Halolz Video Game news site?

I've thrown this idea around a bit in the chat and gotten some feedback so I decided to make a thread for it here.

Basically I think we all can try to make an honest video game news site that would actually post video game related news and honest reviews than the shit found on Kotaku or Polygon.

I know that Alpar said he would be interested in trying and Nick Soapdish also wants to be a part of it.

With how big this group is, I think its possible to have a large opinion range that can attract a lot of readers, and it would be interesting to have debate articles where we discuss why we like something or not. Also group reviews would be interesting where one can find a game perfect and list reasons why while someone can say it was shit and states reasons why and create a much thorough review.

Also in terms of the news aspect, a lot of us are on at different times and can catch news a lot quicker than others, so because of that flexibility we can always try to post things as soon as they happen.

I want more feedback from you guys and more ideas so we can see if this can actually happen or not. I think it will be a lot of fun to work on something together with you all, but it all depends on if you guys want to do it.

It seems like it would be a nice idea. Major problems would be
Site Name
Initial material
Gaining traffic

Additionally, would we be attempting to make money off ads that come through the site? Would we be taking any offer to review a game for publishers, even if they would accept the harshest of reviews? (or perhaps even only "pay" in the game itself?)

So a fourth problem would be "Direction". Will this be a honest side-gig we work in between our real life jobs, or somehow something bigger?

Sounds like a good idea on paper. Stick it to Kotaku 'n shit.

Caelun_Niveus wrote:It seems like it would be a nice idea.  Major problems would be
Site Name
Initial material
Gaining traffic

Additionally, would we be attempting to make money off ads that come through the site?  Would we be taking any offer to review a game for publishers, even if they would accept the harshest of reviews? (or perhaps even only "pay" in the game itself?)

So a fourth problem would be "Direction".  Will this be a honest side-gig we work in between our real life jobs, or somehow something bigger?

The ad revenue will be an interesting thing to deal with. I guess it would be determined on who does what work. Of course a huge portion should go to paying the site to stay online, but then I guess we can do percentages based on how much someone writes, but if people disagree then we can decide later when and if we get ad revenue.

As for offers to review a game, I think we should discuss with them and make sure that they understand that they will be completely honest and will be harsh reviews. No game should get a pass of 10/10 just because a developer paid us or sent a game. As for who gets the game, that should be left up to whoever is reviewing it and if they still like it after the review, or decide on other factors we can discuss when it happens.

And since we are just starting the site off, its really easy to expect that it will take forever to take off, so this should be treated as a side-gig without expecting much in return. Just a fun experiment.

To start off just do it for fun. Worrying about game copies received, ad revenue really is so far away if it ever eventuates. Don't worry so much about being first or current. Sure we can report on stuff but that shouldn't be the focus. It's not like we're going to bring the journalism and get exclusives.

Use tumblr so we don't pay site costs just make it look like a site (like tinycartridge). Later if things work out we could get a domain.

I think it'd be fun we do in between work. Primarily I want to be entertaining and a bit unique. I wouldn't want to just reblog news always.

I think a story how the samurai guy assist trophy got some people mega butt hurt despite him never having a NA release would make a funny story. I'd like to write satire as well. What works is if you review stuff from the perspective of people who like that stuff. Like if I reviewed Hyrule Warriors it'd be from the perspective of a guy who loves musou and basara. Review for a niche (like weebs) instead of being general.

I'd do this if i had good skill in this,it sounds interesting and such,maybe for those of us with less talent could team up with someone more talented and do a reveiwm like that....it's an idea at least.

There's nothing stopping us writing stuff now that we can upload later if we want. At least we can read each others stuff and see what we think.

Name is interesting. Go for clever? Go for cool? A pun? I got nothing right now

There's nothing stopping us writing stuff now that we can upload later if we want. At least we can read each others stuff and see what we think.

Name is interesting. Go for clever? Go for cool? A pun? I got nothing right now

A cool and clever video-game pun... hrm...  Oh, how about "Halolz"?!.... oh wait

Recommendation: The site's name plays, in some form, on the "honest nature" of the site.  Took us forever to get that with good IVs.





What games would be the ones review first though?  There's a difference between being hip and happening and merely being relevant.  I wouldn't mind writing a review for 40k: Space Marine, but that came out 3 years ago.

Recommendation: I say each review should have two or three reviewers to it.  As drastically varied as our opinions are, it would almost be unfair if we only let someone who loved or hated a series/genre review it.  E.G., Leo loves his traps, so letting him alone review a game about feminine-boy alchemists might make the review a bit biased.

