righting about writing

Here's the thing, I'm supposed to review a group of reviewers who lack clarity and it's 7 in the morning. Now I'm not one to purvey the most opaque of reasoning as it is, but lets look at the problems games reviewers face and see if we can't get through this.
One of the main complications the games industry has with self-analysis, is that it is still a fairly new medium of entertainment- Blaaaaah, no Jow.

Decades have passed, games have grown from whirring toddlers into self absorbed teenagers and yet the clearest thing we have to a checklist on them still seems to be the same percentage rating on graphics, sound, longevity, gameplay and all these prominent buzzwords loosely associated with video games we've had for the last 20 years. Here's where the problem begins- all these terms are relative yeah? How does "GAMEPLAY = 4.5 Stars" mean a thing to a reader? I guess what I'm trying to say is that games in essence are so tangible that in most circumstances the style of gameplay is defined by the person playing it and this truth spills over into most aspects of games.

"Yo Jow, what about graphics? Surely they're ratable?"

Word. But look, since games have existed they've been developing graphically at such a ridiculous rate that critical tick boxes haven't had a chance to catch up. For example just over 10 years ago, games reviewers were hitting up Sonic the Hedgehog with 5/5 for graphics, now a few years down the line they're having to give HD games like Assassin's Creed (path of Neo) the same score, if not less. Until games hit a plateau this is going to continue to be problematic.

The NGJ system (New Games Journalism- NOT - No Greater Joy, this is a magazine on Christian parenting) has in my mind commanded an entirely sensible approach to this problem, which is to subjectively journal the reviewers personal experience of the game- perfect in my opinion! This was the style of games analysis I've always been after, it gives all the benefits of a truthful perspective on the game without the pointless complexities of the "thumbs up". Gonzo journalism hitting the games industry could not be a more ideal solution- for me, ah this shit's all relative son. The sad thing about this is that it is not economically effective for the product, games reviewers are, by and large, at the whim of the massive media based companies who everyone knows have no soul. To get reviews published on any sort of scale you will have to be working for people who have decided that review = advert and opinion = irrelevant. Nevermind kids, you call always sniff glue- Might even make that cold, empty feeling you get from acting entirely on subliminal advertising go away.

To be honest, people generally would (should) much rather experience a more subjective personal and portrayal of the world, it's fun and you get a glimpse of truth in it, but it's impossible to stray from the objective unless what you're writing is a completely incoherent rant about what ever tangent your subconscious has decided to peruse. If given a task, using my own blog for an example, a piece of writing will be filled with specific bullet points you had to hit, I just try and drown them with as much incoherent ranting as I can get away with, playa.