Slashdot Mirror
On Videogame Journalism
Michael_Blessed writes "The most incisive critique of games journalism currently out there. I would say that as I participated, but there's some real illuminating stuff in there. And it's all true - I should know, being a games 'journalist' myself." It's a whole long series - read all 11 parts.
Most people who haven't read the story will probably see your comment as flamebait, but as someone who tried to read the article I wish I could mod your comment "+10 bang on".
:puke:
As an example of this guy's excellence in journalism, let me quote you some text he wrote regarding the topic of "Role Playing":
This is not to say that people, individually, are not intelligent. They are, for the most part. I don't know that I've met many who are truly apathetic, either. It's just that we're all abused.
We're all hurt children. We don't know who to believe, so we grasp for the most comforting, available parents we've got. We are raised not to believe in our own judgement, and to defer to Nabisco. To Tom Brokaw. To the Government. To Science. To God. To the experts.
Life is above us. We don't know any better.
"The market alone cannot provide sufficient constraints on corporation's penchant to cause harm." -- Joel Bakan
Game journalism is people who cant write, interviewing people who cant talk, for an audience that cant read.
So go to people who can draw, instead.
I don't play video games much (well, ok, less than 4 hours a day), but these two have a wicked sense of humor.
Games are ever becoming a more powerful cultural weapon. The idea began when discussing Blessed Magazine's ideas about alternative game journalism. Why not introduce genre into game journalism? Can you imagine I-novel game journalism? Gonzo journalism? It doesn't exist in 95% of game writing on the internet. But you deserve it, because you care about games.
Life is above us. We've even lower standards. You can call it art, if you like. "Art" is merely what happens when the listener starts to apply that entertainment to his own life.
It's the same as with anything in life.
When we review, we review games as product. Videogames are objects. Journalism is meant to inspire free thought. I've a question to ask. It seems this pisses some people off. Online gaming media, at that. The idea behind art is to allow people more flexibility in their thought. The study of art is the study of life. People are intelligent. People care. They've just been abused, and neglected by the media bombardment of our post-modern world. Ask questions. The goal for game journalism should be to point readers toward the truths that matter in life.
I might owe my entire career in video game journalism to Paul Magliulo. This small-time operation died out when I started to write video game reviews for the sixth-grade newspaper.
By the time I reached eighth grade, Arnie Katz had pretty much succeeded at fostering a video game fanzine culture and, reading Fandom Central in the then-new Electronic Games magazine, I thought, you know, I could do this. Arnie reviewed it in Electronic Games. Okay, I'm joking around - video game journalism is not really crap. I find varying degrees of merit in dozens of video game-related websites and print magazines. 1. You call Shigeru Miyamoto anything other than Shigeru Miyamoto. Details are sparse at the moment, but if other games in the ______ series are any indication, this game will feature ______.
I've read some Wind Waker reviews in which the game is referred to as Zelda 9 or, for extra pretentiousness, Zelda IX. What the hell game is that?
Transitioning between gameplay and graphics is not - unless you're a bad video game reviewer, in which case you just write "For a game with such good graphics, the gameplay is lacking."
People reading your writing might be doing it to glean information on a game that they're thinking about buying. Well, you're not going to if...
Some people are correct to think this, and some people are dead wrong. See if they laugh. Let's say you're writing a review of a piece of shit game - a veritable humor goldmine if ever there was one:
So consider, then, Kohler's Hierarchy of Video Game Reviewing Skills, from bottom to top:
/ TEACH! \
/ ORIGINAL STYLE \
/ BASIC WRITING SKILLS \
I visit gaming sites primarily to be enraged.
There is value, when disparate individuals share experiences. I don't need any Maxim-esque man talk, I'm there to talk games when I visit these sites - they don't need to make gaming seem cool because it already is cool.
What needs changing about game journalism? Pick up an issue of Electronic Gaming Monthly, Game Informer, PSM, GMR, GamePro, Official Xbox Magazine, Videogame Underground, Official PlayStation Magazine, or GameNOW (or, if you prefer, visit IGN.com, Gamers.com, Gamespot, Gaming Age, or any of a thousand fansites and you won't find gaming journalism anywhere.
Roughly, there are three categories: hard journalism, academically-oriented criticism, and consumer-oriented reviews.
"All game writing is based on the same template. What makes that not journalism?"
At this point, even Auto-Summarize was bored.