Are "professional" games journalists clueless?

I'd say yes. Many of them haven't got a clue about anything they are saying when it comes to consoles before the PS2. Just watch this crap - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bsOJF9o9ts8

They say the Mega CD didn't add anything to the Mega Drive? Err, scaling, rotation, more sound channels. They also make it sound as if there were only FMV games made for it.

They also claim that the PC Engine or the US version is 16 bit. No it wasn't. It was an 8 bit console.

take a watch and see how many other mistakes you can find.

Yakumo

 

The PC Engine in the West was advertised as a 16bit console, Hence the Turbo Grafx 16 name. So I can see why they would think that.

 

The point is though, they should know that it was 8bit and say so. Just like when people say the Jag is in fact 2 32bit processors together, not 64bit.

 

Well, they probably had to strip down a couple of details (such as that the PC-Engine was ESSENTIALLY an 8-bit machine, despite using two 8-Bit processors which could make people logically conclude that it's 16bit). I agree that they make the Mega CD look like a CDi piece of crap though.

I believe most people who are becoming game journalists nowadays are more gamers rather than freaks and veterans who barely remember the NES/SNES era from their childhood. It's not a surprise that when they are only playing/buying current generation titles, they have to do research all from scratch for reports about older stuff and that's where mistakes happen.

 

IMO, people like us would make much better game journalists than the ones we have. They sound like company front men spouting shit just to get you attention. In my case though, this makes me want to walk away.

 

The short answer: yes.

You wouldn't hire a journalist for World News only to find out that they have no clue about Nixon resigning. I could understand them not knowing about cargo cults over in Southeast Asia but the ability to do research is a good thing when writing articles. When it comes to these guys running their mouths pretending to be an expert they do it daily. No need to fact check, its only a damn video game magazine!

There is a huge difference between writing about 360 and PS3 games and trying to discuss games of yesteryear as if you actually lived in that era or at least have PLAYED the console/game in question. To spew that the PC Engine was 16bit is clearly false but I must wonder why anyone would anyone who only reviews 360 games anything about the 80s/90s.

Why not ask the eye candy that "The Screen Savers" had on towards their quick spiral into the toilet about computers? Obviously if you work for a show that is all about computers and technology you must know something about it, right?

Fuck no.

 

Indeed, but then again there is hope! Like all those private little projects that are in fact much better gaming journalism than most professional ones (like your Retro Core, PC-Engine.co.uk's PC-Engine City Podcast or some YouTube productions). One of the best commercial ones must have been the GameOne Shoot'em up report on French television, that was was ace. And they interviewed real big names like SWY and Ikeda and the journalists really knew what they are talking about - which is not easy when it comes to an elitist field such as 2D shoot'em ups where there are always people correcting you.

I think what Assembler said is pretty much spot on - stuff gets dumbed down intentionally. I mean, look at those guys, how they dress, how they talk, the body language. Obviously the focus of attention is not on the information but on the entertainment factor.

Stop fucking waving around with your hands. Shut the fuck up you 20 year old asshole talking about the 3DO in stores, I can hardly remember the Super Nintendo being sold in stores and I'm probably older than you! Seriously, shut the fuck up, video game journalists.

 

Are these guys really professionals, as in, is someone actually paying them for this? First of all, they could've at least mentioned who Trip Hawkins is other than "some guy who created 3DO", even Wikipedia could tell you that. And Sega immediately started talking about the Dreamcast after the Saturn's release? WTF are you saying? The whole 32X thing was a conflict between Sega of America and Sega of Japan, you could've at least mentioned that...

Weren't you born in like 1990?

 

1989, yes. And I'm very well aware that I was a little brat when the consoles were around that I collect right now. That's why it pisses me off when people of almost my age, maybe 2-3 years older, talk about the 3DO and Sega Saturn as if they'd totally been part of the entire thing. They were probably playing in fucking sandboxes back when Sega failed, just like me. And nowadays they're talking in front of fancy greenscreens as if they are 45yr old veterans.

Sounds to me like they're pretentious, that's all.

 

Yeah, exactly, to me it seems like these guys just read a few Wikipedia articles on "failed" consoles and now they're experts on the subject. And what the hell is up with Dan's facial hair? I bet he likes wearing steampunk clothes.
They could've at least searched the Internet for better sources...hell, I'm 3 years older than you, so it's not like I can remember why the 32X failed, but there's a damn good Segabase article about it.

