Jan 7
What does the sale of 1UP show about game journalism?
Rumors of the demise of EGM and the sale of 1UP.com to various suitors have floated around the interwebs for awhile, but now, unfortunately, it has come to pass: 1UP.com has been officially bought out by UGO, resulting in a enormous rash of firings. Many other blogs have covered this event well, so instead of just copy-pasting their hard work for the sake of site-hits or content, I’ll merely link to three stories that I feel are most pertinent. Said links and my personal feelings on the 1UP “fallout” after the jump. Just a warning: it’s pretty long.
The original story from Gamasutra, Joystiq’s full list of the firings, and finally, a blog post by a UGO contributor defending the acquisition, but also containing a forum post made by Sam Kennedy, the still-intact 1UP Editorial Director, on the NeoGAF forums.
I, like many, am frankly super bummed that the 1UP podcasts, such as 1UP FM, 1UP Yours, the 1UP show, and Broken Pixels will no longer be continuing, at least in an official 1UP capacity. This turn of events is also personal for me, as one of my best friends (and the friend of several Megatonik contributors) was one of those let go; of course I wish him and all those who were laid off the best of luck, and have no doubt that they will find success. Frankly, they’re too damn awesome not to.
But, I find the 1UP sale disturbing on an even deeper level, as someone who sees games-journalism as a sort of “dream job,” so to speak. In the past several years, we have seen two major events that have really struck down what I would consider core-members of the games-journalism field: this recent rash of 1UP Firings, and the infamous “Gerstmann-gate” of December ‘07, where longtime Gamespot employee Jeff Gerstmann was seemingly fired for his harsh review of Kane & Lynch, whose publisher was providing a truckload of advertising dollars, and the subsequent resignations of several high profile gaming employees.
Before the Gerstmann incident, I religiously visited Gamespot and listened to its podcasts, as they were staffed and produced by a group of people who knew games and loved them to death; ditto for the 1UP podcasts. I thought of Gerstmann as a pioneer of sorts, a guy who had been there in the early days, and the 1UP guys as trail-blazers, guys who were doing new things with the field and also doing them better than anybody else out there. What does it mean, then, when such people are fired or let go so easily due to financial concerns?
Well, it means a couple of things, at least to me. First, it means that, yeah, our economy is that shitty, and it looks like the games industry and those surrounding it and depending on it aren’t as recession proof as some people predicted. I severely doubt UGO is staffed by a cackling group of dark wizards who have been plotting the firing of 1Up staffers from their evil lair; it was just something that had to be done, and, from a business prospective, those who had to be let go were let go. It sucks ass, but it’s the reality of living in a economy that’s starting to circle the drain. Had UGO not bought 1UP, the whole network might have gone kaput (re: Ziff Davis filing for bankruptcy).
Second, and probably more important to me, is that I think it shows the place of gaming journalism in the whole spectrum of journalism. Unfortunately, as a field, games journalism is just not up there with movie critics, sports reporters, and the other more solidified genres of writing. Would something like what happened with Gerstmann happen to Roger Ebert? Hell no! Though I’m sure The Chicago Sun Times, like most print publications around the country, are not doing as well financially as they used to, there’s no way they would fire Ebert for a movie company threatening to pull advertising dollars due to a harsh review. Ebert is solidified; he’s THE movie critic, and thus nobody in their right minds would fire him. We don’t have someone like a Roger Ebert in the games journalism field. Sure, there are guys who are at the top of their game, guys who have been there for a long time and who have revolutionized the field and done some great things; but nobody in games journalism has the notoriety of an Ebert, because movies - more specifically, its critics - are more mainstream and more recognized by the masses. Joe Sixpack recognizes the name Ebert, and could rattle off a few more high profile journalists in sports and news, but the same guy probably wouldn’t know recognize Dan Hsu, Gerstmann, Brian Crecente, Hilary Goldstein, or any other popular and/or well respected games journalist that you pull out of a hat.
