Considering that the question about “Should Gaming Journalists be good at Videogames?” still lingers. GeekReply clears any and all questions about it.
That's so silly. Is like saying you can't criticize music if you don't know how to sing. A journalist just must be honest with his reviews, all the opinions are fine and then let US choose who we think are the most qualified to follow their advise.
You can't be a music critic or work at The Billboard you are not into the field of music and know how to critique, Otherwise Lil Wayne's crappy Rebirth album would have been a 10/10. You and I can criticize a game but to have job about being a game critic must require experience in Journalism and be good at gaming. Credibility is very important for critics. You think imma take an opinion from someone who can't beat a tutorial seriously when I did it with just one hand?
Yeah, i do think in all honesty that is dumb to think they have to be good at games. There are plenty of titles that i have played that i wasnt very good at, yet enjoyed. I do think they have to have a basic understanding though, and in certain cases if they are that bad at the game i think it all boils down to that it was never their tyoe of game ti begin with. Imo the only real criteria besides from grammer, is that person should at least be interested in said title or genre. To many times ive seen reviewers review a game out of their comfort zone. It never made sense to me, why send a person whos only interests are FPS to review a yearly sport game, or a children geared title and ect?
That does kind of dilute the concept of journalism down to just being able to talk about a topic because you enjoy it. If you are going to review a game, you should be able to speak critically about gameplay, but more importantly, people need to trust what your critiques are. If you're not good at a game, how can one trust your critique of that game's gameplay. I've played several games that I refuse to review because I wasn't very good at it. Sure, I enjoyed them, but I can't sit there and critique gameplay that I can't get a hang of. You could focus your review on other elements, but at the core of every game is gameplay, and that will always be most important in a game review.
it's not so much good at game as it is being knowledgeable and experienced in the genre, that's what separates a journalist and a blogger writing whatever he feels added with 10 minutes of google search. for example, someone who isn't knowledgeable in RTS won't be able to give an educated opinion about what makes a game different from games in the same genre, what's it's strengths and weaknesses, why the devs chose this decision instead of that, etc etc... the same holds true when an elitist who's arrogantly said 'Pokemon games are for kids' or 'Hurr durr shooter is only for dumbass dudebro' is told to make a review about these games, it will most likely be a blogger-quality rant with minimal insight on the games and shit-ton of whining. and no, I don't believe there's anyone who is bad at games, they just won't try hard enough to be at least decent at it. and if you won't even put that much effort that it's so apparent to anyone who saw your video that you're painfully bad at it, please don't call yourself a journalist.
U read my mind m8 :D
What game journalists have nowadays is the lack of transparency. When I talked with fellow readers of mine, I took note that one of the main issues is the fact that the reviewers don't often show the gameplay they have. And that's a major issue considering that transparency is key. This is what makes people like AngryJoe so popular amongst transparent reviewers and critics,.
"That's so silly. Is like saying you can't criticize music if you don't know how to sing." You don't need to know how to sing to criticize music. Just how you don't need to know how to develop games to criticize them. However, you need to know what makes a good song good and a bad one bad. You do that by experiencing multiple songs for the same genre or the same artist. If you don't listen to heavy metal you wont know if it's good or bad. And if you don't play RTS you wouldn't know what's makes it good or bad The guy who played doom clearly doesn't play FPSs so he wouldn't know what make this game stand out from the others. The man who played cuphead doesn't play shmups so it's hard to take his view of the game I remember when gamespot game a low score to football manager game the said "you only manage the team and nothing else".....see what I'm saying about not being familiar with the mediam or the genre??
That's an inaccurate comparison. If the article had said critics need to know how to develop games then you could use the music/sing comparison. Critics should definitely be good at games. Some games require skills to access all the content and a bad gamer wouldn't be able to properly rate a game he or she has not played fully
Your comment is sound, but unfortunately, the 10 dislikes are all from children who don't yet look at life with same level-headedness. The reality is that this industry is dominated by children who react outrageously to things because they lack maturity. I've been a gamer for twenty-five years and I'd probably suck at Cuphead... doesn't mean I don't know my shit.
Ohh really? I think you need to do a bit of thinking yourself before you speak. You calling people children is very ironic.
No, the amount of dislikes say that they don't agree with the opinion of the person in question. And many of the people here have shown the reasons why the comparison doesn't work.
I dont think you have have to be good but one should at least be capable of doing basic functions without struggling.
Yes you should because unlike most mediums you have to take part in the experience to get the experience, it's an active process. Having someone who can't play games write about games is like having someone who cant read review a book, or like having someone who's never used power tools write a magazine about them. How do you review a racecar if you suck at driving? How do you review a recipe if you don't know how to properly measure and cook ingredients? Seems like common sense to me.