 

The reasoning for the screen being red on the Virtual Boy is clearly coming from someone who wants to sound smart but is full of crap.

And clearly the N-Gage was the worst console ever. TACO STYLE HOME DOGG!

 

I guess we all know where they got their information from.. You can tell that some of them didn't own the system they were talking about.

It was a pointless report really, I'm sure the average user here would of known the history of the systems..

I noticed they jumped from Failing systems to Systems that are more powerful, for example they started mentioning the Playstation and Nintendo 64, those were both successful, they didn't fail. Same goes for the Playstation 2 and XBOX -_-

Pretty much what 7Force said in post 9 as well

When you make a report, you're meaning to research it! Ok so the Atari Jaguar is a 64-bit machine, when really it wasn't all that powerful at all.

What they should of said was "The Turbo Grapfx 16 was advertised as a 16-bit machine but really was an 8-bit."
The word ADVERTISED is a big keyword, especially if you're doing a report about it.

 

Well, the N64 wasn't exactly successful. Only about 250 titles were released for it in Japan, which is pathetic number compared to previous hardwares (Famicom = 1000+, Super Famicom = 1450+).

It might be too much for such a short, condensed report that's supposed to appeal to the dumbasses who do not like to sacrifice more than 5 minutes of their valuable Call of Duty-online-time on video game history, *breath*, but some details were just wrong. The Sega Saturn was very successful in Japan, there were more than 1000 different titles for it. Granted, the PSX wiped the Saturn's ass, but PlayStation is a phenomenon on its own. The Saturn did rather well in the Far East. Furthermore, addons to consoles had been a good idea from time to time. The CD-ROM/Super CD-ROM for PC-Engine was very successful and popular. Granted, the Duo-consoles were probably an important factor, but still - it's an example for successfully introducing expensive addons.

 

"It's all about the games, not the hardware"

I can almost agree to this, but I think all the "failed" consoles had an underlying reason that the games were either too few or too shitty.


The thing that really made me dislike this video was, as ave pointed-out, how they ignored popularity worldwide. Some of the consoles they outlined were technically flops in the states, but pulled fairly respectable numbers in Europe and/or did very very well in Japan. This brings me to my first point - Remember the Saturn's marketing? How many of us (younger guys) saw many (if any) Master System commercials or TG16 commercials? Or was that just because Nintendo had their arms wrapped so tightly around us at the time?

They also failed to note how a lot of the systems (well, except in Sega's case) that were overtly popular were also came out before their lesser rivals. Why would I want an XBOX when I have a perfectly good PS2? A 3DO when I'm comfortable with my SNES collection? I've always thought some companies simply knew WHEN to put out their product. It's like you had to judge the market and get your system out right as the generation changed (and at a respectable power and value), and not in between where you'd seem like an afterthought.

Anyway.

 

To answer the topic: Yes, clueless as fuck and full of hype. Fucking fakes. But there are also non-profit projects by amateurs who hype up stuff way way way too much. It saddens me to see how hard it is for people to have an objective opinion about a game or a console. People compare systems and software, instead of just giving them a chance to do what they were made to do. It's unfair and condemns perfectly fine games and consoles as uncool and on the other end of the spectrum certain overhyped releases become cult stuff for people to hoard. It's the retro gaming scene who are partly responsible for what eBay has become.

And about the N64.. I think that if a console makes the company a shitload of money it's a success. No matter how many games it had. Looking back at it now, sure it had a small library compared to what the Famicoms had, but Nintendo had a different gameplan with more competition around.

One more thing. I fucking hate Kotaku.

 

Yeah I found a huge error.
He said the PS1 is not as good as the N64.

"Software over hardware".
Well, if you dont have the hardware, you wont have the software.

I also don't like the guy in the orange shirt...

 

Either do I... *Switched to SMG*

 

Nintendo didn't have a different plan. They flat out didn't see where the industry was heading with optical media and dropped the ball. That wasn't the only mistake of the N64 but it was the biggest. It cost them a number of developers and the majority of top tier titles for that generation.

They might have made a profit with the N64 but in the case of that system it is more about what they lost than what they made.

 

I have been wanting to do a retrospective on the sega/mega cd and go over its strengths and weakness and why it failed. Maybe this clip has encouraged me a bit more.......