By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Gaming - Malstrom: Game Industry tries to justify corruption

rocketpig on 07 December 2009
mhsillen said:
rocketpig said:
LordTheNightKnight said:
rocketpig said:
LordTheNightKnight said:
"Comparing game reviewers to soldiers is just stupid"

No, just as a counterpoint to the claim the job of a reviewer is hard.

Reading comprehension FTL.

Where did the reviewer say that his job was hard?

You guys are letting Malstrom put words in the reviewer's mouth, completely misinterpret what he said, and you don't seem to even notice...

Not those exact words, but the various comments:

"I'd driven a hundred miles to get there, to play Infinity Ward and Activision's blockbuster shooter for a review. It was my second time sequestering myself in a hotel room to evaluate a video game."

"There's nothing lavish about being cooped up in a dark hotel room for two days. It's annoying," Gerstmann says. "And unless you have direct questions about a game, the company reps at the event usually just stay out of your way. Most of the time they don't even ask us what we thought of the game. They just sort of hang back and, I guess, hope for the best."

"I sort of get the impression that no one involved on either side really enjoys these events," Gerstmann adds. "But between us wanting timely coverage and publishers feeling protective of their biggest releases, I don't see these events going away anytime soon, either."

So the guy didn't like having to do that (and again, I don't blame him, I wouldn't care for it either) and therefore he deserves to have his quotes blown completely out of proportion and made to look like an ass as if he was comparing his job to that of a soldier's?

You guys just aren't seeing it. Malstrom is the one being a giant douchebag... again. This isn't the first time I've seen him take someone else's rather innocuous quote and snarl it into a malicious rant, completely making the person look like an asshole in the process. He seems to get off on taking a simple quote and trying to make someone into a villain over it... and the readers eat it up.

The guy is an asshole and I don't know how some of you read his stuff.

you must realize the words you use to describe Malstrom fit you like a hand to a glove

If you can't see the difference between a forum post and a blog, I see no point in arguing with you. I've written plenty for this site and I can't recall ever going after an individual in my writings. What I write for a site, while often containing similar content, will be written in a completely different manner. I don't believe in going after individuals, particularly when the given quote wasn't even spoken to me and could be taken out of context or have omissions left out by the original author. It's cheap and unprofessional, IMO.

There's a difference between stating an opinion of someone in an informal setting versus using your website as a platform to say the same thing.




Or check out my new webcomic: http://selfcentent.com/

Around the Network
noname2200 on 07 December 2009
vanatos said:

They are not? to you and everyone else here that criticises Maelstrom it is.

 

I'll take your words.

"Most of us find it grating; arrogance is difficult to stomach when it comes from a person who you don't need to listen to (and even when you do have to listen to the person). Additionally, calling your readers "idiots," "fools," etc. is not a wise way to get people to listen to you. There's more, but to summarize: people often have better things to do than listen to someone insult them or pleasure himself to his own written words."

 

1.You choose to criticise Maelstrom

2.You attack his manner

This is exactly what Maelstrom is doing, is not Maelstrom saying the reviewer is essentially 'whining to downplay an issue'?

You call Maelstrom's actions arrogant, Maelstrom calls a reviewers actions 'phony and whiny'.

No difference.

Just because Maelstrom elaborates on it more then you doesn't change this fact.

 

Review this thread. Point out where I disagreed with Malstrom's conclusion regarding this article. Then get back to me.

As a second assignment, tell me whether you think that I would consider Malstrom's article an insult to the readership.



scruffybunny on 07 December 2009

Are you guys still in this vortex? This endless loop of armchair logic and criticism. This is frustration, this is anger, this is attention seeking writhing in a climactic orgy.

Those that agree with Malstorm's points should never ever read a game review again, ever. Those that disagree can find something less infuriating as a pass time.




vanatos on 07 December 2009
noname2200 said:
vanatos said:

They are not? to you and everyone else here that criticises Maelstrom it is.

 

I'll take your words.

"Most of us find it grating; arrogance is difficult to stomach when it comes from a person who you don't need to listen to (and even when you do have to listen to the person). Additionally, calling your readers "idiots," "fools," etc. is not a wise way to get people to listen to you. There's more, but to summarize: people often have better things to do than listen to someone insult them or pleasure himself to his own written words."

