What happened to the Escapist?
- Thread starter remnant_phoenix
- Start date
Recommended Videos
Bless you, dude. I was worried that I was maybe remembering things with rose-tinted glasses, but no, this stuff was really was that good. The best games... I don't think journalism is the right word, as little of it was fact searching. Game-thought? Game-Contemplation? It was good discussion about games, man. Thoughtful. Eloquent. Not something you can get from Youtube, because these articles would make hour long videos, which are immensely difficult to make regularly. Often looking for the good in games, their positive contribution, but not afraid of speaking out against negative industry practices, like Gamestop's schemes, horrid DRM and the fad of monetization. Things that affected EVERY consumer, and that still do. And there's plenty more to speak out against. Publisher's running dev houses like sweat shops, for one. (maybe, before you encourage women to become developers, you should make sure that the game development industry isn't the new Industrial Revolution era factory? I have lots of friends, both men and women, studying at college to become game programmers. Every time I hear how horrid the industry is, the 80 hour weeks without paid overtime, the massive layoffs after every game launch, I fear for them. All of them. I really do. Ah, but this is a tangent.)Owyn_Merrilin said:
I don't know if there's anything like it left on the internet, except for some of the stuff RPS keeps locked behind a pay-wall. If anybody knows of any, I would love to hear it. I have little reason to come here anymore, as I'm not involved in the forums. (this might actually be the first time I commented on something that wasn't an article.)
Well, enough waxing nostalgic. I've stated what I miss about this site, and I know it isn't coming back. It wouldn't have been cut if it was paying the bills.
Oh, one last thing, Mr. Owyn_Merrilin. Would you happen to remember the names of the other columns? I know Andy Chalk had one, and there was another one by a dude who had an exercise ball. The latter probably wasn't too memorable if that's all I remember of it, but I like to be a completionist when I can
Thanks in any case for what you did dig up, hit me right in the fuzzies.Edit:
Sigh. I guess that explains why I don't see that many people who joined before 2011 anymore. I'd been wondering for the past couple of years if they had just dug down into the forums and quit commenting on the news. I guess not. Shame, that. Think I'm going to drink to the site-that-was, and those who were part of it, contributor and commenter alike. Cheers.
You're very welcome for the links, and I agree with you on everything you've said.Supahewok said:Bless you, dude. I was worried that I was maybe remembering things with rose-tinted glasses, but no, this stuff was really was that good. The best games... I don't think journalism is the right word, as little of it was fact searching. Game-thought? Game-Contemplation? It was good discussion about games, man. Thoughtful. Eloquent. Not something you can get from Youtube, because these articles would make hour long videos, which are immensely difficult to make regularly. Often looking for the good in games, their positive contribution, but not afraid of speaking out against negative industry practices, like Gamestop's schemes, horrid DRM and the fad of monetization. Things that affected EVERY consumer, and that still do. And there's plenty more to speak out against. Publisher's running dev houses like sweat shops, for one. (maybe, before you encourage women to become developers, you should make sure that the game development industry isn't the new Industrial Revolution era factory? I have lots of friends, both men and women, studying at college to become game programmers. Every time I hear how horrid the industry is, the 80 hour weeks without paid overtime, the massive layoffs after every game launch, I fear for them. All of them. I really do. Ah, but this is a tangent.)Owyn_Merrilin said:
I don't know if there's anything like it left on the internet, except for some of the stuff RPS keeps locked behind a pay-wall. If anybody knows of any, I would love to hear it. I have little reason to come here anymore, as I'm not involved in the forums. (this might actually be the first time I commented on something that wasn't an article.)
Well, enough waxing nostalgic. I've stated what I miss about this site, and I know it isn't coming back. It wouldn't have been cut if it was paying the bills.
Oh, one last thing, Mr. Owyn_Merrilin. Would you happen to remember the names of the other columns? I know Andy Chalk had one, and there was another one by a dude who had an exercise ball. The latter probably wasn't too memorable if that's all I remember of it, but I like to be a completionist when I can
As for the columns, I can't remember most of them by name, but if you scroll down to the bottom of <url=http://www.escapistmagazine.com/articles/view/columns>this page, they've got a list of what as far as I know is every regular column. Hopefully you'll find what you're looking for.
Also, one last thing, there is at least one person on the internet doing stuff like this, in video form, no less. Allow me to introduce you to XboxAhoy:
There's a lot of talk about getting youtubers to post videos here. If there's one youtuber I'd like to see here, he's it.
