Five out of Ten 3 + Triple Pack (also need feedback and media buddies)

[Alan Williamson]

Now, I'm not saying this is the best value bundle in the history of games writing. But I can certainly imply it ;)

#3: 'Reflecting Reality'

“We hear of games becoming ever more realistic, but maybe they’re just becoming more intricate fantasies. There’s a place in gaming for both documentary and drama, fact and fiction.”

Ten new features from Cameron Kunzelman, Robbie Pickles, Jordan Erica Webber, Craig Wilson and myself. As before, we're doing a two week Early Bird Discount, so grab one quickly! Full details on the website:

https://fiveoutoftenmagazine.com/

We're also trying something new for Issue #3 since we're gaining new readers all the time: a Triple Pack of our first three issues, for the price of two (or more - it's the same tiered system as before). If you haven't read Five out of Ten yet, I'd love you to try it and hear what you think! If you've bought one issue, may as well buy the Triple and then you've got a free copy to give to a friend. Share the love!

- I am really keen to hear any feedback: we've already had some about the design and are working to improve for the next issue in July.
- I'd like to build a mailing list of writers interested in promoting the magazine. If you're interested, let me know: free copies involved, but I need to know your viewing figures etc.

Hope you all like the new issue. I'm really pleased with it.

[Amanda Lange]

Got the triple pack, great deal! Thank you!

[Johannes Köller]

Since the issue of dancing letters has been confirmed to be my own fault for not reading this on the proper device, I think my only remaining concern is the role of personal experience in writing. Not to open this can of worms again, I actually support it wholeheartedly. I mean, I've gone on record saying I was in writerly love with Mattie Brice and I certainly do my fair share of this kind of writing (typing this to temporarily avoid one such draft). I also don't really want to criticize a project I generally like, especially when my complaints might be lingering bitterness I didn't make it in with my own terrible pitch.

Anyway, I guess what I mean to say is I enjoy writing that weaves in personal experience without being about the writer first and foremost, and the issue dives a little far into that territory for my tastes. The opening piece in particular seems to be only about personal history, or at least I'm not entirely sure what deeper argument the tale is communicating. "Things sure have changed" seems such a banal observation to make. I like Cameron's and Jordan's entries, but they too seem to make their points a bit hastily, towards the end.

This is just a preference, the same obsession that makes me state my general topic before using the word 'I', and evidently we disagree on the subject since your philosophy is to put the personal features before the themed submissions, all of which I adored.

[Johannes Köller]

Also one of my writers just suggested that I should really try to get you to include us in your bundle of issues (something a la "Plus a free issue of Haywire!") and I think the idea is kind of genius, though I also wouldn't want to weigh you down with our thing.

[Cameron Kunzelman]

I think this might have been more clear in the editorial work of the first Five Out of Ten, but Alan made it very clear to me when I pitched to write for the issue that the kind of games writing that FooT does comes is more about the essay first and mechanical/object analysis second.

I'm as ardent a defender of games-oriented writing as there has ever been, but I've also spent a lot of time saying that both methods are valuable, and there's nothing better than putting your writing labour where your mouth is when it comes to this kind of stuff. 

[Johannes Köller]

I've got nothing against the idea, please don't take it that way. I guess I'm just realizing how far my personal enjoyment of entirely personal writing goes or doesn't go.

Maybe I should have just learned by now that if that's my damage, I ought to jump to the second half of the issue instead of reading everything in order in one long binge. I definitely don't want to launch any qualitative debates when all I've got to my name right now is the fairly anemic latest issue of my considerably more humble writing project.

[Alan Williamson]

Woah, you go away for a weekend and... I've only had an iPad and so I've had to watch this conversation unfold without contributing to it!

Firstly Joe, thank you so much for taking the time to leave feedback on the magazine. Ultimately as the guy who commissioned the pieces, it falls to me to defend everyone's honour, so I'll try and explain some of the thought processes and what I'm doing to address your concerns.

The opening piece in particular seems to be only about personal history, or at least I'm not entirely sure what deeper argument the tale is communicating. "Things sure have changed" seems such a banal observation to make.

