New Threads, Same Old Dirty Bastards

[HaemishM]

We're changing more than just our underwear.

Poll coming when I can figure out how to do the damn thing.

[Righ]

> I'll review anything someone gives me for free.

Please provide a PO box number. Even your loyal readers may have some diabolical ideas of things for you to review.

I use and endorse Firefox. Feel free to enforce advertisements on users of inferior browsers.

[Samwise]

As long as you're making efforts to minimize ocular rape, advertise your heart out.  Especially if there's any sort of chance that the proceeds will come back to me in the form of contests.

[Soukyan]

No complaints here. Glad to see that the site is gaining some more recognition and that other people are interested in advertising on it. That's a good thing.

[sinij]

It was years since I seen an add banner, do theys till make them and do they make any money?

[HaemishM]

It was years since I seen an add banner, do theys till make them and do they make any money?

I guess we'll find out.

[MrHat]

Phase 1: Steal Underpants.
Phase 2:
Phase 3: Profit!

I don't care.  If you can make money to help support the site more, then do it.

[Velorath]

Go ahead and throw some banners on here.  Personally I wouldn't hold it against you guys if you ever end up really selling out.  Isn't that the real American Dream anyway?  Fuck, if you ever get offered a truckload of cash to turn this place into f13.ign.com you should probably take it.  Just let us know if you start getting paid to write good reviews for games.  Try to work the word oxidize into fake reviews so we know to skip past them or something.

[Lanei]

So, you want to make the site better by getting more opportunities to generate content for the site.

<sarcasm>No, you aren't allowed to do that.</sarcasm>

Popup or popunder ads ought to be right out, but I don't think you'd really do that anyway.  Banners aren't really objectionable to me, and I've clicked a few from PA, /GU, and PvP, so why not here.

[Calantus]

/me shrugs

The only adds that bother me are popups/unders, and the ones that flash and jerk about. I don't even care if they have sound because my computers are perma-muted unless I play an FPS. Since Firefox blocks the popups (and I doubt you'd use them), and you already said you'd reduce the occula-raping adds I have nothing against this.

And really, if you want to pocket the money I still couldn't care. They're add banners ffs, knock yourself out.

[ahoythematey]

The fact that I generally get far more entertainment from these forums than the $50/month I'm paying to TimeMonopolyWarner for cable-TV is a more than fair trade-off for a few easily ignored advertisements.  At least I think so.

[Riggswolfe]

I don't mind banners. Popups make me want to kill people with rusty hacksaws. I am curious, you mentioned reviewing games. We're not one of the big sites ala Gamespot or IGN or whoever, so what do publishers care about our reviews?

 I mean if I come on here and rant about some MMO or some game, you guys read it, maybe chuckle or call me stupid but it doesn't affect a publishers sales any. I suppose I always figured reviews were important because of their affect on games.

In any case, who will do said reviews? You and Schild? Will there be a system for submitting reviews from some of the rest of us?

[Dark Vengeance]

I don't want to be the guy to bitch, but here goes the full list of my concerns:

1) I hope schild and Joe, in light of the inherent conflict of interests, will not be doing game reviews.

2) I would much prefer that advertising for a product is not accepted until after the review process is complete. Best way to avoid even the appearance that a review is "bought and paid for" is to review first, advertise the good stuff afterward.

3) Pop-ups, pop-unders, or ads with music and/or noise are teh suck. I'd ask for ads that are as inconspicuous as possible, but that is kind of the exact opposite of what advertising is supposed to do. Just realize that ad banners in the forums are a big thorn in the side of people who read or post at work....at least in my office, they're a sure-fire way to tell if someone is looking at something work-related at a glance.

4) Naturally, heavy-handed moderation in the gaming design or gaming discussion forums should probably be limited to Hrose-levels of retardation. You don't want it to even give the appearance that someone was banned, or that a thread was locked because it bashed an advertiser.

Not that any of the above are problems, or that I expect them to become problems, just some things I'd keep in mind. As to anyone making money, or getting review copies of games, trips to E3, junkets to game companies, or whatever....meh. Get what you can.

Bring the noise.
Ceers..............

[schild]

1) I hope schild and Joe, in light of the inherent conflict of interests, will not be doing game reviews.

