Divinity 2 - Review @ Game Observer

I'm probably your age...

I'm so sorry! :p

I also notice the "locker room" language and mentality of a lot of game reviews, and I appreciate it when reviewers offer something deeper than that. I don't think that's a matter of being an old fart. I think it's a matter of having taste. You know amateurish writing when you see it. But at the same time, it's the internet, and so I'm not bothered by it.

I used to subscribe to so many gaming mags. PC Gamer was my last... I dropped my subscription oh probably back in 2001... they were well along onto the MTV-ization train by then.

There is still one magazine I subscribe to, it's retro-gamer. It's a great magazine if you were alive during the times they write about. Their writing style captures that of the past era (circa 80s, early 90s) with very little to none of the MTV locker room trashy talk.
 
Joined
Oct 18, 2006
Messages
2,897
Location
Oregon
The quality of gaming journalism is particularly low at the moment, and I don't think I'd single out the US here. It's all over the place.

Eurogamer, for instance - which I assume is a european site, is one of the worst sites imaginable if you ask me. Completely ignorant and quite a bit of unnecessary hostility towards guiltless parties in several of their reviews. Nah, it's all crap these days :)
 
The quality of gaming journalism is particularly low at the moment, and I don't think I'd single out the US here. It's all over the place.

And, of course, it isn't just gaming either - as someone said in another thread 'anyone can be a game reviewer', so too can anyone be a journalist of any sort ... and the entire industry is sinking to meet that metric.
 
Joined
Oct 18, 2006
Messages
14,932
And, of course, it isn't just gaming either - as someone said in another thread 'anyone can be a game reviewer', so too can anyone be a journalist of any sort … and the entire industry is sinking to meet that metric.

The really scary part is that many people still trust reviewers, and for games that's something we can live with because it's subjective and just entertainment.

My main concern is that people generally trust the media, which constitutes a huge problem if journalism in general is in such a poor shape. I don't really have a way to verify what I read or perceive in the media, so I guess ignorance is bliss.

That said, I'm also one of the most sceptical people I know - so I basically don't trust anything I haven't witnessed personally, unless I really have no choice.
 
The really scary part is that many people still trust reviewers, and for games that's something we can live with because it's subjective and just entertainment.

Good game reviews are hard to come by. Once in a while I find one. Sometimes I find a review where I feel the critical points are ok, but there's so much trashy talk in the review it's difficult for me to get through it and after I make a mental note of the author's name and proceed to avoid that writer in the future.

Other reviews, even without trashy talk are horrible when the writer essentially bashes the game based mostly on perceptions of what that person feels the game should have been. There is a lot of this going on and it's even worse than the MTV trash talk problem.

The best reviews are those that primarily take into consideration the features of the game shown on the game's box (or in published advertisements by the developer/publisher) and then go down the list critiquing each of those features. Too many writers get caught up in the pre-release hype-hysteria and sometimes form strong opinions about what the game should be versus what it actually is. This type of thing might be ok between fans on various forums talking about the game, but in no way is this ok with so-called professional writers.

My main concern is that people generally trust the media, which constitutes a huge problem if journalism in general is in such a poor shape.

I try to keep my postings here strictly focused on gaming, but since somebody else widened the door in this thread, I'll chime in with my 2 cents.

Here in America the network broadcast news media and high profile print news sources (New York Times, Los Angeles Times, etc.) are in big trouble as viewership and subscription continue to nose dive and are now simply waiting for gravity to sink them totally as they circle the drain.

Why is this? I think the main reason is the rampant blending of hard news reporting with editorializing. Too many 'news' sources have either become owned by those with specific political agendas or have willingly become lobbyists for those with a political agendas.

Another major factor of course is the internet which in many cases can be far worse than broadcast or print news sources (and sometimes much much better).

Since 911, the world has become an increasingly hostile place since the times when I was growing up (late 70s to mid 90s). There is a lot of fear in the world and people have found out, if they are awake, that much of what they hear and read cannot be trusted at face value.

The irony is how so many broadcast media and print news companies continue on as their viewership and subscription rates reach new lows. It's a race to the bottom where some companies scratch their collective heads wondering why their financial performance is so bad while others are so entrenched in their political views that they seem to be simply choosing to go down with the ship preaching political ideals most people don't agree with.

I don't really have a way to verify what I read or perceive in the media, so I guess ignorance is bliss.

There is no way that you can personally experience the news that is happening all over the planet. The next best thing is reading… reading lot's and lot's of different news sources, especially on topics of importance to you. There is usually some truth in things you read. If you read enough different sources on a subject, that is the best you can do to have some hope of knowing the truth. It isn't perfect, but until human evolution allows for omnipresence, it's all we've got.

I don't think regular citizens of the world can have the luxury I enjoyed growing up in the late 70s and 80s… which is to shrug off national and international world events and sort of hope for the best. That is, afterall, exactly what my generation did and now look at the state of the world. If the up and coming generations don't get as informed as they can possibly be, I think the world is going to be a very tough place to live in - much tougher than it is now.

There are too many powerful people and powerful organizations that want nothing more than to create a world-wide caste system of haves and have nots. If your part of my generation, it's hard to believe because we grew up in a time where the idea of a middle-class was commonplace. The middle class here in America and all over the entire Western world is under direct attack.

I hope people wake up, because I really like playing computer games and talking about them in my free time... but if things get too extreme many people may not be able to even afford a $50 computer game let alone afford access to the internet or afford the time to sit around actually playing games and writing about them on forums like this one. That sounds out-there and unimaginable yet I believe it's a strong possible outcome the way things are headed right now.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Oct 18, 2006
Messages
2,897
Location
Oregon
Back
Top Bottom