It really only is a personal history, as you say. There's not really a deeper argument to it. I guess you could argue that it is often unclear why people become disenfranchised, but it's my fault that we didn't go deeper with the piece, not the author's.

I like Cameron's and Jordan's entries, but they too seem to make their points a bit hastily, towards the end.

I don't agree. Cameron's point seems clear to me from the first section, and Jordan's blindingly obvious from the first page of the DSM. Perhaps the take-home messages are a little forced, but the arguments are continuous. But I'm glad you liked them anyway ;)

---

So with that out of the way, there's been a bit of back-and-forth about my 'philosophy' when it comes to Five out of Ten, and perhaps that has been misconstrued given the material in our first few issues. So allow me to explain:

First and foremost, Five out of Ten non-themed pieces have to pass 'the granny test'. That is: "assuming my granny was interested in reading about videogames, could she read this?" This is where most pitches get rejected: the very academic, the insular and technical. It's not that there isn't a place for these pieces, just that I want to cast the net wider rather than deeper. Hopefully this explains why Robbie's piece was included: it's a good primer on the state of PC games and why they have changed, that is aimed at a layperson rather than a 'gamer' per se.

But the main focus is that we're talking about games, more than just the people that play them, so to move on to a point Cameron raised:

Alan made it very clear to me when I pitched to write for the issue that the kind of games writing that FooT does comes is more about the essay first and mechanical/object analysis second.

Well, it is and it isn't! Since I commissioned the work for the first three issues, I've now written a 'manual' for contributors. It includes the following:

"We are writing videogame criticism, not life stories. We aim for what has been called “game-centric” criticism, where our experiences inform the critique, but they are not the point of the article. People aren’t buying the magazine to read your life history; they want to read about videogames and their culture. Experiential writing is an important part of what separates us from other game magazines, but it needs to be grounded in a conversation that is ultimately about the games themselves."

This raises the question: why doesn't the writing in Issues 1-3 match this description? The answer is that such a mission statement didn't exist at the time! While I am very proud of all the work in our first three issues and wouldn't change a thing, one thing I am keen to do is focus on the games themselves and ensure that experience is one facet of the essay, but not its totality. I actually stole "game-centric criticism" from Cameron's blog.

There is an inherent tension here: most people that buy Five out of Ten are people who play games already. A significant number of them are games journalists. I won't deny that it is really difficult to strike a balance between accessible writing and articles that go deep enough. It is probably impossible. As we go forward with the magazine, my job is really just to steer the ship.

Yes, it does worry me that people will read Five out of Ten and think it is too much about people's personal stories, not enough about games - although to be fair I don't think we go as far as Kill Screen or Unwinnable, whose connections are much more tenuous at times. But if you want, as I do, to reach out to people who don't play games, then your stories do need to be about people as well as the games they play. That's why our heading reads 'videogame culture' and not 'videogames', after all.

Just to re-iterate: I am really grateful for all of your feedback. I want a magazine everyone can enjoy, not just me.

[Alan Williamson]

I also had an interview with Ian Cheong where I talked about Five out of Ten and the state of games journalism here, if you're interested:

http://www.gamefront.com/game-front-1-on-1-five-out-of-ten-editor-alan-williamson/

[Johannes Köller]

Accessability is a noble goal, but it seems to me that what I lovingly call "high-brow games writing" is mostly appreciated and consumed by a small subgroup of the larger subgroup of people who play games regularly. That's no excuse to go for the insular or self-serving, self-perpetuating, but something I like to keep in mind, and if I ever work out the exact formula for fusing personal and more general observations I'll let you know. I assume it's not a whole lot of use to argue about content since as far as I know you've got things set and ready for the entire year already, and changes to the editorial process will take a while to surface. Maybe what I really ought to do is stop buying the Bonus Drinking Money versions, so you're forced to do these sober? I'll wait to see what you've got lined up.

Also, latest Haywire issue, last page spread before the back cover, same twitchy Helvetica problem. Kind of glad I know for sure it's specific to my rig now.