I agree 100% I'm a teacher and i know what i'm talking about!
But teachers aren't actually that good at their subjects. You're good at teaching your syllabus, but a maths teacher ain't no proper mathematician.... You don't teach advanced calc or algorithms to 16-year-olds... the stupid thing about this article and this whole argument is that it is based on the Cuphead gameplay by Dean Takahasi. The man has been writing about games since most of the people in this thread were young children. Stfu.
It's one of the only only entertainment mediums where the critics must be skilled at partaking in it since it's interactive
This is a grey area to me. I usually take reviews from dualshockers because their ppl actually volunteer for the game theyre reviewing and enjoy said genre.
See, this is a problem too. Because sometimes reviewers who specialize at the genre don't look at the average joe who doesn't know what the genre is. For example, when I talked about Cuphead. I focused on how casual gamers would react to it rather than how enjoyable it was for me. A lot of critics don't see that and create the misconceptions I talked about.
Being or showing a level of interest is all that's needed. Most issues comes from game reviewers who seem to care less if not hate games.
I mean, did you look at the playthrough GR posted?
No. People need to understand and appreciate what the game is trying to do and it’s place in the market.. nobody should be expected to be good at *all games* - yet a reviewer is often going to be tasked with scoring something that’s outside of their stronger areas. You can’t really quantify “good” anyway. I’d say I’m bad at bloodborne.. finished it, but not skilfully (haha.) still my favourite game of the generation so far.
I mean, you can look at my gameplay of Cuphead that I did for the review. You can see I'm slightly above average in that regard. And I play everything at that level as well, because that's supposedly my job. Again, journalism isn't supposed to be something anyone can do.
First off,many of these clowns from Polygon and other lousy sites are not journalists. They are gaming media who just write three paragraph long articles and call it a day. Youtubers are often similar in that aspect. Second,some gamers dont have the skill or determination to be good at every genre org ame. I would be the worst person chosen to review Titanfall or Madden since they are both absolutely boring games to me. Easy? Hard? Who cares? The games dont hold appeal to me and it would be unfair to be in charge of reviewing such a game if I am not good at the game to describe the challenging portions.
Glad to see you look at both sides of the spectrum, that was mostly the intention of the article
i believe this totally depends for whom the Journalist writes the review. The casual average consumer may want to have a review from his unskilled point of view and Not from the point of view of a supertrained hardcore gaming mashinist.
I said it before and I will say it again, you can't expect everyone to ace at every gaming genres. No one can be that perfect, not in gaming nor in real life. I consider myself a vivid gamer, but even I have problem with certain genres (such as stealth games, god damn those games). People don't have to be very good at video games in order to be a gaming journalist, just a respectable skill is enough in my opinion.
I don't think they have to be "good", but they certainly have to be competent. They need to be able to understand and learn the mechanics in order to properly formulate a review. People are making this into a false dichotomy, and that's dumb.
In order to critique anything, you must not only be good at it, you must be a master at it. You must know everyrhing about it. Just because you like to eat, it doesn't qualify you to be a food critique. Just because you like to listen to music, it does 't qualify you to be a music critique. If you only need to be good at video games in order to be a video game journalist than you are nothibg more than a guy with an opinion. This is the problem with video game journalism today. No qualification is needed and any idiot can call themselves a video game journalist. This is exactly why we get so many shitty opinions disguised as "articles" or reviews. And perheps the bigger problem is that people set the bar so low that they accept this. Shameful. Video game journalist are the the very bottom of the barrel.
So, I guess I am part of that bottom of the barrel despite meeting the qualifications you just mentioned...
If you meet the qualifications I mentioned than no, you are not the bottom of the barrel. But gaming journalism is precisely because anyone can claim to be a video game journalist without qualifications and for 1 proper journalist there is 1000 average joes. That needs to be controlled.
I think its far more important that they have a deep understanding and knowledge of what gaming is and all the different genres. He/she doesn’t need to be a pro at every game, but at the very least, they should be average.
No. They don't need to be good at them. They simply need to understand the source material, and be able to give a critical analysis without their skill destroying the results. This need to be good in order to give ones opinion(review) is an absolute joke.
I dont know how this is even a discussion. You cant give a fair review of an RPGs Magic system If all you do is attack with your sword, heal and grind when things get tough. You cant give a fair review of the combat system in ninja Gaiden or bayonetta if you mash 1 button until everything is dead. You should, at least, be able to use all the tools the game offers effectively.
N4G is a community of gamers posting and discussing the latest game news. It’s part of NewsBoiler, a network of social news sites covering today’s pop culture.