As I recall, it was first posted on 8chan, then found its way here.Solaire of Astora said:If I remember right, the person who first distributed this image (was it on Reddit? My memory is fuzzy)MarsAtlas said:
Indeed. He made the poor decision to post while drunk and got modded for it (justly, in my opinion).
Actually, I disagree with the usergroup idea fairly strenuously, for the exact reasons TopazFusion points out. Whomever is put in charge is going to create a "no disingenuous posting" rule day one, which is going to become a "no antiGG allowed!" rule, which is going to become a "no one who disagrees with me allowed!" rule very quickly, and I don't want to post on another Internet North Korea ( that's actually why I moved here from Civfanatics some time ago). In my opinion, the optimal solution would be to let things remain the way they are- keep the thread open and keep enforcing the code of conduct.TopazFusion said:
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Actually on topic: I originally came here for Zero Punctuation, and as long as Yahtzee stays here I'll still be here. While I'm sure the website is feeling the pain of losing two of its three big names, it can still recover if it keeps Mr. Croshaw on board.
You're mistaken. Gamergate is, among other things, a REACTION to the deliberate policies of the "GameJournoPros" that polarized the gaming community. Look back on all the GJP-led sites for some time before GG, and you'll see the polarization starting to appear. For my sins, I used to read Polygon somewhat regularly. The comment section basically became an ongoing zone of combat between people who WANTED to have a Culture War and the ones who didn't (note: not between "good people" and "bigots", but Warriors and live-and-let-livers). It was not just about "social issues" either, but a wider ideology that suddenly declared every damn thing DEADLY SERIOUS that divided gaming. Games DESPERATELY "needed" to "grow up" (presumably into "I Get This Call Every Day"), journolisters were "industry colleagues" with developers (both actual and, er, ones who fancied themselves devs on pretty spurious resumes) and, of course, MISOGYNY EVERYWHERE! Those, I believe, were the three main prongs of the assault on the "unsafety" of the "gaming space" that conveniently justified the collusive practices behind the scenes.Silentpony said:
Gamergate is the ongoing protest against this coordinated push to remove the fun and games from fun and games that drew the dividing lines between people who shared a passion for this medium (and apparently some who didn't, but wanted to get involved anyway). But make no mistake, the polarization was initiated by the "games journalism" establishment. I mean, most "gamers" had no problem with a variety of games available. Personally, I'm a bit old to take the urgency of the "games need moar Art!" evangelists all that seriously, but the number of copies of Gone Home I have purchased is equal to the combined number of games from the CoD, Madden and GTA franchises I own (that would be "one", in case you were wondering). There was no conflict between supporting these different types of games, until the Leading Bloggers decided there damn well ought to be. Why? Presumably so they could be Important Opinion Leaders in Emerging Culture.
And that's the division that we are feeling now. To their credit, The Escapist appear to have realized that this is a ghastly dead end (and detrimental to many of the causes the Culture Warriors claim to care about), hence their apparent desire to leave this mess behind. Sadly though, such rifts do not heal so easily.
Can't agree with you there, for the simple reason that GG is not a "group" in that sense. It's supposed to take place out in the open, as an open protest should. It should not retreat into some "sikrit" lair to scheme.TopazFusion said:
Cheap "gotcha!" posts are annoying, sure. But openness is worth that annoyance.
