15 replies to this topic

[xg4bx]

and it falls on the shoulder of modern game journalists.

it is literally impossible to read about an upcoming game without having every single surprise ruined for you. we know every enemy, every level, set pieces to look out for, every secret, every achievement, etc.

to get the full enjoyment out of a game you have to completely ignore every single article about it and even thats no guarantee because they like to give spoilers in the headline. to go into a game without expectations, one must totally divorce themselves from the entire gaming media.

i knew so much about killzone 2 going into it,for example, that i almost didnt even have to play it because nothing was left for me to discover.

just from the headlines alone i know who the enemies in arkham city are and what the unlockable costumes are. why do i need to play it now? i'll pick it up used or after a price drop.

not to sound like an old man but back in my day we were lucky if we got more than a handful of screenshots and a blurb.

in their rush to fill content i think gaming sites are doing the entire industry a disservice.

[Rex Dart]

I do miss the 1994 GamePro / EGM days of VG journalism.

[Austin]

Maybe you should stop reading modern gaming press?

Rex Dart, on Mon Aug 22, 2011 5:20 PM, said:

I do miss the 1994 GamePro / EGM days of VG journalism.

Likewise. And add GameFan to that list.

Edited by Austin, Mon Aug 22, 2011 5:22 PM.

[Rex Dart]

Austin, on Mon Aug 22, 2011 5:20 PM, said:

Maybe you should stop reading modern gaming press?

Pretty much; his complaint is "I can't read everything about a game without learning everything about a game." Just quit after a point.

[AtariLeaf]

Blame the interwebs. Remember the good old days when you had to actually go out and buy a magazine if you wanted info on new games?

Same thing with movies. I try so hard to avoid reviews before I see a movie but I see so many links on sites I visit regularly with tag lines about how this movie sucks or that movie is movie of the year. Dammit!

[HammR25]

xg4bx, on Mon Aug 22, 2011 5:17 PM, said:

and it falls on the shoulder of modern game journalists.

it is literally impossible to read about an upcoming game without having every single surprise ruined for you. we know every enemy, every level, set pieces to look out for, every secret, every achievement, etc.

to get the full enjoyment out of a game you have to completely ignore every single article about it and even that's no guarantee because they like to give spoilers in the headline. to go into a game without expectations, one must totally divorce themselves from the entire gaming media.

i knew so much about killzone 2 going into it,for example, that i almost didn't even have to play it because nothing was left for me to discover.

just from the headlines alone i know who the enemies in arkham city are and what the unlockable costumes are. why do i need to play it now? I'll pick it up used or after a price drop.

not to sound like an old man but back in my day we were lucky if we got more than a handful of screenshots and a blurb.

in their rush to fill content i think gaming sites are doing the entire industry a disservice.

This is all you need:

http://www.ign.com/index/upcoming.html
http://games.gamepre...ncyclopedia.asp

Now on to your next regularly scheduled rant.

[Mord]

AtariLeaf, on Mon Aug 22, 2011 5:30 PM, said:

Same thing with movies. I try so hard to avoid reviews before I see a movie but I see so many links on sites I visit regularly with tag lines about how this movie sucks or that movie is movie of the year. Dammit!

Not too much different from just reading the back of a movie's dvd/vhs case in the old days then, depending on the movie. I swear there were times I'd read the summary on the back of the movie case and realize I've been told every major plot, including the resolution, of the movie contained within.

[Nukey Shay]

The backs? Sometimes, a major spoiler is given right on the DVD's cover (the picture on Hudsucker Proxy is one).

[onlysublime]

xg4bx, on Mon Aug 22, 2011 5:17 PM, said:

and it falls on the shoulder of modern game journalists.

it is literally impossible to read about an upcoming game without having every single surprise ruined for you. we know every enemy, every level, set pieces to look out for, every secret, every achievement, etc.

to get the full enjoyment out of a game you have to completely ignore every single article about it and even thats no guarantee because they like to give spoilers in the headline. to go into a game without expectations, one must totally divorce themselves from the entire gaming media.

i knew so much about killzone 2 going into it,for example, that i almost didnt even have to play it because nothing was left for me to discover.

just from the headlines alone i know who the enemies in arkham city are and what the unlockable costumes are. why do i need to play it now? i'll pick it up used or after a price drop.

not to sound like an old man but back in my day we were lucky if we got more than a handful of screenshots and a blurb.

in their rush to fill content i think gaming sites are doing the entire industry a disservice.

so you miss the dark ages of no Internet and you had to buy $5 magazines where half the pages were ads and that were 3 months behind in information because of publishing lead-time?

[moycon]

In my opinion, if your biggest gripe with modern games is your own inability to avoid information about them, then you have no legitimate gripe with modern games.

[Video]

I can kind of see what you mean, but it's not like anybody requires you to read about the games.

Me, I personally got magazines, but am months behind in reading them, so it's not much help to me. I just enjoy reading about them, but I'm often so hopelessly behind that I'm usually readingabout games I've already played/beaten/not going back to.

Anyhow, as for internet vs magazines. it seems to me the internet is in the real dark ages. Funny, they get the games and can instantly get the intel out to the public about the games....so why is it that only one person publishes and the other half millions or so sites simply cut and paste what "the other guys" said? Granted the magazines may not be much different, but you usually get some of the writers humor in there, and have a greater chance of the info actually being somewhat accurate.

[Vic George 2K3]

moycon, on Fri Aug 26, 2011 1:49 AM, said:

In my opinion, if your biggest gripe with modern games is your own inability to avoid information about them, then you have no legitimate gripe with modern games.

Then their gripe should be aimed at the game journalists.

[Necron99]

Vic George 2K3, on Tue Aug 30, 2011 5:32 AM, said:

moycon, on Fri Aug 26, 2011 1:49 AM, said:

In my opinion, if your biggest gripe with modern games is your own inability to avoid information about them, then you have no legitimate gripe with modern games.

Then their gripe should be aimed at the game journalists.

I can't even look at modern gaming news sites anymore, a lot of the time they just feed you too much information about the game. an example right now is Call of Duty Modern Warfare 3....it's EVERYWHERE and takes up 95% of the articles on G4's the Feed.

I prefer getting Magazines where I can read an article while taking a dump and then Google(after washing my hands of course) any interesting ones to see further if it's worthwhile or not, I don't like getting caught up in any hype.

[Mendon]

I just read that Game Informer has a 10 page in-depth story on Skyward Sword in their newest issue. I've been avoiding EVERY news story and video about the game and will continue to do so because I want to be totally surprised when I buy and start playing the game.


Mendon

[Algus]

Ehh, I haven't had that problem. I only have two "game news" sites bookmarked though, the Gamespot news section and GamePolitics. GamePolitics doesn't often cover new releases or whatever since it tends to look for political-related stories to gaming. GameSpot's news section doesn't have reviews in it and a lot of their headlines aren't to sensational. Although yeah, they will entice you by revealing gameplay features in the headlines.

I guess it just isn't an issue for me because I'd like to know something about a game before I buy it. Unless it is a sequel that I know I am going to pick up. For instance, I've read almost nothing about Diablo III. I know I'm going to buy it so I don't bother looking for news about it or reading stuff I come across about it.

[bomberpunk]

my gripes are that games these days are way too long, and that they all kinda blend together. you play one FPS you've played them all. the market is completely saturated with them. i'm thankful for throwback titles like Cave Story, some of the wiimakes (Contra, Adventure Island, Castlevania), and many of the XBL indie titles. i just can't get into games like Man of Gears 3: Anal Destruction or whatever that is that was just released.