FirstInHell said:
This is exactly what I expected to happen. I knew the majority of GAF would only focus on the vocabulary criticisms and call into question my intelligence level. I hope he becomes a permanent member of the 1UP show since you guys love hearing him pontificate about high level game design theory. Myself on the other hand will pass.
Well, its not like you left anyone any other choice.
Let's start with your title - Dripping with angsty sarcasm.
Now your points:
His guest appearances on 1up Yours are probably the most boring thing that I have ever been subjected to. He constantly cuts off the other members of the podcast and dives into long winded lectures expounding his theories about such riveting topics like "art in games", "narrative" and "components of good game design". There is nothing wrong with these topics. However N'Gai speaks on them as if he is some visionary from high above instilling this great knowledge to all who listen. The things he talks about:
-Have been discussed ad nausem
-His viewpoints are not "new" in anyway. He is just reiterating what everyone already knows in a much more boring fashion
I don't think they have been discussed ad nauseum or that his viewpoints are old. The rest of 1UP Yours never attempts a cross-disciplinary approach to these issues. N'Gai's mainstream media background, as well as his previous stints as a music critic, cause him to want to frame issues in the context of existing, established media. This causes some of the arguments on 1UP Yours, but his approach is valid.
In essence, he is trying to port over the vernacular of music/film criticism to game industry issues. He isn't always right, but it is almost always interesting.
Reading this guy's blog is an exercise in pretension. I do not consider myself stupid, but his use of obscure vocabulary that completely disregards his reader demographic is insulting. I do not doubt that N'Gai knows this. Does the average person reading about videogames know what the words "epistolary" and "curmudgeon" mean? You can find obscure words like this littered in his blog posts and sprinkled in his incredibly boring guest appearances on 1up yours. A short while ago I was sent to a practical writing class. They went into the theory that there is a sweet spot to the grade level of your writing, once you go above this you come across as arrogant and condescending. Ask yourself why Readers Digest has been around for so long. I am not saying that everyone should post at a 3rd grade reading level littered with "luz", but it seems like he is trying really hard to use complex words to appear intelligent. To me it is smug and I see right through it.
Look at some headlines from his opinion pieces. They read like some boring college thesis that puts half of the auditorium to sleep.
N'Gai ultimately reports to the Newsweek editorial board. They expect a much higher level of writing than, say, 1UP. Not a slight on 1UP, but the audiences are different. You touch on this with respect to your Practical Writing class, but you make the rather obvious mistake of not recognizing there are different audiences even within the games category. Reader's Digest has been around for a very long time, but to call it even remotely literary is silly. Mass market enthusiast publications versus mainstream media (and Newsweek, while no Economist, is also not the Reader's Digest of news- USA Today) are written to different audiences. I don't see why you need to slight him for aiming higher.
Also, a point of order. Saying you learned about something in class, then turning around and calling someone pretentious, is bad form.
Pretentious is defined as "making claim to or creating an appearance of (often undeserved) importance or distinction". You are making claim via your educational background, and using that claim to bad mouth someone else.
Why do people treat him like some industry celebrity? Listen to this guy for five minutes and you will realize that his ego does not need to be fed anymore. Let's put this into perspective: He writes about videogames for Newsweek. Does the average Newsweek reader give a fuck about videogames? I have much more respect for people that write for EGM or other enthusiast publications. They understand their audience and do not treat them like a bunch of idiots who need to be lectured to (most of the time). The only reason why anyone in the industry pay any attention to this moron is because they hope to get some sort of mainstream exposure that Newsweek can provide. You could have an inanimate object blogging about games for Newsweek and I am sure game companies would still be banging down their door to take them out to dinner.
And it is here where you fundamentally miss the point. N'Gai isn't engaged in lecturing at all. He is trying to raise questions more than answer them. In many cases, being on the development side of things, I think that his background can be both a blessing and a curse when he proposes ideas, but they have never once come off as preachy or boring. At least to me.
The final thing I want to bring to your attention -
Does the average Newsweek reader give a fuck about videogames? I have much more respect for people that write for EGM or other enthusiast publications. They understand their audience and do not treat them like a bunch of idiots who need to be lectured to (most of the time).
You shouldn't be asking whether Newsweek readers care about games, you should be happy that Newsweek editors care about covering games. Games still exist in the critical ghetto. Enthusiast magazines assign reviews, which we assume to be objective, partially because we treat them as a) reviews of products instead of productions, and b) because there is no established critical background/vernacular for game review. As more mainstream publications become involved, their editorial boards will demand this sort of vernacular be developed and cauterized. This is a good thing. Gaming pubs are more like Consumer Reports than Ebert and the Sun-Times. I applaud N'Gai for recognizing this and trying to change it.
??