If I ever met any of the Polygon guys in person I wouldn't be afraid to let them know that the way they act in these videos could seriously cripple the validity of their site before they've even launched. That's my job after all.
Press Reset: The Story of Polygon - financed by Microsoft for $750,000
- Thread starter Grecco
- Start date
- Status
If I ever met any of the Polygon guys in person I wouldn't be afraid to let them know that the way they act in these videos could seriously cripple the validity of their site before they've even launched. That's my job after all.
HamPster PamPster
Member
If the widespread negative reaction was just based on jealousy, then I doubt Game Informer's editor would have said this about the original trailer.
DangerStepp
Member
You sure it's not "pure, unadulterated jealousy"?
lol!!)My ignore list is coming in handy today.
Jasper Avenue
Member
I don't know a single adult that reads video game reviews.
Felix Lighter
Member
If the widespread negative reaction was just based on jealousy, then I doubt Game Informer's editor would have said this about the original trailer.
He hates happy successful people. It's the only other explanation why anyone could possibly have a negative reaction to this documentary.
Heh... seriously?
I will agree that some people are taking their criticisms a bit too far with unnecessary insults, but many are just simply critiquing the series and its tone. Has nothing to do with being "jealous".
Also, there are other successful and/or well-known people in the industry that pretty much agree that the documentary is a bit too serious in tone.
Heh, I don't know about others in this thread, but I would have no problem saying what I said in this thread in a face to face conversation as feedback.
The problem with accepting money from eg Microsoft is that people are going to assume it's the impetus behind your words even if it never occurred to you.
I mean, what if Halo 4 really is great and they give it 9/10. Regardless of the quality of the game or the quality of the prose, their opinion will be ignored because people will just assume they've been paid off.
It just doesn't seem like a good way to bolster your credibility, even if you're not going to let the cash go to your head.
I mean, what if Halo 4 really is great and they give it 9/10. Regardless of the quality of the game or the quality of the prose, their opinion will be ignored because people will just assume they've been paid off.
It just doesn't seem like a good way to bolster your credibility, even if you're not going to let the cash go to your head.
Anton Sugar
Member
videos games are for kids duh
D
Deleted member 47027
Unconfirmed Member
Then we find out that Gerstmann is the higher power!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cNgxyL5zEAk
That video is so good.
Full disclosure, im a doctor too and sometimes I gotta deal with my own arrogance, but its just too damn funny to see someone like Mcelroy and Crecente talking about the importance of themselves, when true Gods of game writing like Jeff Green, Shawn Elliots and Jim Rossignol always had to playful casual attitude about his job. And also would probably hate the terms I used to describe them.
ThatObviousUser
ὠαἴÏÏιÏÏÎ¿Ï Ïαá¿Ï εἶ
The only thing I don't like about Polygon is that it's almost too good.
Sissel likes this
LOL
Tylahedras
Banned
That trailer is, wow, wow. But it's fucking funded by MS? So forget paying for reviews, we'll just pay for your whole fucking website? WTF?
I mean that trailer is basically people jerking off for 5 minutes. And how fucking hard is it to build a website funded by one of the largest corporations in the world, run buy someone who just sold his previous website for millions of dollars?
This is disgusting.
I mean that trailer is basically people jerking off for 5 minutes. And how fucking hard is it to build a website funded by one of the largest corporations in the world, run buy someone who just sold his previous website for millions of dollars?
This is disgusting.
lol
BruiserBear
Banned
If the widespread negative reaction was just based on jealousy, then I doubt Game Informer's editor would have said this about the original trailer.
I'm sure he didn't like his Magazine/site being labeled a "co partnership with retail" in the first episode. Do you really think someone intrenched in the current gaming media, wishes success upon the new well funded upstart?
What's more likely? That Game Informer is the future of the gaming media, or a site like Polygon?
Do you think it would be stressful to build an entire website from scratch? Of course.
So if someone walked around filming you during the process of creating that website, do you think they'd film you stressing out about certain aspects of the project, and seeming "serious" at times? Of course they would.
So do you think the people filming that footage, tasked with making the most entertaining documentary style video possible, would choose the most serious, dramatic footage and audio to assemble, in order to show the human side of creating something like this?
It's like no one here has watched a reality show, and realized the power of editing in making something seem a little different than it really is, in order to be more entertaining.