I know what you mean to say is "I don't like your reviews." But honestly, I don't have a conflict of interests. You may THINK I do, but I don't. Legally I can't review games I work on. But I can discuss any other game I want in any capacity. And trust me, what I'm working on won't figure into it one bit.

2) I would much prefer that advertising for a product is not accepted until after the review process is complete.

That's what we're HOPING to do. Advertisers might not go for it. We don't quite have the clout for penny arcade. Anyone who does want to advertise has to give us either A. a copy of their game (multiple copies at that) or B. access to their game via game card if it's online.

3) Pop-ups, pop-unders, or ads with music and/or noise are teh suck. I'd ask for ads that are as inconspicuous as possible, but that is kind of the exact opposite of what advertising is supposed to do. Just realize that ad banners in the forums are a big thorn in the side of people who read or post at work....at least in my office, they're a sure-fire way to tell if someone is looking at something work-related at a glance.

We work in an office too. I'm sorry the people you work with are so uptight that you can't read for pleasure.

4) Naturally, heavy-handed moderation in the gaming design or gaming discussion forums should probably be limited to Hrose-levels of retardation. You don't want it to even give the appearance that someone was banned, or that a thread was locked because it bashed an advertiser.

We're not going to ban people for disagreeing with something we support in some capacity. Yes, they would have to reach the Hrose level to be banned.

[schild]

As to the aforementioned question. We will have a submit editorial button on the front page. This is something I wanted before, I just continually forgot to put it up. If we get copies of a game, I'll post a stickied thread with some ridiculous contest (fun though, not insane like 1,000 people running to payphones for ilovebees.com/buyhalo2nowsucker).

There will NEVER be popups, popunders, flash ads, ads with sound, ads that put cookies on your computer. Our ads will be NOTHING but a direct link to the advertiser. It will be up to him to track traffic. f13.net is not a for-profit business. 1. Because it can't be and 2. because we've seen what happens when sites become that.

We'll probably pick up some more writers. Mostly because we've been pretty stagnant lately whatwith work and all.

[Signe]

I don't mind, although I feel sorry for Karen.  Why can't we help her with her bills?

[Dark Vengeance]

I know what you mean to say is "I don't like your reviews." But honestly, I don't have a conflict of interests. You may THINK I do, but I don't. Legally I can't review games I work on. But I can discuss any other game I want in any capacity. And trust me, what I'm working on won't figure into it one bit.

Don't misunderstand me, it's simply that if you write a review bashing a competitor, that may not look kosher to some folks. If it's a product competing with one of your own, that may bias your opinion....likewise, there may be a greater tendency for treating colleagues with kid gloves.

If you avoid even the appearance of impropriety, the site gets credibility++. It's the same reason Raph doesn't bust on competing products, or that Lum stopped doing formalized reviews once he got an industry job.

I'm not saying don't discuss games or design theory, I'm just saying that being an "official" reviewer gets into a murky area. I actually like some of the stuff you've written schild, so please don't think it's a personal thing....the movie reviews and the op/ed piece on Raph's laws I objected to on the basis of content, not the name of the author.

EDIT: Removed a couple paragraphs, as schild already addressed the popup issue.

Bring the noise.
Cheers..............

[edlavallee]

SELLOUT!

Only kidding. Just hope you guys don't sacrifice objectivity and independance so you can get all the nice foozles at the conventions. 'Tis a slippery slope gentlemen, but if you can get someone else to pay your way to the dance, go for it. Just don't be suprised when they take you home and want a few quick pokes for the pleasure of your company.

On the supportive side, I would be willing to endure some banners to read the opinions posted here. Hey, I pay the dentist to drill my teeth, how is this different?

[schild]

As far as objectivity goes. I will probably avoid reviewing games that are direct competitors to Big Huge Games. That said - what is a direct competitor to Big Huge? The stuff from Ensemble? Nope, that's Microsoft Games also. Blizzard? They probably won't have another RTS out for umpteen years when they realize how much work WoW will be. It's a nice little niche of the market I work in and I'm glad to be here.

Big Huge let me keep the website and only restricted me from discussing what happens behind the doors there. Everything else is fair game. Yes, I'll make my own rules. And yes, I'll follow them...I think.

I won't be treating colleagues with kid gloves. Never have, never will. I have no reason to make myself look weak. That would be pointless.