Sadly, the field just isn’t there yet, from a numbers perspective. I would argue there are just as many great games writers as there are sports writers (hell, probably more; sports journalism has become horrid in the past couple of years), news writers, and opinion columnists, but people don’t pick up the newspaper and read the gaming section like they do the sports section - because there isn’t one. Even as the Wii and DS are making gaming a thing not just done by fat sweaty guys in their basement (like me), but by grandmas, grandpas, your mom, and celebrities (I hate that DS ad campaign, Nintendo. I hate it so), the field of covering it is extremely niche, limited to specialized magazines (which are dying), websites, and the occasional special mention in a daily newspaper (my hometown paper has a games pages every Friday, for example). Though games publications have been around (relatively) forever, the field is still in its infant stages.
Even though I can rationalize all of this, though, it’s still terrifying to me, a wanna-be games journalist. Why? Because, the bottom line is no matter how good of a writer you are, no matter how many industry contacts you have, no matter how many times you break the story first, in the world of games journalism it seems everyone is expendable, especially during this recession. The field is still fledgling, relying desperately on ad revenue and, in the case of 1UP, buyouts, to keep it afloat. I don’t think it’s a coincidence that while magazines like EGM die, the “official” company sponsored publications are, to my knowledge, still going. Many point to the Great Depression as a time when movie critics became recognized as actual journalists, as the Depression lead to many people flocking to the movies for an escape, but also needing people to tell them which movies were worth their hard-earned (and dwindling) money. So far, this recession has had the opposite effect on the games journalism field. Yes, more and more people are buying games; but they’re not coming to gaming sites to see which ones they should spend their money on. Look at Amazon’s top-sellers list: several of the top spots are inhabited by Wii and DS shovel-ware games, like Jillian Michaels Fitness Ultimatum 2009 (AWESOME), or sequels to popular and well-known games, like Call of Duty: World at War or Gears of War 2. The average consumer doesn’t care about the quality of games, because they’re still seen by the non-hardcore crowd as throw-away entertainment. If they see a game is a sequel, well, the first one must’ve been good enough to warrant a sequel, right? If there’s a million Ubisoft titles ending with “z” (Babiez, Puppiez, Kittiez, Crackwhorez), well, it must be a great series if there’s so many of them, right?
And, honestly, that’s fine for them. If my little neice is happy playing mommy on her newly acquired pink DS, more power to her. I’m not enough of a gaming snob to say that if you haven’t play my favorite niche JRPG, you’re not a “true” gamer. But as long as people are content with seeing video games as a “throw-away” hobby - interested only in stuff like Wii Fit or the casual DS games - there isn’t going to be a demand for high quality games and people to tell them what those games are. So, while there will be people like me and the countless 1UP fans who are devastated by this firing, it’s going to get worse before it gets better. It’s the nature of the beast, and as someone who wants to jump into the belly of said beast, it’s pretty terrifying.
But I’m getting an English degree and don’t want to teach, so, frankly, it’s kind of my own fault.
Lastly, if you are in need of teh lolz over this depressing news, please check out this hilarious post at Hardcasual, as well as the image Kotaku has been running with their 1UP-related blog posts. As a Star Wars nerd, I can appreciate that.
10 Comments so far
Leave a comment
The thing is, conglomerate blogs/magazines like 1UP and IGN are always going to be bound by the restrictions placed on them by advertisers. Luckily, there are still plenty of independent game enthusiasts that have a voice in the industry and aren’t retained by big companies (like us!)
The bizarre thing is that video games, as a hobby, generally cost more than movies. Shouldn’t people value game reviews over movie reviews? I’d be more comfortable blowing under 10 bucks on a movie without reading a review than picking up a $60 game without knowing anything about it.
The problem with being independent hacks like us though is that there’s no way we can get access to exclusives, reviews, etc. At least, not as easily as what you called conglomerate blogs. Though, I wonder, what would you classify Kotaku as? They do take ad revenue from games (and other sources as well), but they certainly seem independent, esp. when it comes to their review system, which is different than most websites, since they don’t offer a random numerical value.