I guess I've been watching something different than you, because I haven't seen people "loudly announcing at every opportunity how great they are". But please, feel free to present some quotes of this behavior, because I bet they amount to people saying typical things that anyone who's starting a new site would say.
Everyone and everything surround Polygon is so serious. Not like this post though, which isn't serious at all.
Jake Tower
Banned
Pssst. Every single person associated with Polygon is entrenched in the current gaming media.
TeamXbox > Freelancer/RebelFM (Anthony's roommate) > IGN > Joystiq > Polygon.
I think I got that right. Only know any of this cause I listen to RebelFM.
BruiserBear
Banned
Sure, but they left their old jobs for this new one. So again, do you think that a magazine/site like Game Informer wishes success for Polygon?
Come on, I know you know the answer to this question.
So with that in mind, should we be surprised and impressed when Andy McNamara starts taking shots at Polygon on Twitter?
D
Deleted member 47027
Unconfirmed Member
Yeah, BruiserBear didn't let me down. Keep fightin' that good fight brother.
BruiserBear
Banned
You keep doing the same, brother.
RedNumberFive
Banned
Let's be fair - we've all been taking shots at Polygon, and with good reason. They're like the Super Friends of hack journalism.
I have absolutely no idea who any of these people are and I think that they're being painfully indignant, a viewpoint that is only amplified by the fact that they work in video games "journalism", an arena for which the standard of quality and the consequence of failure is so low that it is almost baffling that people get paid to do it.
I also have no idea who you are and I think that your preconceived notions of the people you're arguing with make this post a waste of time, but I've got to fill the lunch break somehow, y'know?
Of course there will be stressful times making a website, however certain production techniques come across as being too much and/or too serious in tone when it comes to "Press Reset" in my opinion.
Even during the "non-stressful" scenes in the documentary, the documentary has very cliche indie movie production value/shots that are unnecessary imo.
That's not entertaining to me. And I love that you brought up reality shows since those aren't entertaining to me either for basically the same reasons; they make every little thing as dramatic as possible.
There was a behind-the-scenes vid that the AVGN did about a year or so ago that showed his process of making an episode. He talked about how things sometimes get stressful and/or how tedious it can be but overall it was enjoyable to watch since he came across as someone who truly enjoys what he's doing without being pompous/uppity about it.
I guess what I'm saying is that for something like a video game website, I would expect a bit more of a happy tone and/or humbleness instead of constant drama, "life or death" seriousness, and somewhat pompous attitudes/statements.
I was very interested in the site since I enjoy reading The Verge, but I must say that these recent vids have turned me off a bit.
Anton Sugar
Member
I don't really follow games journalism. I had no idea who any of these guys are before I saw this, though I'd heard names tossed around in Gaming.
Despite my fear of sounding hopelessly idealistic, yes. Games journalism is a tough business to survive in, so there's very much an "in the trenches" camaraderie shared among most folks in the business. Also, there's a lot of reshuffling of personnel all the time. You never know who you will be working for, or who might be working for you, or who knows someone, or whatever. These are friends, contacts, colleagues, and employees. In other words, it does no one any good to be (publicly) negative toward another publication/site. In fact, it more often will do you harm. Everyone knows this.
So something about these docs from Polygon has struck a nerve in the games press if people (in the industry) are so openly questioning Polygon's tone and tactics.
Doc Lobster
Member
What's missing from this casserole of fair and unfair criticism is how poorly these videos are performing.
http://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLFECD492AC5E3201F
The seven released episodes are averaging 3,128 views on YouTube. The teaser, which seemed like it was linked and parodied to death, only reached 8,305 on YT. These don't include views from Polygon's site, of course, which uses a proprietary video player. Maybe a million-billion people are watching it on their site.
Anyway, any smart advertiser would see this as evidence that Polygon's narrative is just that--an attempt to sell a story about who they are, when measurably it's something that only a very small portion of the gaming audience is interested in, will watch, or notices.
http://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLFECD492AC5E3201F
The seven released episodes are averaging 3,128 views on YouTube. The teaser, which seemed like it was linked and parodied to death, only reached 8,305 on YT. These don't include views from Polygon's site, of course, which uses a proprietary video player. Maybe a million-billion people are watching it on their site.
Anyway, any smart advertiser would see this as evidence that Polygon's narrative is just that--an attempt to sell a story about who they are, when measurably it's something that only a very small portion of the gaming audience is interested in, will watch, or notices.
