Why is Digital Foundry the only place that feels like it has a standard in the gaming journalism sphere

I've rarely seen a complainant of DF add more nuance and context than they do. It's almost always the complete opposite.....they lack any nuance and context.
 
Whatever happened to VG Tech? That was a great channel that at least folks had something to compare DF to and keep them honest. Not that I have a problem with DF. I think they do a good job, personally.
 
Straight Face Trying Not To Laugh GIF
 
I thought they weren't going to touch that game.

I was clearly wrong about that but everything else I said still stands.
Eurogamer said they weren't, DF said they wanted to but "they hadn't received" a code, and then one of them went on a rant how he hates HP and wouldn't be the one to cover it.
 
I have no idea why there is any need for gaming journalism anymore.

Watch a trailer on Youtube. Never pre-order. Wait for user reviews. Done.
 
Considering their bread and butter was Xbox 360 vs PS3 when the war was at full tilt.
I can agree.



Your username is Pure Platimum, im assuming thats a Bayonetta reference........the PS3 version of Bayonetta was not fun.
It took Sony themsevles to step in after launch to try and fix the game.
Digital Foundry was the largest voice pointing out just how off the PS3 version of the game was.




Define better?
CCuz arent graphics part of the puzzle when people say a game is good or bad.
Because if not, wouldnt it be fair to say most graphical techniques dont make a game better, yet people will hold a game with better graphics in higher regard than one without.
A good game is a good game even if it isnt textured at all......it would be better with textures.....it woould be better with good animations.......it would be even better with good lighting(Raytracing).
Wasnt Halo infinite clowned on prerelease because it didnt have "good graphics".
The Bayonetta point is fair - I think outside of "This game is broken", most technical breakdowns are fairly trivial. BayoPS3 was a pretty extreme example.
 
Do TF claim the game is not fun because of pixel count ?
Biased/Un-biased, they only do technical tests, not fun to play tests. Its gamers that choose to listen to pixel counting as fun.
I just wish that we had 1/10th of the discourse online about actual design, mechanics, gameplay, as we did about graphics and pixel-counting...but of course one is very hard to talk about because "game-feel" is a very nebulous thing. It's far easier to talk about resolution and frame rate which are measurable.
 
Agree with this very much. DF pitch themselves as enthusiasts interested in dissecting the minutiae of what goes into making the biggest games technical masterpieces, but unfortunately, their audience historically has been console warring fanboys who would be happy to skip the analysis and jump straight to "Playstation/Xbox better" with a couple of screenshots showing one platform at its lowest framerate and another at a locked 60 that they can then post accompanied with: 😂 😂 😂 😂 😂. I'm certain that some people have no idea when they're playing something that is technically good or bad, but DF tells them if they should praise it or condemn it when arguing online.
Many of my fondest gaming memories stem from PS2 era - SoTC ran at I believe 15FPS most of the time, and it's one of the strongest games ever made. Technical fidelity has very little to do with having fun.
 
You might not like some person there or something they said in the past, but its qualified people talking straight, and they produce in video form, and just stay consistent and on-topic.

I think old Gamespot, when Greg Kasavin was there, had the same feel.

Why does everything feel so amateruish in gaming journalism?

I just want some serious people with thought out informed opinions on games, contained in a 40 minute show without 3 hours of bullshit, lighthearted banter and people constantly trying to be funny.
A lot of hate for DF here but I agree with you! Also they hate DF so much but post every video of them, quote them, use their analysis etc.
 
Last edited:
You had me at Greg Kasavin. Best critic in video form I've seen. Everything has gone down since then.

I liked 1UP Show as well but maybe mostly for the show itself rather than their reviews or journalism.

But yeah I like Digital Foundry. Without them I would've wasted so much money on buggy games that needed more time in the oven.
 
The Bayonetta point is fair - I think outside of "This game is broken", most technical breakdowns are fairly trivial. BayoPS3 was a pretty extreme example.