This. I've been saying since I first got the news that the 'Pist wasn't taking the default anti-gamergate stance: they made that decision because they'd already seen, over the course of the last few years, that it was a bad idea to bite the hand that fed them. The cries of misogyny were never all that strong here, but this place was ground zero for the whole "games as art" and "moving the medium forward" thing.StatusNil said:
not just GamerGate but the internet time and time again has proven it ISN'T a safe space...there is rampant misogyny and everything else and to say otherwise is burying ones head in the sandStatusNil said:
and even...everything GG stands for seems to hinge on a serious lack of understanding reality
-culture has and always will be criticised from many different veiwpoints, games are not special
-that the representation of people who are NOT White Males and "fun/good games" is mutually exclusive
- there NOT is a concentrated effort to "force developers to adhere to a checklist" from a fictional shadowy group of SJW's
- a criticism of the sexism in media is not a criticism of the people who enjoy such things
-that its not possible to enjoy things while looking at them critically: it is
- that suggesting games represent different things is somehow "radcial" and "scary"..it is not
welk I'm disappointed....wheres my mention? am I not big enough? SJW enough?MarsAtlas said:
...seriously though, all this shit makes me tried, like emotionally tired
this is something I just cannot understand, WHY has taking about thease things [footnote/]woman, the appeal of games, representation/minorities take your pick [/footnote] ALWAYS met with such hostility? always interpreted as a personal attack? why are people so fucking scared? that something so god damn innocuous gave rise to the biggest cancer online gaming discourse has ever seen?Supahewok said:
because I love games, or at least I used too..I still do but I've turned to other mediums where I see woman, POC, gay people, gay woman POC's as the protagonists and I think "wow, this is awesome for everyone" I've seen what I'm missing
it hurts that people would hate me and others like me because we care about this kind of thing, and it hurts that they would froth at the mouth at those who discuss these things in the media, or put such things in their games, that theyre incenced over the fact that they DARE ask for representation? that they DARE point to those things and say "this is sexist?" they are want to be included?
no don't say that, talks bout the games, just the games and for gods sake don't mention your gender you attention whore
are they hurt because they feel their "identity" has been insulted? yet they hate us for our identity's, ones that are innate and not based on the products we buy...or the ones that aren't, that we dare have opinions that don't validate them, that we dare believe that the media we consume is NEVER JUST X
before it was trantums over review scores and now its tantrums over criticism
and it makes me tried, gamers want to act like children, want everything to remain the same forever, but we aren't children...games aren't childish nor are they SOLEY for CHILDREN, they haven't been for as long as they were around, I'm not a child anymore and I can see that the obsession with the "gamer" identity is an unhealthy one, borne from defensiveness of the mainstream constantly telling us we were losers, manchildren, games were childish, had no value but we said NO...we are not like that, games are awesome they sought out their own little world and that world agreed...but in revelling in validation people regressed and turn into every awful sterotype there is, and so gamergate proved them right
I take solace in the fact that if I get my ass of the internet GG fades into the background, there have been those games...even if they are expections to the rule...even if they aren't *perfect* but they have existed, and they were awesome
and so GamerGate "lost" it "lost" before it began
A couple of days ago. His stuff will probably stay up as long as the website is, if you look in the archives all of the old content is there, even in cases, like the case of Extra Credits, where the departure was less than amiable.008Zulu said:
I really need to get on The Twitters.Owyn_Merrilin said:
Seriously, if Yahtzee leaves, I won't have any reason to visit this site anymore.
I came for Yahtzee. I'm staying for Yahtzee.
When I came here around 2009 there was a lot to splunk through and that I found interesting to view. As time passed, little seemed fresh, or particularly interesting. I kept up with some f the shows because some friends were larger fans and liked to talk about them, but I started to lose interest. I tried getting into the forums, but like most forums, conversation was limited. Then the shit hit the fan. Politics and social commentary were the order of the day, which did revive some interest, but it had a major flaw: gamers were always wrong. We were expected to respect casual players as much as hardcore, surrender what we considered rewards to anyone that wanted them, forfeit our personal gaming tastes in the name of "artistic integrity," and somehow were an evil cabal of people trying to keep any non-white-straight males out of out space because we dared to try and offer games with more character variety and suggest that it would be better to support those than ***** on forums about games that do things you hate. Over time, I posted less and less just because I was tired of the same fights with people that seemed more interested in having something to be mad about, and as these topics became much of the articles and videos, I watched and viewed less and less.
As it stands, the Escapist has lost a lot of talent, much of which I don't think was worth the time anyway. Now it needs to replace them, and hopefully with something not done better by someone on youtube. Someone that can cover gaming controversies without immediately picking sides, or repeating topics. Someone that can analyze and and critique something more than they recap it. It isn't hard. To get customers, you need to give them content they want, and day late news and reviews of last nights TV doesn't do it for me.
When I came here around 2009 there was a lot to splunk through and that I found interesting to view. As time passed, little seemed fresh, or particularly interesting. I kept up with some f the shows because some friends were larger fans and liked to talk about them, but I started to lose interest. I tried getting into the forums, but like most forums, conversation was limited. Then the shit hit the fan. Politics and social commentary were the order of the day, which did revive some interest, but it had a major flaw: gamers were always wrong. We were expected to respect casual players as much as hardcore, surrender what we considered rewards to anyone that wanted them, forfeit our personal gaming tastes in the name of "artistic integrity," and somehow were an evil cabal of people trying to keep any non-white-straight males out of out space because we dared to try and offer games with more character variety and suggest that it would be better to support those than ***** on forums about games that do things you hate. Over time, I posted less and less just because I was tired of the same fights with people that seemed more interested in having something to be mad about, and as these topics became much of the articles and videos, I watched and viewed less and less.
