Starting Monday, February 6, I will be a full-time reporter at the Gawker Media blog Kotaku, where I will be covering stories in gaming news and culture.
This is an extremely exciting opportunity for me. As one of the biggest websites in the industry, with a gigantic, loyal readership that includes just about every gamer on the planet, Kotaku will be a fantastic platform for my work and an excellent place for me to write, learn, and report. In other words, I can’t fucking wait.
Earlier today, I published a piece titled “Your Story Sucks,” in which I describe how much I detest the phrase “your story sucks.”
Later this afternoon, writer Richard Goodness posted a rebuttal titled “‘Your Story Sucks’ Sucks,” in which he refutes many of my points. It’s a great read, though I disagree with much of what he says. But there’s something I’d like to clarify.
On Twitter yesterday, my friend Andrew Groen wrote something that bugged me.
“It’s always baffling that so many people place so much importance on the story of a video game when game stories are near universally shit,” he said.
While Twitter is regularly filled with sweeping generalizations like this, Andrew’s statement rubbed me all sorts of wrong ways. “Game stories are near universally shit.” What does that even mean? How can a 30-year-old form of media that has told tales in myriad forms, from the text-based enchantments of interactive fiction to the melodramatic zippers of Japanese role-playing games, be “near universally shit”?
