First off, do not refer to games as “Juvenile”, ever. More work and man/woman power goes into video games than any other medium and that is a fact.

I’m not saying the outlet should stop running these kinds of articles. Kotaku is obviously (35-40% is a large number) going to continue. The entire point of my post was thus: If you are going to do something that obviously isn’t sanctioned, don’t complain when you are sanctioned. Doing so makes you sound fucking…

Is it doing their job to get the publics hopes up for something that has the possibility to be shelved or canceled? That is always a real possibility with any software being created, look at Ghost from Blizzard awhile back. So they get it out there early that Fo4 is coming, woohoo, but oh no Bethesda sees that they…

Oh my god. What a fucking soap-box, grandstand of an article. “We are so concerned that you the reader get the ‘real’ news you deserve, that we are willing to endure these kinds of harsh abuses, just to continue bringing you the reader the kind of coverage you deserve.”

I’ll be honest and say I’m not sure what to make of this article and its motives. Are you attempting to garner sympathy for Kotaku? Foster animosity toward any company/agency that disagrees with your publications? Both? Something else entirely?

Why don’t publishers have the right to ignore gaming sites they don’t respect, or that don’t respect their rules - you are allowing Kotaku the right to act independently, but I don’t see how the publishers owe them anything or aren’t free to do the same.

I’d sympathize with you guys, but then I remember you waged a war on your own readers because you didn’t want to hold your employees to basic ethical standards - something as simple as a little line of disclosure.

Is it really? They are in the business of publishing games to make money. If something doesn’t help them do that they are under no obligation to continue that practice. In other words - Bethesda doesn’t owe Kotaku anything.

Yeah, my reply to this is that those companies don’t owe kotaku access. They don’t have to answer their questions or include them on their PR list. I don’t understand running to the readers for sympathy.

Projecting what exactly? If I get the purpose of the article correctly it was meant to answer some questions the readers had regarding some stuff. Okay, it’s cool. But the more I read the more it sounded like something straight out of fiction where reporters are freedom fighters that uncover a secret lizard…

Just like you guys can choose to ignore any developer/publisher/story you do not wish to cover.

Wanting to control when and how information about upcoming products makes it out to the public is an understandable desire. Ill timed leaks can play havoc with public expectations, which are, as we’ve seen with titles like Arkham Knight important to properly manage. Wanting to find ways to get around that to get…

Aaaand... you are trying to shame them into stop ignoring you? Your work became harder, yes, but isn’t the point of journalism in digging shit and bringing it to the surface? Also setting up the guy from new york times is a dick move imo.

I’m trying to figure out the tone of the article? Are you mad/angry at them for shutting you out? If so, I don’t see why. Any company (anybody) can choose whom they interact with. Just like you guys can choose to ignore any developer/publisher/story you do not wish to cover.

Pissing people off isn’t doing good journalism. Informing people is doing good journalism. Going for information and appealing to smart discussions instead of clickbait is good journalism.