More NavelGazing About Game Journalism

An anonymous reader writes "FiringSquad has just posted an article going into 5 problems with videogame journalism. The author says that since it wouldn't be polite to point the finger at other journalists, he wrote this racing-game shootout and this DOA4 review to provide the evidence. Great article made even better because the writer is using his own work as evidence for why things have gone terribly wrong."

Comments

Anybody know of balanced reviews?

[luvirini]

Seems to me that the average score for games revieved is 80%+, and given that most new games are pure trash, I was wondering if anyone knew of a games revies site that had the actual reviews and scores at about 50% or less?

Re:Anybody know of balanced reviews?

[AuMatar]

THey really are biased by genere though- anything FPS will tend to the higher end of the scale, and non-FPS tends to the lower end. They'll talk about how great and innovative a new puzzle game is, but it will score equal to or lower an FPS they reviewed and gave lukewarm comments to earlier. Thats fine if you're a show/mag with a focus on the genre, but bad for a general show.

Navelgazing?

[MadTinfoilHatter]

"NavelGazing"? I thought the booth-babes were banned?

One problem not mentioned

[TheSkepticalOptimist]

This article was written by a person assuming that game reviewers ACTUALLY play the game, I can say this isn't always the case.

I know of a few Canadian game reviewers in some popular newspapers, grey haired guys or even a few women, that review games, and it is obvious they simply browse through the game's menus and probably spent only a couple of hours playing the game. Just looking at the guys suggest these people can't set their VCR clocks (and the fact they most likely still use VCR's suggests something as well). I actually remember reading a game review where the writer spend more time criticizing the confusing game menu rather then talking about game play. Sure, these are not solid sources for game reviews, but it also suggests that as Wall Street and commercial news services begin to recognize video gaming as being a huge money making industry suddenly your going to get journalists with little to know gaming experience having to review these products. The grey hairs on Wall Street want to read what the grey hairs in the New York Times think of Grand Theft Auto. They of course do not have perspective as to how or why games are played, they are payed to do a job.

But I agree. Like with movie critics, reviewing 100's of products a year probably leaves you with an acid tounge and dried up wit. With so many BAD games on the market, and only a few gems, having to constantly find something positive to say about a game could become strenuous and difficult to accomplish in most cases.