No, but they should at least understand the rules of the sport. They should at least have more knowledge about the sport and its mechanics than a casual fan.
OF COURSE.
I didn't say any different...
No, but they should at least understand the rules of the sport. They should at least have more knowledge about the sport and its mechanics than a casual fan.
Yes, they should. Or at least they should be gamers. It's not a matter of ability, as much as passion and love for gaming.
Not all of us are or have that passion. Some even take pride in calling themselves out of the "gamer" group.
If any one of those worked for me, he'd have to find another job. No matter how good of a writer he is.
Outlets and publishers work within that system. It's their fault that Metacritic is used to determine which outlets get early access to games/whether development teams get bonuses.That's not a journalist fault... is gamers one.
A gamer should never trust on reviews before buying a game. As I always says: if you have doubts about a game, look some videos or streamings and take a desicion. Or read two or three reviewers you know and think like you about games.
If someone buy a game for the Metacritic score, that someone is not a good gamer.
Outlets and publishers work within that system. It's their fault that Metacritic is used to determine which outlets get early access to games/whether development teams get bonuses.
Yes, because I'm not that audience. Basically a person who can only play Civ 5 on Prince is not qualified to say whether a system or feature in the game is broken or not, simply because they don't understand them.Even if the vast majority of people actually playing the game and reading the review will likely play on the 'normal' setting?
They should at least know some of the norms of gaming in order for them to not waste time on small things. One example is TotalBiscuit, great speaking power and debater but poor gaming skills.
Creative intent is fine but I could imagine if a game was too difficult for a reviewer it would have an effect on the experience. But this is just hypothetical since I can't think of a time when that has happened.
Also the transparency of TotalBiscuit often openly stating: "I suck at this game, do not judge the game by how you see me playing it." And I enjoy hearing that. More reviewers should admit they suck.But his stuff is easier to gauge because you can watch the game and why he fails. Much easier to get an idea for yourself watching him.
But covering a sports team and serving as a beat reporter is different than reviewers critiquing video game content.OF COURSE.
I didn't say any different...
I'm curious - you would fire a skilled writer (a valuable, rare trait) over someone good at a particular type of game genre? One skill seems to be a bit easier to acquire.
There are always going to be assholes in any group who are outcasts for the sake of being outcasts, but that is a different thing to discuss. Reviewing games takes passion, but don't make that skill only your number #1 priority. There are other qualities to consider.
Good? No. Decent? Yes.
If you can't beat a game on normal don't review it.
Also the transparency of TotalBiscuit often openly stating: "I suck at this game, do not judge the game by how you see me playing it." And I enjoy hearing that. More reviewers should admit they suck.
A skilled writer usually researches and investigates what they are writing about. Even if they happened to be writing game reviews because of some act of God or Satan, we would not have many issues of that person running their mouth off about things they don't understand.I'm curious - you would fire a skilled writer (a valuable, rare trait) over someone good at a particular type of game genre? One skill seems to be a bit easier to acquire.
There are always going to be assholes in any group who are outcasts for the sake of being outcasts, but that is a different thing to discuss. Reviewing games takes passion, but don't make that skill only your number #1 priority. There are other qualities to consider.
They should have critical thinking skills.
They should be at very least competent and well informed about the genre they are writing about.
Every time I read someone reviewing a RPG without a clue of what Ultima VII, Torment or Baldur's Gate were, for instance, I feel like reading a movie critic who never heard of Citizen Kane or 2001 A Space Odyssey.
Someone with zero expertise, knowledge and credibility in the field he's writing about.
Eh, no thanks. I would rather read a good writer's oppinion on a game than a good gamer's poorly written one.
If a game sucks so bad that it couldn't be finished, it still warrants a review.
Also the transparency of TotalBiscuit often openly stating: "I suck at this game, do not judge the game by how you see me playing it." And I enjoy hearing that. More reviewers should admit they suck.
Good for you? It does something for me. It tells me that I can listen to their opinions on whether they're enjoying it (in spite of being terrible) and remember to ignore what the product on the screen seems to be showing.They do all the time. Doesn't mean shit to me.
Agreed. Especially when watching a review, it'd really be nice to know if what I'm seeing is representative of the difficulty I plan on playing at.SonyToo!™;130680083 said:I know GJ/reviewers are under payed but this and what difficulty setting they played would be useful.
They get payed to play and critique games for a living. Yes, they should be damn good gamers.
The correct answer. Also, they need to be on the consumer's side which is rare these days.
Yes, because I'm not that audience. Basically a person who can only play Civ 5 on Prince is not qualified to say whether a system or feature in the game is broken or not, simply because they don't understand them.
It's the same as a person who thinks free earbuds that come with their phones are "just fine" analyzing high-end gear made for audiophiles. If they can't tell the difference, their input becomes irrelevant.
Doesn't make a person better or worse, it's just the way it is. Reviews must serve at least one purpose, after all.
Got any actual stats to back up the claim that as a gamer's age increases, their skill level decreases?
Hard to argue with this and I don't think it's too much to ask forNo. Should a sports journalist be good at the sport their covering?
They need passion for the sport/game and knowledge.
Sites and magazines tend to have more than one reviewer on staff. Instead of hiring jacks of all trades, they could very well hire specialists instead. You could have a couple sports and FPS guys/girls, someone who knows action and fighting games, a JRPG and open world player, etc.But, on average, your average reviewer likely doesn't have the time to be "good" at any one kind of game. When you have to play a new AAA release every two weeks, you're never going to become great at any type of game.