They for sure are not picked for their journalistic skills either.These 'journalists' aren't picked for their gaming skills...
This.Game 'journalists' are mostly political activists in 2024...
That's probably too kind of a term for these people given how shit they are at propaganda. Activists are a better term.Many of them are propagandists rather than journalists.
I think the opposite would be true. The more I play games — especially established genres with their own particular conventions and vocabulary — I learn and I get better. As I get better, I can clear them faster. I can also articulate what does or doesn’t set them apart for genre players and generalist gamers easier.I would gather having to rush through so many games in such little time makes for a factory line type of process. Probably play every game on easy, maybe even some codes to streamline the process. All about quantity not quality of experience. Not condemning, there is no way to spend the proper time needed in these cases, which kind of makes the review process folly in the first place.
I suck at games and what takes someone 20 hours to beat will take me 60. But I am enjoying myself and don't sweat it. Then again, I don't make a living at it, which most likely would kill my enthusiasm for gaming sadly.
Why are hardcore gamers so bad at writing?
Not as bad as modern game writers.
Nobody's asking them to be game developers before writing as that would be the right analogy to your example, clearly it's the masses that also don't play sports professionally/don't develop games that read/watch them rather than the much fewer people actually in the sport/game industry itself.Most arent journalists either.
Though to be fair, a sports reporter covering MLB doesn't have to grow up playing baseball, nor a movie critic needing to do film school in college.
But the key difference is if their content/reviews are skewed a certain way because they are bad at playing the game thats totally different.
Is reviewing games even considered journalism, wouldn't that just be a professional reviewer?
Wouldn't video game journalism have more to do with investigating and covering the happenings and the people that make up the industry?
It has been a long time since I read a game review, but back when I used to write them the most important thing was that you could write entertaining copy.Not as bad as modern game writers.
I understand that monetization models have changed in the digital age. Still, if a publisher or developer sends you review codes to play and review their product, while also promoting it, is that journalism?Its formed from a hobbist base. The issue is that much like newspapers their a business and traditionally easy to produce puff pieces made bank, via undisclosed sponsorship. Times have changed and now its about digital ad revenue and clicks.
The issue is investigative journalism takes time and resources, which is not something that the current way of doing things would turn a profit on. Even if you break a huge story it's hardly going to make as much bank as some large sponsorship deal for the 50 funny cat articles you write a day.
It's why I think it's no accident that the video format took over for this sort or thing, as longer videos that hold people's interest on YouTube allow for more adbreaks and revenue. So you find that sort of investigative industry thing on those platforms.
Well there's a lot you can do with your hands and mouth other than write and talk about games.They for sure are not picked for their journalistic skills either.
You are totally right but that explain why they suck at journalism, not video games...They're doing PR for corporations. They're not journalists.
Sounds logical.It has been a long time since I read a game review, but back when I used to write them the most important thing was that you could write entertaining copy.
If there had been a games magazine where only the top players at any particular genre could write the reviews, I guarantee it would have been a shitty read. Most people are semi-literate at best.
If magazines needed in-depth guides or analysis from expert players, we'd commission that, and a professional writer would turn it into something readable. But now everyone expects it all to be free on the internet, it's no surprise that standards are low.
I'm in the UK, and there were some fundamental differences between the magazine markets in the US vs here (subscription-based vs newsstand being a big one).Sounds logical.
It doesn't even have to be top players vs avg joes for editorial quality. Just compare video game mags to PC gaming mags and it's night and day. EGM and Gamefan would be tons of pretty pics and numbnut text. Half the pages were almost all pictures. A PC mag would have probably quadruple the text and fewer pics.
I understand that monetization models have changed in the digital age. Still, if a publisher or developer sends you review codes to play and review their product, while also promoting it, is that journalism?
I can't help but think that's more in line with professional critic/reviewer rather than journalist.
The term seems more appropriate for interviewing people within or who have ties to the gaming industry, covering incidents, or even writing about the development history of a game.
Don't post that shit here, it's maddening. My daughter at 6 years old had more awareness.Leaving this classic one here.
I don't know about the US but in my country video games magazines were an even bigger joke back in the days. There are some exceptions of course but overall, it was pretty pathetic and probably worse than today's websites.Game journalism died with print media/magazines when all the gamers moved on