I know Penny Arcade has a policy where they accept ads from only games that they enjoy playing; so, like when Assassin’s Creed came out and it was generating a lot of varied opinions as well as some conspiracy theories about paid off reviewers, I know Gabe from PA basically said they are advertising the game because he thought it was awesome. And I believe PA, because PA is awesome.
Hey Andrew. Really smart post, I liked reading it. Just a bigger journalism perspective — things across the board aren’t going well, and I think more and more journalists (in any genre or specific topic) are finding themselves expendable. It sucks because once newsrooms are cut to the point where they can’t produce good news anymore, it’s just going to make finding funding to support journalism even more difficult. At some point things should turn around, I sure hope so anyway. But yeah, good post. I miss you guys :)
Dear Kim U, how are things? I assume you are still hot.
Dear Nate Gamer, the comparison between movies and games is weird once you bring time into it. A movie lasts about two hours and costs eight bucks. A game can last twenty hours or more and cost fifty bucks. Dollar-to-hour-wise, games win out. But we shouldn’t be talking about that sort of thing when it’s art, right?
Well, I think both games and movies have their own artistic credentials, but when it comes right down to it they’re just forms of entertainment.
Wait, that’s what art is, too… but don’t let any high-brow artistic types hear that.
As far as dollars/hour, I agree that games generally win out. The problem is that it comes in bulk.
It’s like never having had ketchup before, then going out to Costco and buying 12 gallons of it. Sure, it’s cheaper by the ounce, but will you actually use it all, or even like it?
It’s just a smaller gamble to buy a movie than a game.
Regardless, FUCK Ugo. Man, fuck everything. Games journalism sucks these days and I refuse to sit idly by and politely not swear about this kind of injustice and blatant disrespect for writers.
I guess I’m just the kind of guy that would buy a whole lot of ketchup. Basically, though, I was addressing this: “The bizarre thing is that video games, as a hobby, generally cost more than movies.” I think most moviegoers, whether we’re talking rentals or theater seats, are casual film fans. If someone’s HOBBY is films, they’re going to be spending probably as much as gamers do on director’s cuts DVDs, rare films, foreign films, books on films, high-end hardware, and probably some foray into film-making at some point. I think it’s an apples-to-oranges situation because anyone with an honest-to-god hobby will usually end up spending any extra money they have on it. I can always find more comics to read; there are always more games to play; there are always more scrapbooks to make.
As for, “…but when it comes right down to it they’re just forms of entertainment,” well, I guess I’m one of those high-brow types. Stories have changed my life, changed the way I see the world, and helped me become the person I want to be. Afterschool art programs have been connected to lower rates of teen crime. Many parts of American culture are BUILT around the construction and perception of narratives. These all have value that exists outside the time spent consuming the artistic product and, although I’m a pretty casual gamer, I don’t doubt that video games have the potential to do the same sorts of things (see Bioshock’s violent deconstruction of Randian objectivism).
Fuck me, it’s all of a sudden Buzzword City up in here, population: me. I gotta hop off the jargon bus.
Okay, okay, I’m sorry for all this posting. Seriously, though, I want to talk about Swan’s article this time, specifically, this: “But as long as people are content with seeing video games as a ‘throw-away’ hobby - interested only in stuff like Wii Fit or the casual DS games - there isn’t going to be a demand for high quality games and people to tell them what those games are.” I find this comment interesting because it’s nothing new in other mediums; replace “Wii Fit” with “action movie” or “romance novel” to see the same sentiment in film and prose. I think this sort of thing is inevitable, so, despite it meaning that there’s boatloads of pure shit out there, I’ve sort of come to accept it.