As it stands, the Escapist has lost a lot of talent, much of which I don't think was worth the time anyway. Now it needs to replace them, and hopefully with something not done better by someone on youtube. Someone that can cover gaming controversies without immediately picking sides, or repeating topics. Someone that can analyze and and critique something more than they recap it. It isn't hard. To get customers, you need to give them content they want, and day late news and reviews of last nights TV doesn't do it for me.
I'd say it goes something like this.
-Contributors with strong opinions create/increase controversy.
-Controversy creates/increases bile and rancor among that percentage of the population who can't tolerate any opinion but their own.
-Bile and rancor are bad for forum members, editors, other contributors, ad sponsors, pretty much everyone.
-Contributors get asked/told, whether by the incessant screaming of intolerant forum members or calmly by their actual boss, to stop expressing opinions.
-Contributors see they aren't wanted and leave.
-Contributors leave a vacuum behind. People who liked them are sad to see them go, people who disliked them still rant against them and crow about how 'that asshole' is finally gone. No one is happy.
-Either way, whatever fills the hole won't be the same.
Alternatively, replace 'has strong opinions' with 'not getting paid' or some other shenanigans. I don't keep up on the details of these things.
captcha: thank you, come again.
How perfect.
-Contributors with strong opinions create/increase controversy.
-Controversy creates/increases bile and rancor among that percentage of the population who can't tolerate any opinion but their own.
-Bile and rancor are bad for forum members, editors, other contributors, ad sponsors, pretty much everyone.
-Contributors get asked/told, whether by the incessant screaming of intolerant forum members or calmly by their actual boss, to stop expressing opinions.
-Contributors see they aren't wanted and leave.
-Contributors leave a vacuum behind. People who liked them are sad to see them go, people who disliked them still rant against them and crow about how 'that asshole' is finally gone. No one is happy.
-Either way, whatever fills the hole won't be the same.
Alternatively, replace 'has strong opinions' with 'not getting paid' or some other shenanigans. I don't keep up on the details of these things.
captcha: thank you, come again.
How perfect.
...Great god of goonery alive, I almost tried to edit your post for readability* thinking it was mine.major_chaos said:
Because that's pretty much exactly how I feel. (*no offense, I'm anal about formatting)
I'm an ex-GFAQer and an old one at that (two different screen names) that came to the Escapist in late 08' early 09' but didn't create an account until 10'.
The Escapist was a place where discussing GAMES didn't feel like an uphill battle with brain-dead unfunny trolls; it had a sense of humor to it, was well-moderated and aimed to keep the discussions as DISCUSSIONS rather than the usual banal channer-circle-jerk of memes that took over Gfaqs.
(sure, there were some memes here and there, but it wasn't every other goddamn post or thread like it was on some of the more popular Gfaqs boards)
I rather liked this place a lot...and then things started happening, which itself is long and complicated enough that I don't need to elaborate on in this already large reply.
But that's the nature of the beast it seems.
See, I used to like Gamefaqs a lot too. And then the merger with Gamespot happened (the same merger Cjay said wouldn't happen, but again I digress), which was followed swiftly by a large influx of trolls causing an implosion of moderation effectiveness and a sharp decline in thread quality across most of the board.
Which isn't to say that Gamefaqs wasn't a silly place before the merger; it's just that it was a more manageable amount of silly rather than the tsunami of human stupidity that befell it.
It seems that it will soon be necessary to seek out another gaming site for refuge...only, this time I don't know if there will even be one that satisfies.
Yeah. Though even brushing the pseudo-intellectuals and politics aside, I've come to a realization that "plug, play, and enjoy" is considered "niche" now by the market at large.
With rare exception, there's always some sort of baggage included in the game design.
1) -Feature complete games are going extinct-
I should amend this to say that they can still be found from many indie devs, but that's a matter more of competition than anything. AAA doesn't really compete against each other now. They all have their annual franchises for funds injections and operate in a way eerily similar to modern Hollywood.
Anyway, I digress.
