What do you want to see in gaming journalism?

>>384871413
Nothing
Game journalism is dumb

Just tell me what the fucking game Is. Don't use buzzwords like "metroidvania". Be a gamer yourself.

I actually like Total biscuit because he does this, he might be an arrogant cunt outside of it but I think he's wtf is series is handy.

You shouldn't be allowed to put a review online unless you've played at least half of the game.

>>384871654
i haven't relied too heavily on game critics to determine whether or not i should buy a game, but are there any notable names that don't at least play half of the game they review. I've recently taken an interest in this sort of field, so i wouldn't know any names to stay away from

>>384871654
Even then, the rest of the game might be total fucking trash, or pick up and finish off really well.

I don't think they should review for every fucking game, they should take thier time and write.

>>384871413
I want to see it die.

File: 1445912820033.png (313KB, 762x758px) Image search: [Google]

313KB, 762x758px

>gaming journalism
>journalism

>>384871413
Nothing. I never read that shit and I'm content with the status quo.

>>384871413
Reviewers and journalists are kinda two different things, reviews just need to be well informed, journalism just needs to stick to actual news.

>>384871413
I pretty much just want to see the gaming media version of Red Letter Media.
>Relatable. When I watch RLM, their opinions are never overly pretencious, are arguing about bullshit nobody cares about
>In depth. RLM understands what they're talking about, and don't limit their reviews to "Summary. Movie is good/bad."
>Entertaining. Nuff said. They genuinely seem to enjoy making their content.

Bare minimum you should complete the game. I don't mean getting every autistic collectible on the achievements list but play through the main game. The vast majority of games are short (and this isn't a recent thing as much as the back in my day crowd would want you to believe).

I would also like more in-depth thinking rather than how surface level and consumerist everything appears. The amount journalists who called out Skyrims shifty auto quests was way too small.

>>384871413
Inwant to see them jump off a cliff.

>>384872531
Pretty much this.

And this is for journalist companies: Have one reviewer for a genre. Don't let a guy who HATES or only likes the base level of a genre review a game in that genre.

>>384871413
Reviews should use my format
https://steamcommunity.com/profiles/76561197970600723/recommended/239160/

>>384872531
Also a rating scale that forces you to commit. You can do 10 if you NEED to but this 7.6 is alright stuff is dumb. I've always used the 5 point scale.

Great
Good
Indifferent
Bad
Shit

File: miku too much content is BAD.jpg (47KB, 617x362px) Image search: [Google]

47KB, 617x362px

What encourages retards to review games as fast as possible without playing them?
These are literal who blogs with no readership.

>>384871413
It would be great if gaming journalism discussed games (and hardware) from a development perspective. Surface level analysis is mostly pointless because anyone can play or even watch a game being played and figure out that much on their own. So basic observation just becomes secondary marketing. The real interesting meat comes from learning about design elements, what had to happen to make a game get made, the links in development between different games - those things can make quite an impact but be mostly unknown to all but the dedicated digger. There are times when devs will come forward to share their stories or opinions but it's only a small piece of the pie and lot of what people know about game development is told in anecdotes. Here's something I found on /v/ a while back and found it rather informative:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JJW5OKbh0WA

Obviously you aren't going to get this level of detail from anyone other than the devs themselves, but it's way more information than you can get from some casual criticism. It could almost be called gaming history.

I don't care about reviews, I like analysis of genres or similar topics

If I want to hear about CoD I want to hear from someone who likes it why it's good and someone who hates it why it's bad, I don't need to read the exact same 8/10 bullet point presentation fifty times by fifty people who couldn't care less about it

Get an expert in each genre, there's enough evo contenders that could use work and provide much more interesting commentary on fighting games than Sally Mcbulldyke and her thesis on violence against women or Shillton Shilling and his revelations about shoryukens are hard man

I think it'd be cool to have some candid reviews written (maybe anonymously) by game staff maybe a few months down the line.

>>384871413
Records evelopment news
Maybe records personnel movement because studios the year they make a good game wont be the same as when they make a shit game and vice versa

Some admittedly quixotic attempt to evaluate games on a objective technical basis, which means less about fun and opinion on what makes it fun but whether graphics assets are good, sound is crisp, level/stage design demands constant engagement with the player without too much down time or repetition etc. etc.

each evaluation could an opinion section added on which probably won't even be that far removed from a regular forum post

>>384871536
Actually kind of what this guy said
For all the shit TB gets and brings on himself the core of his set has always been his WTF is? series which is pretty good

>>384873419
Hey, thanks a ton for this link. I don't even care what this thread was about, awesome video.

got anything else similar that's totally worth watching?

>>384877454
>anything else similar that's totally worth watching?

I like Lorerunner's Rumination analyses on YT

>>384871413
>Gaming journalism

how about they make it about the games instead of all sorts of other stuff.

>>384871654
I generally defend games journalists outside of IGN and Gamestop these days but unless it was really bad the game should be beaten fully on the main path right?

>>384871413
Change scale from 8-10 to 1-10.

>>384871413
As an example:
Rogue legacy is a game made in the style of the modern Castlevania, but also branches off into other areas:
2D levels with a huge map to explore and get lost within, which are divided into 5(7?) Themes but map tiles are random.
Level ups just show you the number of generations you have squandered in the quest if playing the game to it's consequential solution.
Rather than levelling up while actively playing it, you spend post mortem money into your fiefdom and unlock status, equipment and classes.
Equipment needs to be found as a blueprint first before you have to spend money on building them and unlocking possibilities to mod them with runes, which also need to be found with each run.
As you can guess, rogue legacy has created a map layout that is in the style of Castlevania and Metroid, paired with the grind of a roguelike, without the possibility to clear it in one go and unlock everything.
And that is not even a problem.
Rather, the gimmick or the feature of the game is, that you can not save much money in the game to post mortem, making advancements in the game difficult and if you are not the person to tolerate or even enjoy such a state, then the game might be come off as boring.
Many mini games are inside the big map giving you opportunities to either win a fortune for later R&D or lose everything and starting from the beginning.

Personal opinion:
I liked the game, but there were times where I had to take breaks and remember myself to continue playing it.
It made me aware that it becomes a slough I the middle of the game and in the end I was glad I was over it.
Maybe the developers should have refine their R&D system, give difficulty settings for players to ease them into their game.
Nonetheless, I accepted the game the way it is and could get some mild enjoyment out of it, maybe also due to my patience.
If you are patient, it might be your thing, else look elsewhere.

Stop using review scores;
Editing the review to save the critic from backlash or to cover up obvious shilling must be strictly prohibited, unless it's needed due to technical or factual mistakes;
Any influences from the games publisher (early copy, exclusive look) should be clearly displayed BEFORE the review itself;
Reviews based on full experience, none off that "beat first level on easy" bullshit;
More objectivity, less personal opinions;
Final verdict must not be affected by reviewer's "personal politics";
Reviewer's name with a link to his/her previous reviews must be clearly displayed before the review.
About everything I want from gaming "journalists"