--

Ed, this isn't about the "free stuff." If I just wanted free stuff I would have stuck around at the last magazine I wrote for; the free stuff flowed like water there. The 200 gig hard drive in my computer, the graphics processor I use for home theater, all my external hard drives and other various goodies.

The next big review feature will either be really cool or really suck. I won't go the middle road as not to 'piss off' someone. I have no reason to do that. Anyone who has known me for a long time will tell you that I'm blunt and honest pretty much all of the time. Despite what trouble it will get me into - though I will keep myself from saying things that will effect my job (as covered at the beginning of this post).

--

One other thing, we will of course want everyone to at least 'check out' what's advertised here. That doesn't mean "YOU MUST MAKE A PURCHASE OR BE BANNED." But they'll be paying for the content you read. So don't worry about being sent to x1.com or something horrible . We'll have a very, VERY strict set of rules for advertisers. If they don't want to send us a game til the banner goes up - so be it. But if it sucks, the banner goes down and the money gets kept. I think you all see what I'm getting at. We'll find out tomorrow if the whole of the website supports or hates this. I'm hoping it's the former.

[Fabricated]

I'll may actually start reviewing shit soon too.

I was going to review Thief 3, and then the game refused to run for more than 2 minutes without crashing to desktop. Then I was going to review Star Ocean 3, which refused to give any indication it was going to end 40+ hours in, so I quit. Didn't help it pulled a Star Ocean and started sucking halfway through.

If the staff starts getting review copies of upcoming games, you may get to take pleasure in the thought of me sitting at my computer with a bottle of whiskey, attempting to play through a Valusoft game because schild was feeling sadistic.

[Morfiend]

And I was so totally joking when I said:

Insert Wild Speculation below. I expect a certain other group of people will be donning their tinfoil hats right about..........................now.

So, when do the banner ads go up?

Does this make me some kind of idiot savant? Nah, probably just lucky idiot.

Anyhow. I would like to echo DV about ads in the forums. It can really make it harder when surfing for work, which I do about 80% of the time, and by the amount of posts on the weekends, I would think a lot of others surf at work also.

Front page ads are fine (although it make the site less pure. HA), forum ads, no thanks.

[schild]

Just like /., we will have ads in the forums. Hell, we have to. 90% of the links to us link to forum threads addressing various articles. It accounts for roughly 70-80% of our traffic on any given month unless we're very frontpage heavy with state of the industry/critical complaint stuff that we whore out to /. and other news sites every now and then (Free advertising is better than no advertising).

The forum ads will be even more subdued than the frontpage one; as in, smaller/no eye popping colors while still following the guidelines Haemish wrote out.

[Nebu]

It's late and I'm likely not to make much sense... So before you read my rambling know that I strongly believe that you guys have worked hard and deserve to turn this site into any type of vehicle that you choose.  Now, let me proceed to make a sleep-deprived idiot of myself.

I do find it mildly ironic (though I'm not sure that irony really covers it... pan to Alanis) that the whole reason you started on this road was to find your own corner of the world where non-mainstream, intelligent people could discuss all of the things currently wrong with trends in mainstream gaming.  Now companies see you getting some traffic and hope that your non-mainstream thoughts will produce mainstream traffic.  Did that make any sense? Like I said... it's late.  

I guess what I'm hinting at is that the quiet corner you've created away from the people that the current games pander to appears to no longer be a quiet corner.  I hope that at the very least, your intolerance for idiots and trolls will be as consistent as it has been in the past.  It became evident when schild started giving away EQ2 beta invites what type or readers/posters are lurking below the radar.  What I'm saying is that I doubt it's the people that are regulars here that are the targets for your future client's advertising campaigns.  

There is no free lunch

[personman]

I guess that I'm hinting at is that the quiet corner you've created away from the people that the current games pander to appears to no longer be a quiet corner.

There's always Corp - maybe the schism will prove to be a good thing after all.  Should f13 get so popular that devs no longer feel "safe" posting here they could at least follow trends here and post at Corp.

[schild]

Should f13 get so popular that devs no longer feel "safe" posting here they could at least follow trends here and post at Corp.

AHHAHAH. That's cute.

It's got nothing to do with not having my own corner of the world. It also has nothing to do with who's lurking below the radar. Go look at who wanted the EQ2 invites. The same "non-mainstream, intelligent" people who post here every day.

