MMR: The Fading Line Between Blogging and Reporting in the V

i was rolling with you until the whole Destructoid thing. Now I never heard about they did until I read your article/blog/whatever it's supposed to be.

While I don't think everyone needs to agree with their point of view about their stunt; I do find it entertaining that all of the "real gaming journalist" are up in arms about it and how it affects their credibility. Those guys did this at E3, not at a press conference with Larry King or for CNN. Despite what you and others may think, out of all of the different types of journalism out there, I don't see why gaming journalism needs to conform with what everyone else does. By doing so, you are just telling that reporter at CNN, "hey look at me, i'm cool too! can i be a part of the club." If you are a journalist with integrity, it shouldn't matter what you wear to a press conference. Also, I don't know if (insert CNN reporter) would give you anymore credibility for wearing a shirt and tie or polo shirt anyway.

To me, if they didn't want someone with the robot head in the press conference, they shouldn't have let him in, in the first place. If the rules for the convention state that you need to be apart of a media outlet then they should have been more specific in their rules. Maybe if they had done that initially, they wouldn't need to downgrade their show.

In either case, video games news is still about video games and that includes the fun youthful exuberance of it. I think video game journalist should exhibit that to a certain extent as well. While I agree that their should be some journalist integrity, I think other aspects should be addressed.

For example, Previews for games have gotten pretty crazy. They are hype machines within themselves that push whatever images and movies they are given and they also are supposed to give a journalist's view of how the game plays. However, very seldom do you see a journalist talk about how the game isn't very good so far. They use terms like "not well polished" which is always followed by, "I'm sure they are going to fix that before the game is released." And sometimes, certain gameplay aspects aren't even addressed until they get the final copy and say, "oh the gameplay is weak" to which I instinctively say, "Why didn't you mention that when you had the preview?"

At this point, I think many seasoned gamers have lost all faith in most videogame websites previews and reviews as they seem to be nothing more than hype machines that do nothing but get people clamoring behind a game who then turn around and ask for more screens and videos of said game.

To your first point: i think that in lies the problem. E3 used to be an important event that had basically become a parlor show. It's importance to the industry might still be there but for the rest of us, I don't feel that it was THAT important anymore. Sites like Gamestop and IGN have basically made it unnecessary since they get their "exclusive hands-on" time with those same games. Having them all at one event didn't seem to make as much sense anymore.....but that's probably E3 was scaled down.

the your second point:
Even though I consider video games very important, I don't really see what the ESA does at this point in time. I'm sure alot of what they do is transparent to the public but maybe it shouldn't be if they want to be taken more seriously.