I would wager most people who spend money on games give exactly zero fucks about whether games or art or the joke that is "game journalism."
Kiwi Farms interview with the "journalist" who interviewed Jace -
- Thread starter DeagleDad420
- Start date
- Status
I would wager most people who spend money on games give exactly zero fucks about whether games or art or the joke that is "game journalism."
I'm going to keep this fast and dirty.
1) Look up the Urban Hellraisers episode of CSI: Miami.That was what the public thought of gamers about 10 years ago. This whole thing, especially how it has been framed in the media, has played out like a very negative stereotype from those days. People like Jace and Homer on the video game side, they're the members GG wouldn't want you to know about and are quick to throw under the bus.
Hell, I this that's why this kid went after Jace. He's the wet dream for any sensationalist journalist.
2) For me, art is something that invokes discussion and further examination. I'd even consider Twilight art for that reason. But, like Twilight fans, GG didn't want to hear about the bad things in their video games.
Early on, I saw a little comic being passed around telling Anita and Quinn to stop discussing the implications of video games and just play them instead. Gaters went apeshit when a reviewer gave Bayonetta 2, what, a 7.5 because he didn't like the fanservice. The whole "get your social justice leanings out of my reviews," the outcry over same sex relations in Dragon Age: Inquisition, etc.
You get the idea. To me, that's not treating games as art. I don't watch Anita, and I know her vids say some things that are not true (Hitman). But to me, she's at least trying to provoke discussion and treating the medium as an art form. I'll give her that. Same as people who make art games. I've been playing shitty art games on newgrounds for years and some appreciation/tolerance for them. I'll even champion Hatred as art because it does make people talk.
Even if someone is a dumbass, they have the right to voice their opinion. Granted, they should extend the same respect to us in reviewing their work.
Personally I'm the same. I enjoy shitty art games on newgrounds more than I feel I should sometimes, but I don't think calling people to stop thinking about the games they play is the point of it. I followed the movement passively for a while before burnout, and I never saw anything that said "just stop thinking". I don't want to drudge this on any longer, just wanted to say I like your opinion being so well thought out.
my autism will not allow me to read that without pointing out that DA:I was a fucking horrible mess of a game and anyone who enjoys it is worse than ebola
HOWEVER, that is due to the repetitive combat, horrible buginess, ugly graphics, boring skill trees, unsatisfying ending, fucking sera, and the awful, awful "war table" that was just the worst part of every iphone game ever. not anything to do with the sexuality in the game, which while was unrealistically portrayed as "everyone in this universe is 100% super tolerant all the time" was not overall overbearing or cringeworthy.
Red_Rager
kiwifarms.net
i have no background in journalism, but I could have done a better interview.
Step 1: You introduce your guest and provide background on your guest. Be sure to thank your guest for taking the time to speak with you.
Step 2: He then should have then asked Jace what Deagle nation is all about and explain who he is. This way you are information your viewers about the guest and giving the audiance a reason to care about Jace. You always start broad to allow your viewers to get the big picture before drilling into the details.
Step 3: You disclose any potential biases you may have, in this this case he should have mentioned that he was an acquaintance of Briana Wu
Step 4: Then you start talking about the subject matter. "So Jace I heard you were going to race Briana Wu, do you mind telling us what happened?"
"Why did you think that racing her was a good idea? What were you trying to accomplish?"
"How would racing her resolve the issue of her being a corrupt gamer?"
"I heard that you were lead to believe that Briana Wu agreed to race with you, what gave you that impression?"
and so on.
Step 5: As you wrap up the interview, you allow your guest the opportunity to share any final thoughts.
Step 6: "So this was Jace Conner everybody, and thank you very much for taking the time to speak with us." Remember, your guest is the one taking time out of their day to speak with you. Be polite and respectful.
This was not an interview, it was an interrogation. The difference between an interview and an interrogation is that in an interview you allow your guest to talk and tell their side of the story. Reubin was leading Jace down to the conclusion that he had already decided was the case. The job of the host in an interviewer is to keep the conversation on subject. You ask broad questions to allow your guest to have their say and then narrow down to guide them into getting to the point of what they have to say about the subject. It is easy to get off topic so some guiding is necessary but only in relation to the topic and the point being made by the guest. Call out bullshit if you detect it, but do not try to warp your interviewees point to fit what you want it to be.
This is coming from someone with no training in journalism, and unless you are a journalist you should not present yourself as such.
Step 1: You introduce your guest and provide background on your guest. Be sure to thank your guest for taking the time to speak with you.
Step 2: He then should have then asked Jace what Deagle nation is all about and explain who he is. This way you are information your viewers about the guest and giving the audiance a reason to care about Jace. You always start broad to allow your viewers to get the big picture before drilling into the details.
Step 3: You disclose any potential biases you may have, in this this case he should have mentioned that he was an acquaintance of Briana Wu
Step 4: Then you start talking about the subject matter. "So Jace I heard you were going to race Briana Wu, do you mind telling us what happened?"
"Why did you think that racing her was a good idea? What were you trying to accomplish?"
