Well, who knows, maybe Facebook won't exist in ten years :)

It probably will. LiveJournal turns 14 in two months... and MySpace technically still exists, too. (But sadly, not Friendster.)

The comma makes a list dude.

Amateur sites COMMA
Sites Like ars COMMA
Sites that make their money other ways.

Three different things. Didn't call ars amateur since they most definitely are not.

Sorry about that. Was skimming and read it wrong.

There's an HBO twitter?

Next thing you'll be saying there's a front page...

Oh, hush, you.

I figure in another decade we'll get Facebook integration :)

Don't count on it. :)

Didn't you say the same thing about an HBO twitter? :-p

There's an HBO twitter?

Next thing you'll be saying there's a front page...

I would not lump Ars in there, but since PAR essentially bought their game reporting from Ars by hiring Kuchera away from Ars, I can see your point. I would certainly not call Ars "amateur". They are mainstream tech press just like Game Informer is mainstream game press, and there is some overlap.

The comma makes a list dude.

Amateur sites COMMA
Sites Like ars COMMA
Sites that make their money other ways.

Three different things. Didn't call ars amateur since they most definitely are not.

This is why the gaming press is highly critical of Zynga, yet give Bungie Aerospace and Certain Affinity a pass when they themselves clone games and release a game with the Farmville business model respectively. Who cares if you piss of Zynga? Nobody reading gamestop is the market for Zynga games. But don't piss off Bungie.

When did Bungie Aerospace or Certain Affinity make games in the "Farmville business model" must've missed that... and if you're going to say Crimson, Crimson is NOT the Farmville business model, one has 2 or 3 DLC that could be considered expansions, the other pesters everyone to help each other or, if you don't want to be an annoying a-hole, you can pay to do it instead, only the opportunities to pay NEVER END.

I figure in another decade we'll get Facebook integration :)

Don't count on it. :)

Well, who knows, maybe Facebook won't exist in ten years :)

No one is willing to say it's "good", nor is anyone willing to say it's "bad". Gaming sites make their bread and butter on being able to make definitive statements on the quality of something...

No major gaming website or magazine will ever take a stance and say Destiny is bad. None. It can't happen.

Based on a ViDoc? I hope not.

Based on a complete release?

Destiny, in that respect, is no different from any current AAA title from a major developer/ publisher. Although perhaps the Aliens: Colonial Marines kerfuffle will adjust that. The game's metascore is in the 40s on all three platforms it's been released on so far.

EGM gave them a 90, so perhaps they're proving your point.

If you were Activision, would you give exclusive info to say, Game Informer, if Game Informer has been writing negative impressions of Destiny? Their readers are now disposed to thinking of Destiny in a critical light, so why do your reveal there? Why not give it to Kotaku, who has been writing positive things about Destiny, whose readers will be more excited with the info you give them?

Actually, I would. I would give inside information to Penny Arcade, because they tend to only advertise or endorse games they generally like. So if they hype the thing, it's because they like it.

What's worse is if a publication trashes Destiny, Activision probably won't be as keen to give them info about all their other games. And Activision has some pretty hot games that people will want to read about.

Only amateur sites, sites like Arstechnica on which gaming articles generate a tiny fraction of the site's revenue, or sites that make their money other ways like Penny Arcade can give games like Destiny an honest look.

I would not lump Ars in there, but since PAR essentially bought their game reporting from Ars by hiring Kuchera away from Ars, I can see your point. I would certainly not call Ars "amateur". They are mainstream tech press just like Game Informer is mainstream game press, and there is some overlap.

Remember Gamespot's Kane and Lynch review? A bad review (which was charitable really), got the reviewer fired. Remember the Mass Effect ending controversy? You know, the game which was built on your choices changing the story, that had an ending that was basically the same for everybody? Players were unhappy. This is a legitimate criticism of the game. Did any major reviewers mention this? When players mentioned this, why did the gaming publications defend the developer? Did any major publications criticize blizzard real ID?

I think you're completely wrong about ME but that's an argument for another day.

This is why the gaming press is highly critical of Zynga, yet give Bungie Aerospace and Certain Affinity a pass when they themselves clone games and release a game with the Farmville business model respectively. Who cares if you piss of Zynga? Nobody reading gamestop is the market for Zynga games. But don't piss off Bungie.

There's some truth to that. Entertainment journalism is not investigative journalism. A fundamentally confrontational approach is not only not necessary, but in many cases, undesirable. Many mainstream outlets retreat even further from that, to a point where they cannot provide honest reviews.

