Alright /v/, we're going to create our own gaming news site. So to start from the very bottom, what will be the name? What type of news will we post? Also, anyone willing to give a domain?
Good luck with that.
/v/ isnt a hivemind, it will take hours to days to even get past just looking for a name.
Im going to play along for now, so why not something simple? All Things Gaming or some kind of variation.
that wasn't really my point, my point is there already is one, you can try to make it work and you can make another failure, but there is no point in starting a new fuckin g website when there is nothing wrong with the old one other then nobody being willing to work on it.
not to disappoint you but this isn't the first time /v/ has tried to have a video game news website
besides wouldn't it just be a web spider for actual news sites making it fairly pointless since most web news is shit?
no, but I can remain unbiased (seriously, it's not fucking hard) and talk about a game's merits versus its detriments instead of politics.
I'm much more of an artist but I need a writer
maybe podcasts? hmm.. I don't talk enough when playing vidya. Maybe a group podcast with my buddies...
Video game news should strictly be about video games. Opinion pieces should be disregarded entirely.
I even think that "game reviews" shouldn't be swayed by opinion, just present facts on what the game is like and how it's played, the strengths and weaknesses of the game, and let the reader decide if they want to play it or not.
Ok, heres what we do.
Call it 'The Vidya', its interesting and snappy
The background has to be white and the font and article presentation has to be formal, New York Times shit so people take us seriously
Stick to video games and don't pander to /v/, SJWs OR AAA publishers
Get some of the best writers on here to contribute
If we do all of this it'll work out guys
Not really, I do know /v/ has tried this, but I always check on the blogs I make, it won't be inactive, also with all of /v/ we could find some good things to differentiate us, from other sites. Our main objective is honesty
The most important part, no advertisements on site, or videos. Can't be taken seriously if you are doing news, or a review and the whole page is plastered with "BUY COD ADVANCED WARFARE TODAY!, - "9/11 It's okay" - The Vidya".
every few months someone wants to make something like this, and nothing ever happens.
I always say that I want multiple reviewers, each with pages where I can see what their tastes are like and know their biases. I liked how NP did this, they'd list each person's favorite genre and have the appropriate ones comment.
For example, I don't give a shit what Johnny Twofucks says about Disagaea if he only plays FPS and grand strategy.
And for a Mario game, I actually want to hear from a couple of people -
>the dude who likes platformers
>the dude who likes mario
>the dude who likes mario so much that he nitpicks everything that isn't perfect
and then I form my own opinions based on those.
We need ads to stay afloat, though. /v/irgins are only willing to dip into their doritos money for so long
As a rule though: No videogame advertisements. Never advertise a console, a game, a videogame related service.
Tried making a banner. The title is place holder for now until we can call a vote.
Me and a friend were talking about this actually.
I own a rather huge server that I just use to hoard miscellaneous files and a shitload of bandwidth so a site like this would be easy.
One of my friends has a legit degree in this shit but he's been so plagued by what journalism has become that he avoided getting into it.
We want to cover video games and nothing else. No blog posts -- we'd probably just do reviews and important news. Each review would be prefixed with a disclaimer that states the bias the particular reviewer has towards the genre as well as similar games the reviewer enjoys.
For example; if I were to review Bravely Default I would have the disclaimer state that I am a gigantic JRPG fan and games that I'm biased to that help me relate to Bravely Default are Final Fantasy V and Chrono Trigger. Multiple people would review games with the disclaimer always being at the top of every review. This allows the reader to tell which review (based on taste) he should listen to more.
Does this even seem like its worth it. Would you guys read it? It would take a considerable amount of time and effort to get things started and I don't want to waste time when it will just crumble into nothingness.
advertisements are an unfortunate necessity on a news site. they keep it going and in some cases the writers aren't otherwise employed
but at the same time the obligations to advertisers ruin opinion pieces and reviews
solution: ads by project wonderful. Wrtiers don't owe advertisers shit because they don't know who's going to win the bid that day
Ads are really disingenuous.
I listen to Adam Carolla's podcast and the way he reads advertisements tells that he doesn't give a shit about those companies and is just reading it on-air for the money. I wish it was this transparent when you see ads on websites.
"AHHHH, GoToMyPC. Love those guys. Use the offer code Adam at checkout, baby."
Your business model shouldn't ever be about LYING to your audience.
Nobody, and I mean NOBODY, is going to take the site seriously with that banner. I see that banner, and I assume instantly that there won't be a single decently written piece on that site.