"How would racing her resolve the issue of her being a corrupt gamer?"
"I heard that you were lead to believe that Briana Wu agreed to race with you, what gave you that impression?"
and so on.
Step 5: As you wrap up the interview, you allow your guest the opportunity to share any final thoughts.
Step 6: "So this was Jace Conner everybody, and thank you very much for taking the time to speak with us." Remember, your guest is the one taking time out of their day to speak with you. Be polite and respectful.
This was not an interview, it was an interrogation. The difference between an interview and an interrogation is that in an interview you allow your guest to talk and tell their side of the story. Reubin was leading Jace down to the conclusion that he had already decided was the case. The job of the host in an interviewer is to keep the conversation on subject. You ask broad questions to allow your guest to have their say and then narrow down to guide them into getting to the point of what they have to say about the subject. It is easy to get off topic so some guiding is necessary but only in relation to the topic and the point being made by the guest. Call out bullshit if you detect it, but do not try to warp your interviewees point to fit what you want it to be.
This is coming from someone with no training in journalism, and unless you are a journalist you should not present yourself as such.
He never intended to release the "interview", he just wanted to cherry pick quotes for his SJW buddies and write a sensationalist article for his blog. Once he found out Jace recorded it he flipped his shit.
This, exactly. Reuben wasn't interviewing Jace, he was cross-examining him (without the benefit of direct examination), and trying to leave no opportunity for rebuttal.
Even in a real court that's just not done.
There's points where 'social justice leanings' are bad.
I'm not a fan of the Bayonetta series and made myself clear on this before. This doesn't mean I specifically want a reviewer to give it a bad rating - a part of me would rather see the good rating just so I can dislike it more - but I think I prefer a review that judges the game as a game and a separate analysis that points out why the game's problems are so bad. The problem isn't when the reviewer gives a 7.5 to Bayonetta 2, it's when I read the review and it sounds less 'this game is only worth a 7.5' and more 'this game could be an 8, but I'm giving it a 7.5 because I am close-minded'.
Combine reviews like that with the same feeling you mentioned later - that these guys are condescending and don't like people disagreeing with them and call said people names - and it's annoying.
...probably not the thread for this, maybe.
WOWOWOWOWOW
remind me to NEVER, EVER fuck with the cwckiforums....
remind me to NEVER, EVER fuck with the cwckiforums....
Are you talking about Jace Connors or John Flynn?
just a head's up he's whining on reddit in the gamerghazi about us (or whatever the fuck its called i'm not a pleb)
we're the "gatekeepers" of jace and anyone who points out he got utterly wrecked trying to score cool points off a recently hospitalized schizo is deleted. actually a lot of posts saying the interview was a dumb idea and he should back out are deleted too because the subreddit is ran by nutcase trannies who think he needs to TAKE A STAND AGAINST THE TROLLS. which is great advice for a 21 year old assburgular with a speech defect.
EDIT: when you're too cancerous for plebbit, you have a problem https://www.reddit.com/r/GamerGhazi/comments/2usmx2/targetted_by_baph_now/
we're the "gatekeepers" of jace and anyone who points out he got utterly wrecked trying to score cool points off a recently hospitalized schizo is deleted. actually a lot of posts saying the interview was a dumb idea and he should back out are deleted too because the subreddit is ran by nutcase trannies who think he needs to TAKE A STAND AGAINST THE TROLLS. which is great advice for a 21 year old assburgular with a speech defect.
EDIT: when you're too cancerous for plebbit, you have a problem https://www.reddit.com/r/GamerGhazi/comments/2usmx2/targetted_by_baph_now/
Last edited:
Red_Rager
kiwifarms.net
That was my thought as well after seeing all the SEOs going on. Jace is one lucky lolcow to have people willing to stand up for him like this.
Sigyn
kiwifarms.net
Oh, of course. Because there are kids who are physically unable to receive vaccinations and are dying because of it, but that's much less important than raising a kid with issues that can be worked out. Because, you know, saving the lives of thousands of children nationwide from a measles outbreak isn't worth giving one kid a problem that they can work through. Jesus, Reuben is a trainwreck.
That was GGazi mods, not him. We kept the investigation train rolling in the other thread.
As someone unfamiliar with the intricacies of GG politics that understands the difficulties of finding a job in his field, I am hard pressed to think that a single thing baph, kiwifarms, or an unethical "interview" is going to make it more impossible to use his degree than it already was after watching book girl.
Edit: not to say it couldn't make things worse, but really all things aside... What would his resume have looked like
Edit: not to say it couldn't make things worse, but really all things aside... What would his resume have looked like
The question is did Ruben learn a valuable lesson from all this or will he just pat himself on the back for standing up to Jace and his troll fans? Why did he come here in the first place? I dunno what it is with spergs wanting to do Q and A's with us but its always a terrible idea. For them, not us its hilarious every time.
- Status
Similar threads
Official Kiwi Farms Advertiser, editor at sonichu.com, and all-around nice lady lol
- Poll
Aka, wherein some fucking faggot judges this entire competition.
