As of late there have been a fair amount of debates in the gaming community as to what game journalism is today. If this little shpeil I have on the topic serves anything, it is to commend the community for the obvious growth in order for such a discussion to even take place.
Games have grown to reach audiences of varying tastes, unfortunately my mom believes its a bunch of nerds playing Donkey Kong in a humid basement. For those who aren't my lovable mother, there is a wide variety of games out there for you to consume. As a writer covering the gaming community I have [for some reason] decided to try and communicate to those willing to listen. In regards to games journalism, this communication is tricky. Both the writer and the audience have to decide what they want from game journalism, then the community can progress from this point.
A couple weeks ago, I was in a conversation with a fellow writer and they asked me do I feel uncomfortable with the title 'games journalist'? Obviously, I do. I did not go to college for journalism. I do not have a degree in journalism or a writing intensive program. The alternative of calling oneself a games journalist was a term I heard Shawn Elliott of then Electronic Gaming Monthly coin, this term is 'games enthusiast'. Although I agree and disagree with both terms, for arguments sake, let us assume that games journalism is a higher form [more professional] of games enthusiasm.
What I will do next is explain why games journalism is not really journalism [at least in certain facets]. Please do not burn me at the stake just yet. After this rundown, an explanation as to how games journalism can be so much better and for everyone, will be given.
Access & Fact Checking
I am going to be honest with you. The only access I have to any game or company I write about is the all mighty e-mail. I work two jobs and thusly have very little phone time to spare. I am not being flown out to any convention or expo [nor do I want to be] and if I were to go to an E3 or Tokyo Game Show I would have to leave my fan boy hats on my mantle next to my picture of Carrot Top.
The games journalism is a field much like: engineering, accounting and especially politics. If you have decided to be a writer of any kind, chances are you may want to make a friend or two with someone on the other side of the fence [in this case *insert game developer*]. How do you remain objective? How do you review a game [clear headed] when you were flown out first class to play it before any of your competition or worse...any other gamer has had a chance to play?
"Metal Gear Solid was awesome, especially when looking at a Hawaiian sunset and sipping a Mai Tai".
The previous points were more of the trappings of an established writer. For the upstarts, the biggest issue would be fact checking. With limited access, a writer may be tempted to completely rip off someone's work from a larger, more established site. News happens and essentially one site cannot completely claim ownership of a story being broken. A good writer will double up to make sure they are getting the straight dope. Worse off, a writer may be willing to embellish their new friend's product for the sake of keeping that bond tight.
Seeing as this is the age of the blogger and the slow, painful death of print. Plagiarism, baseless rumors, and an over-saturation of the exact same topic will be plentiful. What I, and hopefully my fellow writers out there, hope to do is deliver this 'insano-stream' of constant news with a unique voice.
Snarkiness != Edgy
Who here has not read a story on Joystiq or Kotaku? As of late, meaning the past couple years, this brand of journalism has been scrutinized and in some cases rightfully so. Make a funny headline or image as an eye grabber then put the occasional quip or jab within the content you are covering. Story, Done!
What I find most interesting about this 'age of snark' would be that the elitists or opposing writers/readers who may have worked in print media have, in some way, written in a similar voice. I have seen almost FOX levels or negativity in opposition of the 'Kotaku manner of reporting'. Yet I have seen the same style of reporting on Edge, 1up, IGN, Gamespot and countless others. Though they are far and fewer between on some publications than others, the fact remains, being a small part of the problem is still being a part of the problem.
So as a referendum, both sides are not as clever as there potential indicates. You are not witty for photoshopping a PS3 to look like a George Forman grill [but it still makes me chuckle]. To the opposition: you are not edgy for writing a 20-page term paper on how artistic games 'could' become something close to Van Gogh's Starry Night [but I'll read it for the sake of the comparison].
What Could Make Games Journalism Better?
I was listening to a couple podcasts on this very subject. Both of which brought up sports reporters. A sports reporter has the benefit of assuming that his audience is already informed. They do not have to explain the rules of each game they are covering. Sports reporters have there own personalities, but have the ability to report the most mundane in a colorful manner.
Games journalist could learn a little something from the Stuart Scotts of the world. When you watch Sportscenter you are seeing someone having fun at what they do, but you are also seeing a team of researchers and people who care about getting the story right the first time. It has always baffled me as to how much negativity could come out of writing about games. Are you serious? Dude...really.
This is not to say objectivism should be thrown out the window for the sake of writing about fun and happiness. If Sony comes out with a thousand dollar system within the next couple of years, of course you have to report this to the people who are interested, but you may have to give Sony some insight as to how the people may feel about their decision. It may cost you a trip to Monte Carlo to play an unreleased game. You may lose an exclusive story with a developer or two, but isn't it worth it?
Remember that news is different from opinion. When a writer editorializes how they are feeling about the new Shadow of the Colossus movie, you are then stripping away credibility of that shiny journalism badge. Personally, I feel I am guilty of this, so this rant should not be taken as a 'holier than thou' speech. Any writer worth their salt should hold themselves accountable and try to improve their field by improving themselves.
Podcasts have helped tremendously in the growth and credibility department. Reading something as wordy as what you are reading now would be so much better communicated in a more conversational atmosphere. A game review [which is practically a fine art, only a certain few are really great] is dependant on so many variants. Where an open, informal dialogue puts the writer on the level of the listener.
Okay, climbing down off of this soap box now. If you have made it this far, I commend you and hope something of value was taken. Please feel free to comment below or contact me directly. Pointers are always welcome [I really have no idea what I am doing] and my advice is limited so beware.