There's been this notion for a while now among game journalists that video game fans are always unreasonable...

There's been this notion for a while now among game journalists that video game fans are always unreasonable, unrealistic buffoons who are too angry and too demanding of game companies.
Why and when do you think this started? Because for a long time in the 90's and early 2000's, the people that cover games and the people that read their shit and buy games all seemed to be on the same page.

Attached: 1629915920012.png (377x530, 366.76K)

Maybe the way devs and journo's advertised games giving unrealistic expectations was a part of it?

Agreed and let's not forget the seedy business tactics the publishers use. Would you ever say there's a line that can be crossed into unreasonable, tho8ugh?

I think fans were lied to first, and the developer became the scapegoat for any and all bullshit that was likely the result of upper management.

Originally game "journalists" portrayed themselves as consumer advocates; obviously this wasn't always the case, but they at least attempted to appear on the side of the customer.

Somewhere along the way they became unapologetically industry advocates, and customers became the opposite team. I'm sure there's a myriad of reasons why this happened, but the big one has to be when everything shifted from print media to digital, suddenly the only thing they had to sell was ad-space, they no longer had to care what customers thought since they weren't trying to sell them anything.

Well it is tough to say exactly when this mentality really became popular but I'd say in the xbox 360 and PS3 era. once developers realized they could cut content out of their games and sell it for more money. TF2 can be blamed for popularizing in-game markets in western games, before that it was the korean mmos cash shop items.

Journos are financially compromised and kneel to publishers/devs for free promo material to bring hits to their sites.
Publishers/devs decided they won't send out review materials and promos unless the publication sticks to the script and never says anything negative or critical, because criticism reduces sales.
"Gamers" are deeply critical and have standards, so we need to propagandize what "gamers" are
AAA video games are a mass-produced product used to extract money from stupid people. Buy from indies, pirate everything else.

Fair point.

Honestly we were more likely to agree with what journos said back then because there was no opposing voice. You just read a gaming mag, and if it wasn't obvious bullshit then you accepted it as fact. Only now can we go back and see how biased shit like GameInformer used to be, in ways we didn't realize at the time

This is a very correct and intelligent post. They are pro-corp because that is who is paying them. Video game "journalists" are essentially just paid advertisers and propagandists. Old Any Forums understood this very well.

Because back then there was no reason to believe otherwise and the journalists back then advertised mostly what we got
now it's just blatant bullshots everywhere and we are entitled for having expectations

Fans were as angry as they are now, the diference is that before you only sent an email or some shit. Now you can flood one twitter account and for zoomers that its deeply connected to their social life.
No thats not true. The notion of journalist shilling games they have been paid for review is as old as the first magazine.

>shifted from print media to digital
Bingo and it happened seemingly overnight.

Why do you think that anyone with a by-line is a journalist?
>stand in front yard with water hose
>look, everybody
>imma fireman
You retards would probably start excitedly flapping your arms while you look around for the fire truck.

I'm simply going by their vernacular.

>gamers are deeply critical and have standards
this is it, at least in comparison to other mediums. i think a big part of it has to do with how high commitment games in general are, both in terms of money and time spent, so people think twice as oppose to splurging without a second thought.

I think it was the PS3/ 360 generation that changed everything. Well the change probably happened earlier. The PS2/ XBox generation was the first real multimedia console on the general market. Journalism back then still went through the motions of being for people who play videogames but the writing was on the wall. Every single house had at least one of those consoles which meant as long as videogames continued to be multimedia hubs, you had a massive install base you could advertise to. So when the PS3/ 360 generation began, advertisers were ready to raw dog the videogame industry. And honestly, why wouldn't they? It was a whole new market of dipshit journalists that weren't used to that level of attention.

Geoff Keighley's infamous Dorito's Pope video was flagrantly laughed at and mocked. But honestly it was inevitable. Because it was the apotheosis of what was the come. There was no oversight for journalistic integrity, which I guess was also inevitable given the present day. Journalists were giving legitimate reviews while surrounded by merchandise of the games they were being totally objective on. They actually wrote articles defending games from backlash calling gamers whiney brats when there was an outcry against things they hated.

Game's journalists aren't journalists. They're children that want the attention of the big boys to legitimize their jobs. I doubt any modern game's journalist even likes video games

who knew you would be deeply critical of a piece of media that takes 8-300 hours of your life away just to beat the game

btw rpgs are just shit

>Somewhere along the way they became unapologetically industry advocates, and customers became the opposite team. I'm sure there's a myriad of reasons why this happened,

One big reason, or turning point was definitely Gamergate. It may not have been the point at which gaming journalism lost its integrity or its advocation for the consumer, but it's certainly a point at which the average gamer became blatantly aware that today's journalists are shit.

>Game's journalists aren't journalists. They're children that want the attention of the big boys to legitimize their jobs. I doubt any modern game's journalist even likes video games
Which is why they try to focus on other things on their blogs.

I think the Mass Effect 3 debacle did more to damage my view of game's journalists and to wake me up at just how fake the whole thing was. Not helped by the fact that DmC fuckery happened around the same time. I can understand the possbility that maybe, MAYBE, there was a guy out there that saw nothing wrong with the way those games were handled. I would look at that person sideways from then on but I can't dismiss the possibility that across thousands of people those games may have spoke to someone. But more offensive than that is the way that they dismissed all complaints with the most bullshit, handwaved nonsense conceivable. You're not mad about the gameplay changes in DmC or the lack of options in Mass Effect 3. You're just upset about the hair or that there wasn't a happy ending. Obvious it wasn't just those games and I'm simplifying to an extreme degree. But those events stick out the most in my mind and since that time period, after ever announcement, my immediate reaction is wonder what each developer is hiding. Because I sure as fuck am not going to get the answer from journalists that are getting paid by the people they're supposed to be reviewing. What kind of shit is that?