Rossignol sure as hell seems to take games seriously. I'm baffled by anyone who thinks we shouldn't.
I don't get most of the people here. They seem to want, from the get-go, for everything to be unwarranted self-importance. You know, Obsidian went through shit times because they got an 84 on metacritic instead of an 85. Bad reviews can have an impact. Even then, whether it was true or not, if someone said "hey, Doc, your review made my people worried they were gonna lose their jobs," I'd feel bad, whether it was true or not, because that's who I am.
In literally all the other videos, they talk about wanting to make a good site (a good goal!), the uncertainty that comes with it (an understandable worry), the stress of reviewing something that should be fun when you've only got a handful of days to do it (which many games journalists I've read/talked to have said is definitely a problem with the job), and they're talking about how embarrassing it feels to have a paper sent back to you with more red marks than black (I know I do)... so a lot of what they're saying seems like something any normal person in their position would feel, filtered through a modern documentarian's eyes.
The only thing--the only thing--that struck me as pretentious was that initial teaser. Sure, they're playing the whole thing up a bit, but it was that teaser that talked about how they want to change everything (an admirable goal, surely?) that came across as pretentious. Everything else has been "it's a new venture, we're uprooting people to do things, it's weird to meet them in person, etc etc," which are normal human feelings that everyone should be sympathetic with.
I feel like a lot of people are just bashing what they've heard because they only saw the teaser and are working off summaries they've read from the other videos.
So, if you've got a bad taste in your mouth about Polygon and don't work in the industry, you're just jealous, but if you have a bad taste in your mouth and you do work in the industry, then you just want them to fail to save your own hide? It's only the super-rare, super-smart, super-objective people like yourself that can see the truth?
... Sounds like a big audience for them to latch onto. I think they should open a store that sells tin foil hats. They should do this now, before the site launches, naturally.
Jeff Green only said what he said because he knows these guys will be unbiased in their reviews and will lower the metacritic of PopCap's games! Don't you see!? DON'T YOU SEEEEE!?!!?!
To be fair I'm watching it through the Polygon site and didn't even know they were on Youtube. If each video has around the same amount of views then that is what is really important as it shows that the large majority of people who have watched the first episode have also watched the next 6.
RedNumberFive
Banned
Hold on to your diapers babies, the second coming of video-game-journalism-Christ is approaching!
ThatObviousUser
ὠαἴÏÏιÏÏÎ¿Ï Ïαá¿Ï εἶ
ItWasMeantToBe19
Banned
Can anyone give examples of reviews from the Polygon staff (either at The Verge or back from their previous stuff) that demonstrate that they're actually more talented or interesting than most other video game journalists? I can't really remember anything most of these guys have written.
D
Deleted member 47027
Unconfirmed Member
http://www.joystiq.com/2010/05/03/nier-review-fail/
Just kidding! There's got to be good stuff, but the bad ones really shine brighter than permissible or good work.
diffusionx
Gold Member
Kotaku was the worst game site on the internet when Crecente was over there.
I mean, it is today, but it was back then too.
Sir_Crocodile
Member
Think I'll stick with my online trinity of eurogamer, gamecentral and gaf
Interficium
Banned
It should be, they paid a lot of money for those scores after all.
But seriously the white knight of games journalism thing is unbecoming at best. You should probably cut your losses before someone who cares more than me does a huge multiquote post of you and eviscerates you point by point. At least you aren't as far gone as DrSeuss.
Delusibeta
Banned
Neither. Polygon at the moment looks like a Kotaku clone minus Bashcraft mudding the name of the Japanese every morning. If you want to look at the future of gaming media, you'll probably have to look at the many gaming channels on YouTube, or Giant Bomb, or even Rock Paper Shotgun.
Press Reset continues to frustrate because it focuses on the boring parts--The difficulty of designing a website when you have a full staff of paid designers to do it. The fear of having to sell ads on your unproven site, when all you have going for you is a bunch of industry contacts and an experienced ad sales department. The pressure of launching a revolutionary gaming site with nothing but a hand-picked staff of the supposed Best and Brightest and a giant wad or venture capital. The stress of having to review games for your unproven site that already appears to be gettig review code just like the big boys.