I figure in another decade we'll get Facebook integration :)

Don't count on it. :)

Didn't you say the same thing about an HBO twitter? :-p

No one is willing to say it's "good", nor is anyone willing to say it's "bad". Gaming sites make their bread and butter on being able to make definitive statements on the quality of something...

No major gaming website or magazine will ever take a stance and say Destiny is bad. None. It can't happen.

Gaming sites and magazines do not make their bread and butter on reviews, but rather exclusive looks and first reveals or other inside information. Nobody takes reviews seriously since it's common knowledge that they are universally terrible on such sites and magazines. Why?

Because these publications make their money from people clicking to see reveals, and from ad revenues for games, they need to not piss off the publishers or developers. Gaming journalism is not like real journalism. You don't go out and investigate and create a story yourself. If you want an exclusive sneak peek, the publisher has to give you the material. So short of espionage, you need a relationship with the publisher to get material to print.

If you were Activision, would you give exclusive info to say, Game Informer, if Game Informer has been writing negative impressions of Destiny? Their readers are now disposed to thinking of Destiny in a critical light, so why do your reveal there? Why not give it to Kotaku, who has been writing positive things about Destiny, whose readers will be more excited with the info you give them?

What's worse is if a publication trashes Destiny, Activision probably won't be as keen to give them info about all their other games. And Activision has some pretty hot games that people will want to read about.

Only amateur sites, sites like Arstechnica on which gaming articles generate a tiny fraction of the site's revenue, or sites that make their money other ways like Penny Arcade can give games like Destiny an honest look.

Remember Gamespot's Kane and Lynch review? A bad review (which was charitable really), got the reviewer fired. Remember the Mass Effect ending controversy? You know, the game which was built on your choices changing the story, that had an ending that was basically the same for everybody? Players were unhappy. This is a legitimate criticism of the game. Did any major reviewers mention this? When players mentioned this, why did the gaming publications defend the developer? Did any major publications criticize blizzard real ID?

This is why the gaming press is highly critical of Zynga, yet give Bungie Aerospace and Certain Affinity a pass when they themselves clone games and release a game with the Farmville business model respectively. Who cares if you piss of Zynga? Nobody reading gamestop is the market for Zynga games. But don't piss off Bungie.

After reading Claude's reply, I felt like a bit of an idiot, and decided I should go back to writing user scripts until I have enough information to know what I'm talking about. Well... except for this post.

(When writing that original post, Cody Miller was ringing in my head. Their over-analyzing/misinterpretation here reinforced that feeling. Shame, since Ars is generally awesome.)

This is why I don't buy those who say this reveal was all pre-planned. I think it's a response to the leaks, at least in part, or perhaps Activision is getting cold feet and wants there to be more hype.

I think this is the most likely explanation. The game isn't complete enough to show content worthy of a video game announcement, but leaks put Bungie (via Activision) in a tough spot.

I'm guessing that the vidoc was a compromise of Bungie not being ready to announce the game quite yet, and Activision wanting an announcement in response to the leaks.

I figure in another decade we'll get Facebook integration :)

Don't count on it. :)

Gaming sites are quick to pounce on leaks and slather their watermarks all over them-- and when the developer responds a short while later with some very preliminary stuff, it gets labeled "hype" because they don't throw the doors open and let us see everything?

Good grief.

Where's the Like button?

-Matt

Whoah there Matt, let's not go nuts. I mean, come on... we've moved from Perl to PHP.

I figure in another decade we'll get Facebook integration :)

This is why I don't buy those who say this reveal was all pre-planned. I think it's a response to the leaks, at least in part, or perhaps Activision is getting cold feet and wants there to be more hype.

And quite frankly, the gist of this information was "there" a year ago. We have a few more details, but otherwise, we're not sure what to expect. Okay it's some kind of MMO but we're not calling it that. Okay it has some phone integration. Okay there are some player classes.

What will the player be doing exactly?

Shooting things. It's a shooter.

Maybe I missed the train on that one, but it seems like Ars did too. Time to play the wait-and-see game.

Actually, it's not even that time yet. When they announce a release date, then it's time to start waiting. Until then is just the fun part, guessing what it's all going to be like.

Gaming sites make their bread and butter on being able to make definitive statements on the quality of something...

The fact that so many other developers end up legitimizing this is not really worth defending, is it?