It should have mostly just vidya content, like siliconera.com
But with a PC tab
a /vr/ emulation tab
a OUTRAGE tab to show Quinnspiracy and other important totally-not-vidya but videogames-topic tab
and a /drawthread/ comic dialy posted
We can do this, hell even /s4s/ has a lot of newspapers
fuck no faggot, i still get that shit, i just get it from /v/ and /vg/ since it's full of people with very narrow knowledge but also very deep knowledge.
like when i wanted to get into DMC games and i had issues with DMC3 and getting into it, the curazzee general gave me a lot of help and deep information about the game.
i just think video journalism is and outdated mode of discussion, when places like reddit and 4chan exists.
>Not head of Dubs and Acquisition
What a fucking terrible image
Depends, I dont think I should write, but we need people who would be willing to play the game for at least 10 hours, or to finish the game, which ever comes first. There may be a another requirement to have the review actually buy the game as well.
Secondary rules, no memes no arrows, no blog posts, or they will not be published. There is already enough bullshit on this site.
We dont need a mascot.
We do need adverts, no one wants to pay for this server for too long. No video game adverts, dont put up with any bullshit from obvious dev companies that /v/ or anyone with half a mind wouldnt want.
Retro games should be reviewed, but not too often, most people have heavy bias due to nostalgia.
This is everything I can think of as of now. I figure that a good set of rules and a serious person who could enforce these rules could keep it afloat.
If only the mods were good....
I'm just going to assume you have brain problems spell something out for you.
Don't associate the website with 4chan. You're not the first to try this and many others have tried to get /v/ involved by going with shitty 4chan names and using memes.
>gaming news site
>not wikileaks for gaming journalism or gaming journalism critique
Make threads in which you ask people to send a review for a game they wrote to your email. Select the best 10-20 reviewers. When a new game comes out grab a couple of them to make the review.
I don't know why people think it can't work, it seems pretty easy to me.
Because those big stupid gaming journalist sites run by SJWs, whose opinions I care about for some unknown reason despite the fact that /v/ has collectively shit on them for YEARS and even just posting a review used to be enough to get you laughed off of the board at one point, are saying and doing things that don't personally pander to me.
Therefore I need a site that does reflect my opinions and tells me what I should think, the way I want it to tell me how in order to compensate for my tiny penis and lack of self determination.
This is also why I think the Anonymous imageboard I post on is a community and extension of my own self because in reality I'm all alone and this site is all I have.
Jesus christ what is wrong with you.
It should be a standard gaming site, that talks about games and actual important industry-related things.
There could be MAYBE something like a comic section, as long as the art was good and there was some merit to the story or the joke in the comic.
EVERYTHING else would be relegated to the forums. Feel free to shit all over the forums, as long as it is obviously separate from the actual serious website
The whole point of game "news" sites is to repost press releases.
We already did this shit twice.
Gather Your Party and NoVidya.
I was an editor and writer for both of them, so I'm willing to help out. But I'll let you know right now that this won't last more than a few months if you aren't putting constant effort in.
/v/ is a shitpit overflowing with nothing but opinions, infighting, and NOT VIDJA.
The only people who come to /v/ are people who like *chan style imageboards, and don't mind that at least 3/4 of all threads are garbage
what would you even put on the site?
certainly not news, because /v/ has no way of getting interviews or previews or getting into game shows or anything. it would just be parroting other news reports, with "our twist".
so reviews, then? isn't it common knowledge that you're supposed to watch gameplay, ask people who actually played it, try a demo, before buying it? why do we want to encourage people to blindly follow review scores? and besides, it's not like you can't just get a review for any game by posting it on /v/ and saying "what does /v/ think about X".
all that's left is "state of the gaming industry" shit, which I think we can all agree is something that none of us should be talking about when we could be playing video games. fuck.
Somthing like these /s4s/ newspapers?
>don't have the talent
Are you kidding? Have you read anything on any of these sites? None of them have journalism degrees, write like it's a high school report, and use first person terminology like it's going out of style. I haven't any talent in any of these articles written in the past week on any of this Zoe shit.
Retro games can be reviewed, but only after a recent playthrough.
And I do agree with other /v/irgins saying that there should be multiple reviewers, and something that says who likes what so that people get an idea of where reviews are coming from
Which is why I stopped. The only reason I moved from NoVidya to them was because the creator of that site gave up and gave it to some other schmuck that let it die.
I'd be willing to help out and give support if you think you can actually pull it off, man.
Hey, I don' t know if you guys are actually serious about this, but I can help. I would need to be the editor though.
I have a journalism background and I worked at a major newspaper for over two years. I actually know my shit.
Since the standards fr gaming journalism have been below tabloid/tmz level... so, since forever.
OP, give us an email so people who want to write and edit can message you.
