- Age / Gender:
- 39, Male
- Edinburg, Texas, USA
- All Stats >
I am just a guy who has realized he has no talent for animation, so I'll be content to be a spectator. Or a producer.
- Community Stats
Level 11 Blank Slate
Ranked as Police Officer
Contact Info / Websites
Something has been bugging me for years on end, and that has been published interviews (offline or online) by American and Japanese gaming media alike, of Japanese game developers. (American game developers aren't a whole lot better about this, by the way, but I haven't found a pattern for them yet.)
These interviews of developers, whether it's about an upcoming game in a popular franchise, or a big-time gaming company in general, have really become "seen one, seen 'em all." Based on the interviews I've read over the years, I've been able to boil a given developer's answers down into types, such as the "non-answer," the "coy," the "cryptic," and the "ha-ha." (The first three are self-explanatory, but "ha-ha" answers are basically non-answers ending with the person chuckling, and worse, a "ha-ha" answer may have nothing to do with the interview topic itself.) Answers will often, if not always, fall into one of those four types (I thought I had come up with another type, but I can't remember it at the moment). It may even begin to appear to readers aware of this phenomenon that these interviews fall into a certain pattern, and to that I say, "yes and no." I believe there is a general pattern, but the specific arrangement will differ from interview to interview.
Here's an example: Let's say a member of the American or Japanese gaming press managed to get an interview with a very well-known Japanese game developer, and this developer was asked 13 questions, or rather 13 questions and answers were published. The answers given fell into this sample pattern:
So, how many questions were answered? Zero. The gaming media got nothing, and worse, the reader got nothing. Nos. 6 through 10 are the key here. The developer reeled the interviewer/reader in closer with each "coy" answer, and after No. 9, you're expecting the next thing out of his/her mouth to be the info you're looking for (e.g., is a game being worked on, or coming out at some point? etc.), only to be hit with a "ha-ha" at No. 10 that signals to the poor person asking the questions that that's all they're getting... which, of course, is nothing. Keep an eye out for those cryptic/coy answers at the very end (and it could very well end on a "ha-ha" as well) to trick the reader into coming away with the feeling that SOMEthing substantial came out of that Q&A.
Well, after reading gaming magazines and websites for over 25 years, I have had enough. I can't even read the interviews anymore because I know what's coming. The gaming media, both here AND there, need to grow some stones and hit the gaming industry with this ultimatum: "Okay, if that's how you're going to be with us, then we can play that game, too. Unless you give us real answers about what we and the end-consumers really want to know, we will no longer cover your games nor your companies. Good luck with all the marketing you'll have to do to make up for the void, for all the 'free press' we've been giving you by heralding your work."
I suppose that came across like the 1976 motion picture "Network," but that couldn't be helped. Just to save me from having to write a separate post about it, I also have this attitude when it comes to interviewing professional athletes and teams (all stateside in this case).
Recent Game Medals
Total Medals Earned: 69 (From 6 different games.)