on, similar to Giant Bomb at Nite and the Interview Dumptruck. Doing post-mortems with developers could be really interesting.
I hear you on the dead community point as well. Kind of want to encourage discourse happening outside of the big platforms, but using the larger ones to help build an audience.
I’d be interested in an outlet that has reviewers actually finish the game before writing their review. I get the perceived need to release a review as early as possible, but personally I’m willing to wait if it means a more accurate, thorough review (I’m more of a “patient gamer” these days anyway).
Inviting guest reviewers could also be a good idea I think. Always good to get different perspectives and voices.
As for mediums, I prefer video for reviews as it allows for demonstrations of different aspects of the game. This is especially helpful when talking about a game’s performance and artistic direction.
Generally, what you have on the list is what I want to see from a gaming news outlet. I especially like the idea of focusing on older games, mods, niche communities, and that sort of thing. I guess if there was more of something I wanted to see in games journalism it’s more in-depth coverage of gaming topics and less rushing to cover the latest AAA release. I’d much rather be reading a long-form article about microtransactions or watching a video essay on the possibility of a video game actor strike than reading about where to find the best ship or weapon in Starfield. Of course, I’m just some random person on the internet, so take that all with a grain of salt.