And only get niggas with credentials or history with writing.
read file name please
I didn't participate in it, so I called /v/ they
All right, fuck you...unless you actually are the head mod of V.
I'm not a degree fag. I actually worked in an editorial position at a major newspaper for over two years and had some stories syndicated throughout the country. None of my writing was video game related.
Man, I'd like to write about video games.
Is there any great difference between having a journalism degree and knowing how to properly slap words onto a page while maintaining personal and professional integrity?
Here's my AP book.
The daily donker
If only because we already have an icon
How could I trust someone who has made such poor life choices to give me informed opinions on vidya?
Man, I got integrity like toads got warts. And while I've never had much cause for writing as a hobby since i'm more of a tech/mathfag, grades and assistance/critique requests lead me to believe I have some skill at writing shit
can fuck right of to kotaku
>I want to maintain a modicum of credibility. Therefore, I don't want to be associated with retarded horseshit, especially on the FUCKING FRONTPAGE BANNER OF THE SITE
>Must be... what? Gay? SJW? I don't really get where you're going with this.
4chan can run the site, and it can be publicly known through word of mouth, but we cant have anything on the site broadcasting it. This board is infested enough as it is and we want to seem somewhat legit.
If someone from /v/ makes a news site, it can't be a "/v/ news site". The /v/GAs should be a clear lesson that trying to represent /v/ is a losing proposition. No matter what you do you'll eventually run foul of the hivemind and they'll turn on you.
Instead, make an independent news site with a /v/-esque perspective. If it's good /v/ will support you.
Are the reviews going to has some kinda of identification?
Keeping it anonymous would be more fitting, but knowing the anon that makes review is also good.
Would it be mostly articles or video stuff?
whats going to be the process of finding the writers?
Since i already know alot of people are going to shit post this.
Who is going to be the head?
That's what the forum is for. Containment of the retards from the board proper.
Could we create a forum where some sections were full anonymous and other sections required a username?
>We have a chatroom where 4Chan members get exclusive access to so they can let loose and we can hang with them
What are some of your past credentials/examples of projects you've successfully completed? Because you sound like a fucking moron and I cant see why anyone with actual talent would want to hop on your sinking ship
Not pandering would be really tough at first, but as we more known they wont be able to ignore us. It helps that we have /v/ as a starting audience. If we don't self-implode we will eventually become a well known review site, no doubt about it.
You can't have an anonymous reviewer. The whole point of having a constant cast of individuals is to build credibility, so that if one reviewer consistently has good taste, you know that they are more trustworthy than the guy who shat on your last thre GotY's.
I'd imagine that there would be articles and lp's, since that is sort of becoming industry standard. LP's would be more like opinion pieces/ casual looks at the game, since the point of an LP is to be fun to watch. Not to say that people couldn't do hardcore runthroughs of shit, just that that's not what most people are looking for. Articles would be actual informative news and reviews.
The writer process has not yet been determined. Probably just a bunch of people email >>259644198
and then submit a few mock reviews to weed out terrible writers
We hope for the writers to be Anonymous, anyone can write (although we do have mods to see whats posted) and we won't take it down (unless it's bad)
Alright scrap that idea, let's just not viral it on /v/
No, no no.
You need to build credibility. Nothing is more suspicious than this. At least if you know someone's fucking name you can check to see if they have any conflicts of interest.
Are you allowed to put a review on a website like that without permission, or does someone need to give you the go-ahead first?
Because, if we didn't pander to AAA publishers, we could still review the game, we just wouldn't get an early release copy. This being /v/, somebody would be bound to get the game anyway.
Shit, that could actually work in our favor. If the site got popular, and people had to wait until after the game came out to see the review, there would be a dip in day one sales that publishers would have to pay attention to
Anyone who wants 'The Vidya' for the name, please post something.
So far 23 people
The fan writers can be Anonymous if they want, but we'll still be the legitimate writes,
We won't be Anonymous, while fan pieces can be optionally
I have an Okay background, I started game development, and website programming about 4 years prior. I've had numerous blogs, but only a few still remain today. I started a project with my brother that's still expanding til this day, and I study subjects like Physics, etc.
Fan writers (optional)
while making a new site would be more fun, it would cost more resources. If we are already mostly in control of this gather your party site we should just start there.
No use reinventing the wheel.
Nah, dude. I think that before you can submit a fan review/critique/whatever, you'd have to do something like have some posts on the forum that showed you weren't a biased spaz.
Just letting anyone submit reviews to the site would likely be a phenomenal waste of time and manpower, as far as going through all of the piles of shit in the inbox
If anyone was to write an article that people didn't like, then they wouldn't know who did it. Being critical and offering feedback would be useless, since any Anon could write it off and just post another shitty article.
