Great Gamers Not Always the Best Reviewers

Posted by Zonk on Thursday February 10, 2005 @05:16AM from the explaining-my-crappyness dept.

An editorial posted on The Adrenaline Vault posits that talented gamers are not always the best reviewers because of the necessity for those with elite skills to care as much as they do about their performance. The best reviewers, on the other hand, are generally somewhat detached from the subject material. From the article: "Spending 50 hours playing an offering when you are focused exclusively on trying to win certainly would yield very different insights than spending the same 50 hours trying to evaluate the title's strengths and weaknesses to help inform the general public about purchasing decisions." Kyle Orland's Video Game Ombudsman has further analysis on this subject.

1 of 54 comments (clear)

Min score:

Reason:

Sort:

Re:movie reviews by Golias · 2005-02-10 07:44 · Score: 0, Troll

I guess we need to agree to disagree here.

You liked it, the rest of the world did not.

By the way, I loved your commentary track on Dark City, Mr. Ebert.

--
Information wants to be anthropomorphized.