 

1.You choose to criticise Maelstrom

2.You attack his manner

This is exactly what Maelstrom is doing, is not Maelstrom saying the reviewer is essentially 'whining to downplay an issue'?

You call Maelstrom's actions arrogant, Maelstrom calls a reviewers actions 'phony and whiny'.

No difference.

Just because Maelstrom elaborates on it more then you doesn't change this fact.

 

Review this thread. Point out where I disagreed with Malstrom's conclusion regarding this article. Then get back to me.

As a second assignment, tell me whether you think that I would consider Malstrom's article an insult to the readership.

Review my post, did i state you disagreed with Maelstroms conclusion?

The point is, you call Maelstrom arrogant, Maelstrom calls the reviewers 'whining to downplay an issue'.

I see no difference, and there is no difference.

You can extend everything further, Maelstrom criticises (anyone, this includes what you consider 'readership') and calls them (anything).

Its what your doing to Maelstrom.

Of course you've yet to really understand that Maelstrom's blog post, has no loyalty to any 'readership' he gets no funding from a particular segment of readers or anything like that.

Why Maelstrom should not criticize a segment of gamers, is beyond me.

 

Nor have you given me any links yet to this perceived 'calling his readers idiots'.

Go and give me a link then you can talk.



noname2200 on 07 December 2009
vanatos said:

Review my post, did i state you disagreed with Maelstroms conclusion?

The point is, you call Maelstrom arrogant, Maelstrom calls the reviewers 'whining to downplay an issue'.

I see no difference, and there is no difference.

So I state that I don't think Malstrom should insult his readers, I state that I'm okay with this particular article, and you...take it that I'm accusing him of insulting his readers in this article?

I'm sad to say that I appear to be more on the money with my last post than I thought!

You can extend everything further, Maelstrom criticises (anyone, this includes what you consider 'readership') and calls them (anything).

http://www.vgchartz.com/forum/post.php?post=2900675&page=2&postnum=49

Ah, I see the problem here, number three makes it clear. You think "criticize" and "insult" are synonyms.

They are not.

Its what your doing to Maelstrom.

http://www.vgchartz.com/forum/post.php?post=2900675&page=2&postnum=49

Ah, I see the problem here, number three makes it clear. You think "criticize" and "insult" are synonyms.

They are not.

Of course you've yet to really understand that Maelstrom's blog post, has no loyalty to any 'readership' he gets no funding from a particular segment of readers or anything like that.

Why Maelstrom should not criticize a segment of gamers, is beyond me.

http://www.vgchartz.com/forum/post.php?post=2900401&page=2&postnum=35

What motivation would those people have to read a website where they're repeatedly insulted? Look at the VGChartz community: there are now the converted who listen to him, and the folks who refuse to listen to him anymore primarily because of his attitude. Any message he has for the latter is lost. Any and all Malstrom threads on this site quickly get sidetracked by discussions about the man rather than the idea, primarily because of his style. What good does that do anyone?

But it's worse than that. Look at this very thread: rocketpig, who once read Malstrom's works, is now so turned off by that unnecessary attitude that he no longer pays the man any attention. Nor is he the only lapsed Malstrom reader. Moreover, Malstrom's detractors, the people who would hate him no matter what style he used, now have ammo to use against him: if HE can resort to ad hominem tactics, fair play dictates that THEY can as well.

And let me be blunt: even for someone who visits his site daily, the abrasive, hostile, self-congratulatory style wears me down. I do not enjoy insults. I do not approve of puerile attacks. And I grossly disapprove of inefficient, self-defeating tactics, especially when the core ideas tend to be so valuable. It is infuriating to see him lie down in the mud, like those he criticizes, and frustrating to interesting ideas tarnished by the manners of the messenger. Had I, a person who is interested in the business side of gaming and who openly harbors a liking for Nintendo, read Malstrom's blog posts before I read his main articles, I can assure you that I would not be visiting his site today. I can hardly blame others for doing what I would have done myself.

Nor have you given me any links yet to this perceived 'calling his readers idiots'.

Go and give me a link then you can talk.

Unless you've changed your name to Avinash_Tyagi when I wasn't looking, I don't recall promising to fetch you any. In fact, I recall telling you to look for yourself. Yup, here it is. And for some strange reason, I don't really feel like extending you that courtesy anymore.



