This is an issue that I have had to address, being an amateur games journalist for the past couple of years. (This is a blatant plug, but also relevant so bare with me!) I have been hosting and producing a radio show (now a podcast) for the past 3 years, currently located at http://www.weeklygeekshow.com./ We set out to do something different, something unique. We are gamers who absolutely despised normal rating systems. If a game gets an 8.5, what the heck does that mean for you? How in the world does that.5 influence whether or not you will like the game? Whenever we do our reviews, we have three things we discuss: shininess, funness and worthiness. We tell our listeners to consider what kinds of games we enjoy as reviewers, and then weigh their opinion off of that. We tell them that graphics aren't always the most important thing, but if they really enjoy graphics more than gameplay, they can pay special attention to "shininess". We tell them IN OUR OPINION whether or not they should rent or buy the game in worthiness. So forth and so on.
As for games journalists being uninteresting vultures, I can see that. I really dislike other games journalists that I have met. Most of them are either grossly uninformed, or, in the case of big events like E3, are just there for the freebies. Yes, the media can be swagbaggers, too.
I do agree that many games journalists assume that just because they write about games they are "in the industry". Some games journalists can actually be considered influential, however, like the boys from Penny Arcade. You'd be hard-pressed to convince anyone that they don't influence sales with their hordes of screaming fans.
My point? If you are a games journalist, try to be unique and try to give people worthwhile information that would help them decide whether or not they should make a purchase. That is all you are really there for.
Slashdot Mirror
i heard $100 don't tell anyone shhhhhhhhhhhh
This is an issue that I have had to address, being an amateur games journalist for the past couple of years. (This is a blatant plug, but also relevant so bare with me!) I have been hosting and producing a radio show (now a podcast) for the past 3 years, currently located at http://www.weeklygeekshow.com./ We set out to do something different, something unique. We are gamers who absolutely despised normal rating systems. If a game gets an 8.5, what the heck does that mean for you? How in the world does that .5 influence whether or not you will like the game? Whenever we do our reviews, we have three things we discuss: shininess, funness and worthiness. We tell our listeners to consider what kinds of games we enjoy as reviewers, and then weigh their opinion off of that. We tell them that graphics aren't always the most important thing, but if they really enjoy graphics more than gameplay, they can pay special attention to "shininess". We tell them IN OUR OPINION whether or not they should rent or buy the game in worthiness. So forth and so on.
As for games journalists being uninteresting vultures, I can see that. I really dislike other games journalists that I have met. Most of them are either grossly uninformed, or, in the case of big events like E3, are just there for the freebies. Yes, the media can be swagbaggers, too.
I do agree that many games journalists assume that just because they write about games they are "in the industry". Some games journalists can actually be considered influential, however, like the boys from Penny Arcade. You'd be hard-pressed to convince anyone that they don't influence sales with their hordes of screaming fans.
My point? If you are a games journalist, try to be unique and try to give people worthwhile information that would help them decide whether or not they should make a purchase. That is all you are really there for.
---Frodo
weeklygeekshow.com