A new wave of game journalism

[YoshiM]

I just happened to check out Slashdot and found an interesting bit on Game Journalism. There's an editorial essay (http://www.statelovesyou.com/wiki/?ViewStateItem&item=a95) that tells us about the state of current gaming journalism and then talks about a new direction (as the main page says-Hemmingway meets game journalism). Probably the best description I've seen of this "new" journalism is this piece on Jedi Knight II: Jedi Outcast (http://www.alwaysblack.com/blackbox/bownigger.html). Don't let the link's and article's name offend, there is an excellent bit of writing going on here.

As I read it, I didn't want to stop reading it. It was a quasi-review of the game woven into the writer's experience of it (mainly the online aspect). The piece mentions the type of people you can run into online, mannerisms, what makes JKII "different" than other FPS blast-a-thons, some of the online community's gestures (the bowing before an opponent). At the end it made me VERY interested in checking out the online part of this game (I had it on Xbox but never played against other humans) as I can see, with the right crowd, how much fun it could be.

Personally I enjoy this approach. As games do become more of an experience as opposed to "just a game", the old "graphics, gameplay, sound, etc." approach may become outdated.

What are your thoughts on this approach?

[Gamereviewgod]

It's worked for movie reviews for years. Actor A was great, storyline was bad, etc. I do not like the approach at all. Using "I," and "Me" is a big no-no in my book. It just takes the reader right out.

[RCM]

I thought both articles were trash. I promise that I will kill myself if game journalism ever goes that way.

THE ONE, THE ONLY- RCM

[Dahne]

I like that kind of piece. Not as a replacement for a review, but as a supplement. It seems we've fallen into the pattern of look forward to game, get it, beat it, forget it. I like to hear about more than that. More indepth looks at the interaction between the game and the player. Considering how all game magazines I know of fall into the same pattern, it could be an interesting basis for a new mag.

[Flack]

I think there's a place for both kinds. Those kinds of articles are more like features in my opinion. There will always be a spot for simple 1-10 game reviews. People like to get a lot of information from a little bit of reading. Simple ratings reviews cater to that. Also, ratings reviews are much easier to compare games (does game X look better than game Y, etc).

[Ed Oscuro]

That article reminds me of a knife fight in Counter-Strike :)

Anyhow. The writer really does tell us a lot about the game (actually, despite owning it, that one taught me a few new things about the game) but it won't do for a review. It's a "feature," as Flack says. Something for folks who are already interested in this type of game.

[motley6]

The words "Hemingway" and "game journalism" shouldn't be within 5 miles of each other.

[Ed Oscuro]

Okay; I've read through some of the first article, and I agree with some points (vocation vs. "just a job), but here's one (can't copy and paste, interesting if this is his "manifesto"):


Previews -- one of the most despicable words in the lexicon, randomly -- are still going to appear.
What the..? First this writer argues that reviews that don't serve their "basic" consumerist purpose are less than useless, but then trashes previews - which if nothing else can serve to get people interested in upcoming titles, and plan accordingly (though setting aside the cash is one thing, engaging in speculation and then being sorely disappointed when the finished product isn't as good as the previews made it out to be - many previews very gingerly poke at flaws which will later prove to be bruises in the final reviews). How about not apparently contradicting yourself from one sentence to another?

The goals are honorable, but I have one problem with this crowd. Their writing style is icky and overwritten, and glancing at the article I see one spot where "too" had an "o" roll off the end...but then again, what do you want from admirers of "I felt very sad, but very fine" Hemmingway?

The highlighted article, as I've already said, was just fine (and not as overwritten), but these reviews won't ever replace by-the-numbers reviews from the blood and guts crowd...I can't approach it as easily. Some dismiss sillier features like the GameSpy Grudge, but the personality and warmth I find there beats out these artsy works for me. As a writer, yes, my style has more in common with Always Black than it does Fargo...but then again, I'm not writing reviews or humor pieces.

[YoshiM]

Pretty good thoughts all around. I read the Always Black piece again, this time from a more neutral, objective standpoint than a "quickie clicky" before I had to leave the computer when I posted this topic. I do agree, it's a feature. I don't enjoy the read any less but it doesn't give enough to inform the prospective buyer if the game as a whole is worth the purchase. It described an aspect I might not have given a second thought on (online PvP) but it did get across that online battles could become more personal than clicking a mouse or pulling a controller trigger. You hear about online match play but no one really describes the experience like that.

I also see where such writing can get out of hand. I enjoy Penny Arcade like most but their news posts on games can sometimes seem like clever rambling from a guy who likes to hear himself type. "Artistic" descriptive pieces on gaming could become PA X 10 with perhaps the possible trimmings of an open mic at a beat-nic club.

[tyranthraxus]

Its a good article but not a review!! A good review is valuable, I trust the
reviewer has played all the latest games and maybe knows the classics so
they can review the game and compare it to all the rest.

An article that is about the experience is a good read but not a subsitute
for a critique of its pros and cons.

But one of my favorite game articles was from an early 90s issue of
Computer Gaming World (back when they were a good magazine) where
after the review of Command HQ they had a two part article about a
fulll modem game. And the guy described his strategy, what the other
guy was doing and how he was reacting. It put me in the game and I
bought the next week. Of course the fact the real review was very
positive made a world of difference.

[jdc]

Previews...reviews. Doesn't matter to me. I have a few friends that take reviews as the gospel. I don't know why. I've found some of my most treasured games via reviews that have deemed them steaming piles of shit and I've found garbage that has been given 9s and 10s.

Give me a preview that tells me the genre, general gist of the game and any apparent weaknesses/strengths so that when it arrives I can go to the store and mentally recall this info before deciding to buy it based on the finished product and developer's track record for that genre.

Reviews...I could care less for them unless thay are totally unbiased in either direction. I don't want a personal recall of the game, just the facts pertaining to the game's construction. That's hard to find these days, so I generally don't pay them any heed.