Around the Network
Bobbuffalo on 07 December 2009
scruffybunny said:
Those that agree with Malstorm's points should never ever read a game review again, ever. Those that disagree can find something less infuriating as a pass time.


I stopped reading videogame magazines and reviews way before reading malstrom's articles.

They were too pathetic to read. It was like listening to 20 clones of the Comic Book Guy from The simpsons with lots of homphobic jokes and Nintendo insults.Not to mention they started to use the terms "Hardcore" and "Casual" as we know them nowadays.There are many reasons to despise them.

He's the only person in the mental asylum that is the game industry that makes sense.

People don't like the way he writes? oh boo hoo.

He is right. I know it. You know it. Who cares if he doesn't uses flowers and candies to talk.And yes there are things that I don't agree with him fully but when is about the pathetic game industry and their croonies (game reviewers, analysts, god-like cry-babies developers) he's 100% right.

This generation of gaming has showed how screwed gaming has become. Is good to hear somebody to have his feet on the ground. And I don't give a damn if he talks pretty or not.Focus on the message, not the messenger.



vanatos on 07 December 2009
noname2200 said:
vanatos said:

Review my post, did i state you disagreed with Maelstroms conclusion?

The point is, you call Maelstrom arrogant, Maelstrom calls the reviewers 'whining to downplay an issue'.

I see no difference, and there is no difference.

So I state that I don't think Malstrom should insult his readers, I state that I'm okay with this particular article, and you...take it that I'm accusing him of insulting his readers in this article?

I'm sad to say that I appear to be more on the money with my last post than I thought!

No, you've stated repeatedly that you do not like Maelstroms 'abrasive and hostile' style, which definitely includes this article and in fact virtually every article Maelstrom has criticized anything.

The fact you call Maelstrom arrogant, but then complain about his 'abrasive and hostile' style, smacks of hypocrisy of the highest order.

And i still do not understand your huge fixation on 'readership', Maelstrom is not payed or in some way 'given' anything by any segment of gamer, so why must be owe special treatment to some segment? so why is this huge fixation on 'readership'? why is it somehow especially wrong of Maelstrom to criticize a segment of gamers  (which iirc is the hardcore elitist type gamers)?

If you hate Maelstrom's style, dont call him arrogant, you are the same as him.

If you want to accept calling Maelstrom arrogant, then accept that Maelstrom will be 'hostile' in his criticisms to groups or people.

You are not criticisng whether he is factually correct, you are criticising him on his manner, a manner which you yourself display.



scruffybunny on 07 December 2009
Bobbuffalo said:
scruffybunny said:
Those that agree with Malstorm's points should never ever read a game review again, ever. Those that disagree can find something less infuriating as a pass time.


I stopped reading videogame magazines and reviews way before reading malstrom's articles.

They were too pathetic to read. It was like listening to 20 clones of the Comic Book Guy from The simpsons with lots of homphobic jokes and Nintendo insults.Not to mention they started to use the terms "Hardcore" and "Casual" as we know them nowadays.There are many reasons to despise them.

He's the only person in the mental asylum that is the game industry that makes sense.

People don't like the way he writes? oh boo hoo.

He is right. I know it. You know it. Who cares if he doesn't uses flowers and candies to talk.And yes there are things that I don't agree with him fully but when is about the pathetic game industry and their croonies (game reviewers, analysts, god-like cry-babies developers) he's 100% right.

This generation of gaming has showed how screwed gaming has become. Is good to hear somebody to have his feet on the ground. And I don't give a damn if he talks pretty or not.Focus on the message, not the messenger.

Thats what I'm focusing on, you sure made a lot of assumptions in your post. Maybe you should examine that part of your thinking. I don't read Malstorm outside of the posts that get on this forum. So, I'm not aware of the insults that he throws at his regular readers, but if he does that, why do you think some of you, yourself for example, don't feel that hes really flinging insults at you? What makes you sepecial, what makes you exempt? Unique snowflake?

Overall about his post on this topic, armchair logic dude, armchair critism, that is what I'm saying, think about that.




vanatos on 07 December 2009
Bobbuffalo said:
scruffybunny said:
Those that agree with Malstorm's points should never ever read a game review again, ever. Those that disagree can find something less infuriating as a pass time.


I stopped reading videogame magazines and reviews way before reading malstrom's articles.