Why? Money concerns. Feature-complete games are too expensive to produce and turn a profit without greatly increasing the up-front cost now. That's why DLC and microtransactions are the future; people are more willing to pay for things if offered in smaller manageable chunks, and what better way to encourage that than selling opportunities in something they're already invested in?
2)-Big publishers want to force more social-media "features" into their games.-
I can only guess at what they mean specifically here, but if they're alluding to the most successful "social-media" games (Farmville, Candy Crush, Clash of Clans), then they're likely referring to those where either the gameplay mechanics handicaps the player or the game forces competition with other players so the producer can offer to sell little "boosts".
-3) Always online. Always grind. It's The Future(tm)-
More games are made to be online-centric than ever before. Now, I know I sound like I'm coming down on online-multiplayer here, but really, I'm more taking umbrage with the fact that online is becoming the ONLY OPTION rather than the PREFERRED OPTION.
And it all seems to have less to do with improving the gameplay experience and more to do with corralling players into some sort of digital "hen-house" model.
Why? Well, that's what the biggest earners in the business do: Gather the players, dump them onto your server, give them some vague goal or competition, make them grind their brains out to keep them from going elsewhere, and monetize the result in some way.
If it's PvE, charge for a subscription or ingame currency to spend on essentials (like inventory space).
If it's PvP, charge for cosmetics and maps (or boosts, ala Pay2Win if you're feeling bold).
Gameplay? Just do whatever was popular before.
(DOTA2 is a prime example here; it's literally just an always-online version of DotA1 with better matchmaking, some arbitrary exp+random-reward system, and penalties for being an asshole/leaving. It isn't really any different fundamentally.
While I'd LOVE to LAN DOTA2 or some other MOBA with my friends like I did for years or even just play against bots, alas, Valve et al. hath decreed that everyone plays online all the time, which sucks because my internet does NOT place nice with most MOBAs now.)
I should amend this to say that they can still be found from many indie devs, but that's a matter more of competition than anything. AAA doesn't really compete against each other now. They all have their annual franchises for funds injections and operate in a way eerily similar to modern Hollywood.
Anyway, I digress.
Why? Money concerns. Feature-complete games are too expensive to produce and turn a profit without greatly increasing the up-front cost now. That's why DLC and microtransactions are the future; people are more willing to pay for things if offered in smaller manageable chunks, and what better way to encourage that than selling opportunities in something they're already invested in?
2)-Big publishers want to force more social-media "features" into their games.-
I can only guess at what they mean specifically here, but if they're alluding to the most successful "social-media" games (Farmville, Candy Crush, Clash of Clans), then they're likely referring to those where either the gameplay mechanics handicaps the player or the game forces competition with other players so the producer can offer to sell little "boosts".
-3) Always online. Always grind. It's The Future(tm)-
More games are made to be online-centric than ever before. Now, I know I sound like I'm coming down on online-multiplayer here, but really, I'm more taking umbrage with the fact that online is becoming the ONLY OPTION rather than the PREFERRED OPTION.
And it all seems to have less to do with improving the gameplay experience and more to do with corralling players into some sort of digital "hen-house" model.
Why? Well, that's what the biggest earners in the business do: Gather the players, dump them onto your server, give them some vague goal or competition, make them grind their brains out to keep them from going elsewhere, and monetize the result in some way.
If it's PvE, charge for a subscription or ingame currency to spend on essentials (like inventory space).
If it's PvP, charge for cosmetics and maps (or boosts, ala Pay2Win if you're feeling bold).
Gameplay? Just do whatever was popular before.
(DOTA2 is a prime example here; it's literally just an always-online version of DotA1 with better matchmaking, some arbitrary exp+random-reward system, and penalties for being an asshole/leaving. It isn't really any different fundamentally.
While I'd LOVE to LAN DOTA2 or some other MOBA with my friends like I did for years or even just play against bots, alas, Valve et al. hath decreed that everyone plays online all the time, which sucks because my internet does NOT place nice with most MOBAs now.)
There are a few nods here and there towards games without that kind of baggage, almost exclusively indie (Shovel Knight springs to mind), but they're an extreme minority now.
I sound like an old man shaking my cane, but I say this: When fun gameplay or even the ability to just play without some sort of extra baggage becomes -niche-, the joy and purpose of gaming becomes niche.
And "niche joy" is just a nicer way of saying "This sucks, Beavis".