Nothing wrong with bias if you're reviewing a series though. Like if the review is about comparing the game and mechanics to other games in the series. The whole idea can be that I know I love those games and the reviewer loves those games. I want to know what a fellow fan thinks. As an example I'd much rather read a musou review from Jim sterling cause I know he likes those games and will tell me what's good about this entry in comparison to others.

Just saying, if we're about honesty and fairness, it would be better to have unbiased opinions alongside biased ones.

Someone might give a Naruto game a 9/10 because it's their favorite aneemay and has a cast of 500 characters, while the next reviewer doesn't care for casual shit and gives it a lower score because they are more critical of the game's stiff controls and how every character mechanically plays the same.

Likewise, I will admit myself to being partial to neutral scores.  As long as the game is "playable" and "enjoyable", I don't find myself noticing the "depth", or lack thereof, so much.  

I am also personally hesitant to hand out "perfect" grades, so my reviews would probably range 9.0-7.0 for good games, and only go less than 4.0 for truly unplayable ones.  I haven't played DmC all the way through, but I would probably give it around 5.0.  I'm sure Alpar would be glad to give it a lower score, based on mechanics alone.


So for each game, doing something along the lines of "Favored, Neutral, Disfavored reviews".  Give a spectrum rather than a single point.






Also, related, what sort of rating scale would we use? 100 point, 10 point, or 5 point?

Good idea. You can have the fanboy viewpoint and the neutral. That could work.

Sounds like an interesting idea. I'd love to participate, even for free.

I'd totally be down for it.

That's an interesting idea. I'd more more than happy to contribute, though I'm not sure how much my opinions would clash with others.
(To elaborate in my perceived difference in taste: I think the Myst series are some of the best games ever made, and love Briad, Tearaway, Thomas Was Alone and all kinds of indies I think I've seen you guys hate on. I'd go as far as to say I enjoyed Sonic Unleashed, I think the Vita is amazing, don't have a 3DS or WiiU yet, and enjoy games like Uncharted and Last of Us. I enjoy all of Nintendo's stuff too just haven't had the chance lately. Don't hate me plz Q__Q)

Brushing quickly over that, something I've often thought about reviews, is that too much of it hinges on personal taste. See, UK newspaper The Guardian's vidja reviewer is someone I'm convinced just hates video games. Other end of the spectrum you have IGN bumming the shit out of their AAA's.
What I think would be a nice way of mixing things up would be to have a game reviewed from two perspectives: Someone who likes that kind of game, and someone who typicially doesn't. That way you get to see it from both sides and make a better choice on whether or not to get it.

The other thing I'd add is that there isn't really a need to grade things. Having concluding remarks such as "Controls: Very tight and responsive, Story: Tropey but unimportant" means a lot more than arbitrary numbers.

In any case, would love to see where you guys go with this. Best of luck if you go for it!

Honestly, I haven't been thinking much about this due to a big move that happened. Kinda came a little out of nowhere, so I've just been busy nonstop. Long story short, moved from Miami, FL to Greensboro, North Carolina.

But yeah, we can start this site on Tumblr, since it has the option to create a blog that can be controlled by different users. But we would still need a name and try to figure out a system of what content should be written and frequency of topics that need to be written and what not. Glad to see a lot of people are on board for this, so it seems like a more fun idea each time I visit this thread.

Also don't worry Zink, I am very open to indies and liked Uncharted, but I have no interest in The Last of Us because I am just tired of zombies. I don't care if its amazing, I just don't care for anything zombie related anymore.

This is super relevant to my interests. I've been thinking about how I'd make a useful news site layout for gaming. back in the day Nintendo Power had a list of what each reviewer was into such as Rogue-Like, Platformers, Shooters and the like

I think we should make it apparent that everyone has bias when doing reviews, maybe having major games have two or three reviews that tell you whats good about the game from different perspectives.

Also I was a long time lurker very seldom poster on Halolz (RIP). Was following that place for five or six years, sad to see it go even if it wasn't the best at the end your guys comments were always great.

Aha! Fresh meat!
Tell ya what. Why don't you mosey on over to the introduction thread. Should be stickied at the top of the non-vidya section.

Sure, sounds good. Didn't mean to impose or anything bromontana!

No problem, my good man. Always nice to see Halolzians pop up now and again.

So has the news site idea fled?

Hm, with the rise of this site, I don't think it'll be necessary. However, I think we might keep this one on the backburner should the need arise in the future.

Thanks for the link! I've been looking for a gaming site since the whole debacle happened, can't feel good reading the popular sites anymore.

I had to scratch my itch for satire so I created this.
http://justice-gaming.tumblr.com/

I want to act like video games Stephen Colbert.