The Independent Gaming Source

IMO this would be a great improvement. I can tell the difference between fact and opinion after I read something, but chances are I don't want to read your opinion in the first place.

 

FlamingPear

It seems like you're asking a lot of Journalism 101 questions here. I don't know what else to tell you beyond - I don't think you're qualified to do a site like this at this point in time. There's a lot more to reporting/journalism than just typing in the text.

 

To be fair he's not come here asking questions - he's responding to the criticism.

 

I don't think people are "stupid". I do think that the media (in all fields) receives an inordinately high amount of trust from the public, and so those aspiring to be part of it should hold themselves to a higher standard than the average blogger.

It costs over $200 million to make and market, and has already disappeared from the American top 10 having made less than $40 million. Its performance in foreign territories and on home video will have to be absolutely stellar if the studio is to at least break even. So yes, as far as the US market is concerned, "Alexander" is a flop of epic proportions.

Commercially and critically, yes. I'm sure Oliver Stone is pleased with what he's created, but the public has voted with their wallets.

They pertinent information is easily available, so yes, I think it's perfectly possible the writer is speaking from a position of authority.

Given the sense in which the term is generally used (your own take on it notwithstanding), I think it's very inappropriate to toss it around with the figures to back it up.

 

... iirc, Stone has already admitted it's a failure, and blamed the Religious Fundamentalists for it

 

I blame the fact that he's utterly bonkers and hasn't made a halfway decent film since The Doors, but whatever gets him through the night, I guess. Ridley Scott, now there's someone who's getting heat from the fundies on both sides right now... But I digress. Severely

 

I don't think you read the full list then. There are a ton of things on there called flops. They even have Winamp 3 down as a 'flop' - in your terms it can't possibly be a flop as they don't charge money for it.

Waterworld is considered a flop yet made money.

Flop is just a term - some read financial terms into it while others don't. I don't think there's a need to jump up and down on flaming pear just because he's doing what lots of other media types do.

Going by your Alexander logic then how many Indie games aren't flops when they're released? They've not made the money back it cost to make yet, and may not do so for a year or two.

 

You stay outta my garbage cans! And no sneak photos of me while I'm nude sunbathing!

I don't know how much you can pattern your stuff after tabloids, when computer nerds are so unglamorous, but it's an intriguing idea. I do like how you are speaking in your own voice when writing. Giving offense to a few authors here and there might just be part of being honest, and honesty is more compelling reading than copy-and-pasted press releases. Serve your readers first.

You might want to get permission on using screenshots to avoid copyright infringement. IANAL!

Site looks good. Keep going, buddy.

-Erik

 

This is a lot of chatter about the semantics of the word "flop."

I think the idea of a post-script reserved for opinion in each post is a good idea, but I don't think one site is going to change sales of a genuinely good game. If it's good and someone says it's bad, the game will speak for itself. If it's bad and someone says it's bad, it wouldn't have sold anyway.

All indie game sites need our support. Afterall, it's us they're advertising for. Raising awareness is good!

 

This really isn't just about the word 'flop'. I think anyone who presents themselves as press has a responsibility to review a game properly, if they're going to review one at all. While the pros and cons of the word 'flop' can be argued all day long, that isn't what bothers me about this whole thing. What bothers me is that a fun game gets a quick kick to the balls because of one person's opinion (who should have known better, imo). If someone presents themselves as a reviewer, they should do a damn solid job of reviewing the game, and keeping their blatant opinion out of it. If they're going to present themselves as a member of the press, they should fully consider the impact that each of their words may have upon the game.

If you're not willing to hold to these ideals, make sure everyone is aware you're just a guy with a blog. This isn't aimed at flamingpear- it's aimed at everyone in this position. The world is already filled with try-hard, ill-informed and amateurish game reviewers, who cast a shadow of opinion over the facts. I don't know about you guys, but I really don't want to see another one doing damage in the indie gaming world. As I said above- if you're going to review a game (or even comment on it) get some real games reviewing skills and do it properly.

 

Well - I don't want to burst your bubble, Reactor, but a game review is essentially an opinion piece by definition. You cannot give a game a rating without having it be an opinion. There aren't any tests you can put every game through and say "this game performed better under these conditions than this other game" without having it be an opinion (well - except when the game crashes all over the place).

 

However, anyone trying to pass his site off as a legitimate news source for the indie community should try to do better than:

Why did he last a minute and a half? Was it too difficult? Was he bored? How is it "a good first try" and a "mega-flop" at the same time? I'm apparently outnumbered on this one, but that site is nothing more than a glorified blog to me, and flamingpear is just someone itching for some time in the spotlight (such as it is in this community/industry). "News items" that are nothing more than links to this forum or re-posts of actual news items from established sites do not a "source" make.

 

You're right, sure. Thing is, that's the job of a reviewer- to inform what a game is, and then balance that with a light opinion on the overall quality. Most people don't review how they should. They say things like, "I didn't like it at all, but if you like bike games you might want to download the demo anyway." There's an overbalance of opinion, and the actual facts about what the game is, and its overall quality are left struggling to survive.

My point wasn't that reviews shouldn't be without opinion. Instead, people should learn how to review properly, and stop telling the reader what they should think of it.... especially if you're a member of the 'press', since people place extra importance on what is said. Reviewing is an art. It's not a casual commenting on what you think of the game, and thus, opinions kept in check are key.

 

Alright - you had just mentioned "keeping their blatant opinon out of it" earlier...

I don't think I'll be keeping an eye on his site though, despite any defense of his right to voice his opinion. It looks like a blog, and sounds like a blog. If he wants to do caustic reviews, he should learn from the masters at www.somethingawful.com.

I would prefer, that if he had some opinon about some new game, he ought to have a seperate "review", and say something like "Check out our review" and link to the review. Don't mingle the news item with the opinion.

 

I like this idea if only because a full review (with plenty of screenshots) would be nice rather than a little blurb review. And I agree that saying more than "it's bad" or "it's good" is necessary, because that doesn't inform the reader. Give reasons and specific examples.

I also don't necessarily think non-developer gamers will care what's happening on this forum, so linking to discussions here probably isn't very useful to the readers.

 

In a perfect world reviews would be like that but it's not and they're not.

I just felt the criticism aimed at the site's style was harsh. If he wants to label it news, reviews, blog or whatever then it's entirely up to him. I see no reason to tell him that he doesn't seem qualified to run a site like his. How many here can say the first game they ever wrote was up to scratch?

Another way to look at it is this... How many complaints would you all be making if the site was over-opinionated but in the opposite direction? If it was full of "This game is the best!" I reckon there'd be far fewer complaints.

 

With every next opinion in this thread I see that guy made pretty nice and correct shot. He aimed to call out laud feedback noice and he got it. Seriously!..

What at the end? Well. Looks like we need to transform this or any another place into something more private to have useful resource for game developers specifically. What about approriate changing of terms of use for whole this forum or some part of it? - I (personally) still need valuable and useful news and opinions from advanced guys here. Looks like most of them will hide now into some another places.

 

Well he didn't say my game was crap so his site has to be good