Another Platinum game Nier Automata had the GI setting too high with no way to change it, the community couldnt figure out why the game was so heavy when it looks the way it looks.
SpeicalK fixes it with no depredation to visuals, how would anyone know about SpecialK if you arent in the modding scene.....well Digital Foundry talked about it and SpecialK is now a staple for many Jgame players, but it was always otherwise underground, Digital Foundry brought it forward.

Im sure most people heard about Lyall fixes from Digital Foundry.

Alex optimized settings are usually a good baseline for people to use when setting up their games.

Getting info on current and upcoming techniques in rendering without having to pay for GDC or Siggraph.
If you dont care about rendering techniques thats fine, said content isnt for you, some people do care and DF is one of few outlets that actually talk about them.

People who own all consoles can see which versions of a game runs/looks better.
When the games are largely the same, DF themselves will point out just how similar the games are.

Devs watch Digital Foundry and things they point out are checked on.
As they are a media outlet they get codes early so they can report issues to devs before release and the day one patch could address that before its in users hands even.
 
Alex optimized settings are usually a good baseline for people to use when setting up their games.

I ignore and just slide everything to the right. 😂

I enjoy watching the videos though.

I think the funniest thing is that they all mainline pc as primary platform. It's just Alex is the face for pc
 
The closest thing this industry ever had to professional journalists was Gamespot and IGN in the first half of the 360/PS3 generation, then smart phones as we know them now and social media came around and everything became dumbed down click bait.
 
In their defense, it's fuckin' Doom. You should already know what type of game it is.
What's funny is that that couldn't actually be farther from the truth. They've made it into some sort of bizarre bullet-hell bastardization I don't even recognize as a proper shooter, let alone a Doom game.

Props for trying something different, I guess. But "different" shouldn't have to mean "we gave Ron six crates of glue to sniff - let's see what that does to his creative process."
 
I have definitely grown to dislike Digital Foundry, but it didn't start that way. For some perverse reason, I used to enjoy just sitting and watching comparison videos. I really blame others for my distaste for them, since before too long people started holding DF up on some sort of ridiculous pedestal - but Digital Foundry says. Like they're some sort of tech standard against which all others are compared. Like, they're just some dudes who do videos, man. They're the Bill Nye of gaming. Nothing wrong with that, but it is what it is.

Not to mention, once they'd gotten some measure of viewership, they apparently decided they're all stars now, so they jam their faces right into a camera in every video, so close you can count skin pores. Pointless. So then they start gesticulating and blathering things which could just as well been overlayed over video footage. Ugh.

That's speaking nothing of the mess that is Eurogamer (and practically every other games "journalism" outlet out there), who they belong to, which means they are certainly poisoned by association.
 
Whatever happened to VG Tech? That was a great channel that at least folks had something to compare DF to and keep them honest. Not that I have a problem with DF. I think they do a good job, personally.
Hasn't been seen in over a year. Hope he's okay.
 
It's an odd question, to begin with. DF is all about focusing on performance and discussing game performance on consoles. They have standards as far as being objective and just focusing on raw data and speaking to that. But it's odd to say that's journalism. I would say outside of Bloomberg or sometimes Polygon and IGN (rarely), there really isn't actual games journalism, like real reporting anymore. It's just reviews, guides, reaction videos, and opinion.
 
Good or actual game journalism died a long time ago when they decided their personal opinions mattered more than being professionals and doing their jobs. When companies started hiring social media level "experts" you knew it was time to do your own research from multiple sources.

As for DF, I watch some of their videos, but never their podcasts or anything. I personally enjoy seeing some easy to follow basic tech breakdowns about frame rates , stuttering, screen tearing etc and its usual for my own peace of mind that its my system.screwing up or something.

On the other hand, they would sometimes show a shadow of a leaf you'd never normally see / pay attention too when playing and highlight its low resolutions or its jagginess, but that doesn't really fit real world play. Like IGN and their "exclusive 10 minutes of gameplay" but the person controlling the character is walking super slow and zooming in on geometry.
 
Top Bottom