Couldn't have said it better myself.
It's fine for an imageboard since nothing said here holds any significance, but reviewing and the like should always hold someone accountable.
So what do you want the review scale to be 5/5, 10/10, 100/100.
Personally im a big fan of the 1-5, but instead of number have it be hate-dislike-neutral-like-love, But that does leave the review feeling more opinion based.
Maybe have a system where instead of giving it 1 score you give it 2, with one being as unbiased as possible and 1 being more opinon based.
Like Dynasty warriors 8 xtreme
since it is possible to like bad games.
I think if we could combine game reviews and how /vg/ works into one website,
we would have a successful platform for a new game review site.
That way people could get their gaming reviews there and see what people who play the game regularly have to say about it. They would have a decent gauge for how popular the game is right now, and have a reason to come back all the time.
I would want to focus on the 10's and put multiple reviews (from fans and staff alike) and base it off the top 5 reviews, so if all of us rate it a 10/10 it'll be a 50/50 or 10/10 a perfect game. When picking we can't allow bias, so we'll pick the most unbiased one
>I feel like there is not enough in between for perfect and average.
I know what you mean but i think it can show that, mostly with it being shit/bad/average/good/GOAT.
But it is definitely not the best to go in depth.
I know there are alot of people who read the entire thing, but i know for a fact there are more that just read the score and rap-up if there is one.
Review score sets the mood for what your about to read
Review score is a highly acceptable norm right now and we would lose readers without one. I know a lot of people that see big wall of text and skip. That will be the fate of the site with out bulletpoints and a score somewhere on every article. Thats just the way it is.
Review score lets us easily compare games to one another and see the average score a reviewer gives his reviews.
>tfw this will never happen
OP you had better be committed to this shit
Make review scores standardized and have a decent overview of what every single number means as well as a good description of every category (ea. graphics score is related to look and feel compared its contemporary games etc.)
Have a big ass fucking post about journalistic integrity as well as how the website is intended to function from a columnists' point of view.
Make users rate/comment and review reviews. Let people say what they think about what is essentially a quasi opinion piece.
review scale should be separated into categories
all will be out of 100. There are very very few games that have reached 100, if any. 100/100 in overall implies that the game is literally perfect, and that is simply impossible. I'd recommend making the overall bit just an average of the first 4 categories, include multiplayer if that is a major part of the game and take some categories less into account for certain genres
All games should receive multiple reviews, and hopefully a reader will find all the major pros and cons by reading through all the reviews
maximum of 3 professional reviews per game, so as to prevent saturation. No limit on fan/standard user reviews, as sometimes the official reviews will not capture a public consensus
The name should not lead to its origins on 4chan, as some people flat out ignore anything with a connection to this site.
/v/ isn't even that great a place for news anymore. Sure it has good opinions on great games or terrible over-hyped games but that's about it. There are a lot of games that /v/ doesn't talk about. I have been looking for a second source for while now. maybe this will work out.
why just not do it? you guys are fucking retarded. "Gaming journalism sucks", "let's do what we don't like about gaming journalism", "gaming journalism is meant to feed the shills", "let's feed the shills"
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>no gameplay catagory
>making a rating system
Just fucking stop now.
If your writing isn't engaging enough where you have to summarize your shitty article into numbers, then you're better off not writing at all.
That is not a bad system but it seems like it would lead to problems with the categories ect. Especially since i don't think some of those should be weighted the same.
I think we should just have a plain Good to Bad scale and let the article tell you which parts were good and why. We could have a guideline for the contributors so they touch on all relevant categories and a way for readers to quickly find said categories
You guys who want to do this shouldn't even talk about it here.
Your gaming site should have no ties to 4chan at all - none that anyone can see. That way when some editor at Forbes finds out he can rat someone out and goes after Kotaku (because gaming journalism sure as hell isn't going to do it) he won't be called out for his sources and will be more likely to USE those sources.
One that definitely needs a new site design but is doing this in a fair, informative way is attackongaming, though even that has a specific tone down to its very domain name. A new news site needs to be made just like any other, but made to cover issues like this.
Well what I was trying to imply was that the textual review would provide more detail on each section and more. The scales would act as a form of tl;dr and the review would elaborate on why you rated them as such.
Also, Genre should be listed for every game. Genre names should also be remodeled to be more specific, since if we only use the common genre names, we end up calling several extremely different games under the same genre.
I think it was aimed more at just having some people write stuff because they like it but it looks pretty fucked either way.
I'd be up for a /v/irgin journalist site though.
Especially if they did analyses.