Even more than accepting it, I think I’m okay with it. Should we really begrudge someone their two hours of deflating after a long day on the canning line? Or if some sad, telemarketing divorcee manages to keep his current wait with a daily regimen of Wii Fit, does that negatively effect the industry? There’s also the Harry Potter phenomenon, where a rising tide raises all boats. (Is that a fallacy? I don’t know.) If there is a gaming industry booming with competition, that lone wolf with a brand new idea might look a lot more appealing that s/he would to a company that can reliably sell sequel after sequel to the same static niche audience.
I’m not trying to flat out argue against your statement because I don’t know much about the gaming industry; you’re article is definitely good (if you couldn’t tell from all the conversation it’s sparking). I just think these ideas need to be aired out and spread on the grass for everyone to look at.
I think Aaron makes a valid point. In one sense, I don’t think that casual games are hurting the game industry on their own because they aren’t necessarily taking sales away from “hardcore” games; rather, they are selling different games to different people. Casual games do become like the action films, or the romance novels. They are constant veins that can be mined for cash. The problem I see with that is, when sales are inflated by the casual gaming crowd, it raises expectations about what a “hit” is. If a third-party casual game comes out on the Wii and sells 200,000 copies, it likely more that earns back it’s cost, because the game was not that cost-intensive to create. However, I think games more than films are dictated by the blockbuster title. Movies like The Dark Knight can come out and make $500 million, but studios don’t use that figure as the benchmark for the hit because it’s not realistic. Whereas in games, there is a disconnect often between “quality” and sales. A game like Wii Fit comes out and sells millions of copies and is certainly certified a hit, whereas a game like LittleBigPlanet–which had a mountain of hype behind it–released to somewhat tepid sales initially.
I guess what I worry with games is that the domination of casual games that we’ve been seeing will adversely effect the health of the industry as a whole, making it hard for studios to make something outside of what is immediately marketable (see also: Mirror’s Edge, Valkyria Chronicles).
I don’t mind action movies and I don’t mind romance novels, because I think film and books cater to such a widely varied group of consumers, whereas games, while becoming more prominent, are still pretty niche. Rather than looking at sales through the lens of different genres (action films, independent films, etc), games are still largely treated as a whole.
Aaron, I agree with you - and think I said as much in my novel - about casual games. I have no problem with people playing those games, or, as Ben pointed out, someone reading non-academic literature (I am the guy who just spent a $100 gift card for B&N on Star Wars novels and Buffy graphic novels, after all) or someone watching an action movie. Everybody needs to space out at some point. I think the big difference between gaming and other forms of entertainment is that people recognize that there is a difference between, say, a romance novel and a collection of Hemingway short stories; between a movie with Keanu Reeves and “Citizen Kane”. For most people - whether they are non-game players, casual game players, or, hell, even most “hardcore” gamers, I would argue - games are just games. Their only redeeming quality is whether or not they are casual or hardcore. Most people don’t debate the meaning of the story behind GTAIV (which I just beat, and I have to say, is absolutely superb and would put it at the same level of books I have read for classes); they see it as a game to kill hookers and cops. A game like GTAIV makes me think about my views, challenges me to inspect my actions, just the way a great piece of literature, graphic novel, or film would do.
Nate, as for your assertion that all art is entertainment… I would disagree there. For me, something crosses the line between a piece of entertainment and a piece of art when it requires close inspection from a viewer to understand. Now, that’s different for different genres of art - a painting requires you to analyze the brush strokes, and, uh… other art words I don’t know. Literature requires analyzation and notation. Movies require reviewing. Games… Well, games are a different beast. It’s really hard to analyze what GTAIV is saying about the American society’s class divide when you’re being asked to drive a car at 100+ mph while trying to shoot a guy’s tires out at the same time. I read an article somewhere that said games cannot be truly art yet, because we just can’t handle the brain capacity and multitasking needed to a) Play the damn game and not die, and b) Analyze what the game is telling us through all its cues (graphics, story, actions, etc.) at the same time. Sure, you can watch a guy playing a game, but that makes it not a game and starts bordering the realm of movies.
Okay, this is long enough to be a post, let alone a comment, so I’m done.