They were too pathetic to read. It was like listening to 20 clones of the Comic Book Guy from The simpsons with lots of homphobic jokes and Nintendo insults.Not to mention they started to use the terms "Hardcore" and "Casual" as we know them nowadays.There are many reasons to despise them.

He's the only person in the mental asylum that is the game industry that makes sense.

People don't like the way he writes? oh boo hoo.

He is right. I know it. You know it. Who cares if he doesn't uses flowers and candies to talk.And yes there are things that I don't agree with him fully but when is about the pathetic game industry and their croonies (game reviewers, analysts, god-like cry-babies developers) he's 100% right.

This generation of gaming has showed how screwed gaming has become. Is good to hear somebody to have his feet on the ground. And I don't give a damn if he talks pretty or not.Focus on the message, not the messenger.

I agree, do you know what ive noticed? Maelstrom is copping the same shit that a certain other person used to (and might still be) copping.

And that was Dan Hsu,he was an editor for EGM, and was the ONLY person i read that directly interviewed a microsoft (iirc) represantative and put actual tough questions, not 'oh whats your next game, oh what features does this game have' bullshit, but something like 'how are you addressing these problems in your etc etc'.

And you know what he got? same shit Maelstrom is getting, 'your being too harsh, stop being mean'.

Fucken stupid.

You'd think someone finally voicing the bullshit in the industry would be met by praise by gamers.



noname2200 on 07 December 2009
vanatos said:

No, you've stated repeatedly that you do not like Maelstroms 'abrasive and hostile' style, which definitely includes this article and in fact virtually every article Maelstrom has criticized anything.

http://www.vgchartz.com/forum/post.php?post=2900758&page=3&postnum=3

As a second assignment, tell me whether you think that I would consider Malstrom's article an insult to the readership.

vanatos said:

The fact you call Maelstrom arrogant, but then complain about his 'abrasive and hostile' style, smacks of hypocrisy of the highest order.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/hypocrisy

n.  

pl. hy·poc·ri·sies

  1. The practice of professing beliefs, feelings, or virtues that one does not hold or possess; falseness.

  2. An act or instance of such falseness.


I'll give you a cookie if you can point out one time in this thread when I claimed that I am not arrogant. Chocolate chip, peanut butter, you name it, you'll have it!

vanatos said:

And i still do not understand your huge fixation on 'readership', Maelstrom is not payed or in some way 'given' anything by any segment of gamer, so why must be owe special treatment to some segment? so why is this huge fixation on 'readership'? why is it somehow especially wrong of Maelstrom to criticize a segment of gamers  (which iirc is the hardcore elitist type gamers)?

http://www.vgchartz.com/forum/post.php?post=2900401&page=2&postnum=35

What motivation would those people have to read a website where they're repeatedly insulted? Look at the VGChartz community: there are now the converted who listen to him, and the folks who refuse to listen to him anymore primarily because of his attitude. Any message he has for the latter is lost. Any and all Malstrom threads on this site quickly get sidetracked by discussions about the man rather than the idea, primarily because of his style. What good does that do anyone?

But it's worse than that. Look at this very thread: rocketpig, who once read Malstrom's works, is now so turned off by that unnecessary attitude that he no longer pays the man any attention. Nor is he the only lapsed Malstrom reader. Moreover, Malstrom's detractors, the people who would hate him no matter what style he used, now have ammo to use against him: if HE can resort to ad hominem tactics, fair play dictates that THEY can as well.

vanatos said:

If you hate Maelstrom's style, dont call him arrogant, you are the same as him.

I'll give you a cookie if you can point out one time in this thread when I claimed that I am not arrogant. Chocolate chip, peanut butter, you name it, you'll have it!

vanatos said:

If you want to accept calling Maelstrom arrogant, then accept that Maelstrom will be 'hostile' in his criticisms to groups or people.

I don't see the connection, but I'll respond anyways...

http://www.vgchartz.com/forum/post.php?post=2900508&page=2&postnum=44

For what it's worth, I DO agree that those people are missing out, but I find it unfortunate that we could have a much larger pool of people who listen and discuss his ideas than we do now.

You are not criticisng whether he is factually correct, you are criticising him on his manner, a manner which you yourself display.

http://www.vgchartz.com/forum/post.php?post=2900758&page=3&postnum=3

Review this thread. Point out where I disagreed with Malstrom's conclusion regarding this article. Then get back to me.