There are flashes of interesting things, but they're only ever background. The Ethics Committee that was mentioned/formed in one episode actually sounded like somethig that would have been interesting to see, since it could have actually been a view into what could make Polygon different, but it vanished. They mention losing all their Sony PR contacts in an episode, but nothing after that. And they're firmly in the part of the timeline where the backlash and perception of them is a real thing, but it's not lookin like that's something considered appropriate for the documentary.
Which isn't necessarily the individual staffers faults, but we don't exactly have a Polygon to judge Polygon on. We have their past history and the documentary at this point--and while it's not super-offensive, it's nothing that's going to change people's opinions of these people.
There are flashes of interesting things, but they're only ever background. The Ethics Committee that was mentioned/formed in one episode actually sounded like somethig that would have been interesting to see, since it could have actually been a view into what could make Polygon different, but it vanished. They mention losing all their Sony PR contacts in an episode, but nothing after that. And they're firmly in the part of the timeline where the backlash and perception of them is a real thing, but it's not lookin like that's something considered appropriate for the documentary.
Which isn't necessarily the individual staffers faults, but we don't exactly have a Polygon to judge Polygon on. We have their past history and the documentary at this point--and while it's not super-offensive, it's nothing that's going to change people's opinions of these people.
Great post. To the bolded, and I'm just guessing here, but you probably didn't hear any more about that story because it went "oh no, I lost the numbers of my Sony contacts... ok, I DMed them all on Twitter and we're good now."
Nope. They're all perfectly capable, perfectly acceptable, perfectly fine writers. But none of them is a standout in any way (or I could be more generous and say "they're all equally standouts," but that's nonsense). Their reviews will be just fine and follow the same format and approach that's been done for decades. Though I do respect their editorial approach to scoring (scoring as a team based solely on the text of the writer's review), but even that's been done before.
As far as anyone can tell, their big "revolution" is in layout and UI, not in content. Unfortunately for them, content is king.
I'm not out to see them fail. I'm one of the few around here who has been a long-time fan of Joystiq. I was shocked and excited to see Chris Grant take a bunch of those folks off to start this new thing. But now that I've seen what it looks like, I'm supremely underwhelmed. I see no reason to go there rather than the other places I already go for reviews, news, and opinions. If their final layout is anything like what they're already doing on The Verge portal, it's a major pain. No sense of chronology, significance, or intuitive interaction. Perfect example of an "over-designed" layout.
I think Matt Leone deserves to mentioned as a standout. He's been working hard trying to write interesting features for years.
Everyone else just seems like they followed the chain of friends/coworkers from the top down. Which is why I always grimace when they're referred to as the best of the best, or what-have-you.
I feel like BB's avatar is coming to life, firing shots to every and all posts that he's quoted. BLATBLATBLAT
This is a pretty good statement that should be repeated. I feel like there are some crazy attacks going on but the second Phil and Jeff stepped in it was a page or two of either actual criticism or "omg it's this guy", which I find hilarious. I wonder if people would keep shitting on Aegies or Justin if they popped in here. Probably a yes on Arthur.
This is a pretty good statement that should be repeated. I feel like there are some crazy attacks going on but the second Phil and Jeff stepped in it was a page or two of either actual criticism or "omg it's this guy", which I find hilarious. I wonder if people would keep shitting on Aegies or Justin if they popped in here. Probably a yes on Arthur.
I don't know enough about the personalities behind Polygon to have a ton of baggage. I don't doubt the complaints about Arthur Gies are at least partly true (based on what little of Press Reset and his Twitter comments I've seen, he does seem a touch self-important
That said, I appreciate seeing him carve a swath of red type out of a review as was shown in this episode (which I watched after a few Twitter comments piqued my interest). More outlets *coughIGNcough* could use someone actually reading the work they post before it goes up.
That said, I appreciate seeing him carve a swath of red type out of a review as was shown in this episode (which I watched after a few Twitter comments piqued my interest). More outlets *coughIGNcough* could use someone actually reading the work they post before it goes up.
When Chris Grant was EIC of Joystiq their policy (as he described it on their podcast) was very straightforward:
They didn't do paid-for junkets. They paid their own way or they didn't go.
They gave away all of the free tchotchkes and PR swag they were sent.
Plain and simple and to the point. It didn't even require explaining via a $750,000 vidoc.
They didn't do paid-for junkets. They paid their own way or they didn't go.
They gave away all of the free tchotchkes and PR swag they were sent.
Plain and simple and to the point. It didn't even require explaining via a $750,000 vidoc.
- Status