Our attitude towards trolls and spunkmonkeys will not change. I mean jesus, what's the name of this thread? "New Threads, Same old Dirty Bastards."

Edit: THat wasn't supposed to be a dig at corp, but rather, should we get "So Popular."

[Soukyan]

*sniff* I think he just called me a spunkmonkey.

[AlteredOne]

Sounds like a great plan to me.  I'm amazed at the content-to-noise ratio on this site.  Quality posts out the wazoo, and trolls are seldom to be found.

[Fargull]

Viva the old Dirty Bastards!

[Paelos]

See if Netflix will pony up some dough for the site. I think a lot of us are users and love it. I'm probably going to start doing reviews of stuff I get from them in Gen. Disc. soon just for shits and giggles.

Money = good. Viva Capitalism. Pop-up ads make baby Jesus cry.

[Roac]

Don't misunderstand me, it's simply that if you write a review bashing a competitor, that may not look kosher to some folks. If it's a product competing with one of your own, that may bias your opinion....likewise, there may be a greater tendency for treating colleagues with kid gloves.

Eh.  I think the concept of "unbiased" is faulty from the start - people have oppinions, and good luck seperating them from their reviews.  Really, I don't see much use in a review that doesn't insert some subjective judgement, because otherwise you're just looking at a stat sheet.  I think what you dislike (and I'd agree with) is a reviewer purposefully whoring themselves during the review, either for or against the product in question.  But I'm not sure that schild admitting links to the industry requires that to happen, or if he didn't have them that it would make it go away.  Soon as there's ad money involved, there's potential for whoring.

*shrug*

[schild]

I don't know why you'd assume we'd whore. We're not gamespot. We're not throwing up ads blindly, and we'll take them down if the game is unanimous ass.

[Roac]

I don't know why you'd assume we'd whore.

I don't.

[Ookii]

I don't know why you'd assume we'd whore. We're not gamespot. We're not throwing up ads blindly, and we'll take them down if the game is unanimous ass.

Heh, well I don't really think that is how it works.  Basically, if we have ads then we will have ads, we don't get to pick and choose which ones we show (even though we aren't desperate).  We have ads so we can buy more stuff to review, thus ads will actually improve the site, but what the site is now will not change.  We will be improving bits and pieces soon, but f13.net will remain the same as it is, I won't stand having to read pubescent teen's posts on games.  The fact that someone wants to advertise on this site, means that they feel that our current demographic will respond to their product, so I'm sure you won't see a lot of non-relative things.  Also, if the product does suck ass, just laugh at it and go on with your day.  Anything advertised will not influence our reviews, if game x is advertising on our site, and blows, game x will get a bad review.  It's then up to the advertisers to decide whether or not to pull the ad from our site, and it's worth it if bad games fund our reviews of much better games.

[WayAbvPar]

I don't think it is a big deal, as long as it doesn't chase the core group of posters away. If it gets you guys some free swag to use for reviews, the more the merrier.

[Dark Vengeance]

Heh, well I don't really think that is how it works.  Basically, if we have ads then we will have ads, we don't get to pick and choose which ones we show (even though we aren't desperate).

The hope I had, albeit unrealistic, is that if a company wanted to run ads here, they'd need to provide a copy for review. Once reviewed, f13 would either accept or decline the ad.

It would kind of lend an "schild tested, f13 approved" kind of quality to the ads here, thus making the ads more effective for the advertiser, and better for the readers. Additionally, the producers don't pay anything to the site if it gave them a bad review, so they are only out one review copy.

Since the ad doesn't go up until after the review, it avoids any kind of appearance that the review was 'bought and paid for', like so many of the gaming mags and sites nowadays. Moreover, it makes it look like f13 is above such practices...perhaps lending them more credibility to the general gaming community as far as readership goes.

But it's not realistic, certainly not at this point. The site only has like 750 registered users on the forum, and even if you figure 90% of the readers just lurk, that's still only 7500 people. It's still not enough clout to really make those kinds of demands, and still get quality advertisers in any kind of acceptable number.

It'd be nice if it *could* work that way someday though...but I tend to believe you're right that the site can't be quite so picky if you actually want to attract advertisers.

Bring the noise.
Cheers.............