Should reviewers be good at games or is it possible to write

>>389417121
I think it's theoretically possible for a sufficiently observant and thoughtful person to be a good game critic without actually being skilled but probably not something you'd ever actually see.

The best reviewers should generally:
> have some fucking brains, be articulate and not have any noticeable personality or hygiene issues
> have a broad body of gaming knowledge, ideally in the genre and series in particular
> have a bit of skill
> be able to clearly relate observations about a reviewed game to readers/viewers of varying levels of familiarity with the genre, introducing key concepts in a natural and unobtrusive way

However, most people with these sets of talents won't waste their time in vidya "journalism".

Skills like reflexes don't matter at all, but they need to be smart enough to quickly learn gameplay mechanics and how they work with the game.

Reviewers these days don't even get 2 hours into the games they review nowadays, so it really doesn't matter.

As long as they can differentiate the games shortcomings from their own it's not really a problem. Though I dont see how you cant even be half decent when you play them for a living?

I dont know about you guys but at this point a sort of baseline skill level pretty much transfers to every game I play once I figure out what the button/key layout is, unless it's something totally new to me. I can't imagine how the fuck a video game journalist can struggle with something so familiar as a 2D platformer.

>>389417121
>Seems like most developers, journalists and casual players are leaning towards the camp that says no skill is required ("Should film critics be filmmakers too?")

A real film critic would be very close to a filmmaker. Criticism is all about representing something better from the future and building a bridge to it (this is the gist of constructive criticism).

If a game player can't even perform basic tasks in a game without smashing the game's appearance, how is he supposed to anticipate the next best incarnation of that game? When someone is driving a high performance automobile (not the best comparison but it works), his skill will determine what even shows up in the writing. He'll be able to tell you what the performance is REALLY like on the tightest turns and such. Someone who is worse will simply have less to tell you. The same goes with game critics, who are basically admitting to being uncreative trailer-trash when they think their skill level doesn't matter.

Also, little known fact, you can be a shit writer and write a great game review. Anyone that wants to act like you can just be a good writer is a retard, because if you can't even hold the game controller in your hands you won't have a thing to say about it.

>>389418367

I feel the same way. I think the last game that got me feeling like I never played a game before was Demon Souls, because the controller layout was so foreign to me. Even that, though, in 30 minutes ~ one hour I had already completely got over the learning curve.

File: 1354780304527.jpg (40KB, 320x240px) Image search: [Google]

40KB, 320x240px

>>389419505
For me Pyre really did it this year.
I have like 27 hours of playtime and I'm starting to be not totally shit.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/erikkain/2012/07/28/the-real-problem-with-video-game-reviews/#2d8fe5db4b37

Article was written in 2012; a blog piece, but good enough to get my point across. Games take too much time to review in the current format. Games need continual reviews. The perfect site for reading game reviews would be one with many writers, sectioned into different genres, so that they can be experts in their genre and have the right amount of time given to knowing the game while also having the right amount of time to properly criticize it, AND they have the opportunity to go back and add on to the review over time.

Games take time to play, they should take time to be reviewed by someone who has the time to do it right.

>>389417121

https://www.gamespot.com/forums/system-wars-314159282/dean-takahashi-certified-genius-amends-negative-ma-26137357/

>same shithead who played cuphead like some 4 year old who just started to play video games
>Does not know how to play ME, call it shit.
>backtracks once he realizes it's an RPG.
>has 2 decades of experience, APPARENTLY

yes. yes, it helps to actually have some basic reading and motor skills to review vidya. because otherwise, you may as well take every anon's word on why a game is shit, despite them never having played it.

>Should film critics be filmmakers too?
shit comparison. you can tell whether a film's shit without needing to be a filmmaker. you can know how crappy a food is without needing to be a master chef.

>>389420335

For that to work, though, they'd also have to have people doing the technical reviews on day 1 as well, since that's a huge part of why people want reviews in the first place. They want to know if it works on day 1, like a toy or an appliance.

So you'd have to have one dealing with tech (like Digital Foundry) for day 1 and one dealing with the art aspect of it (that could keep updating the review as they play, sorta like IGN's review in progress).

>>389420818
Film is 97% subjective, though. Even games are less subjective, since some tech problems are objectively bad for the overall interactive experience (erratic fps, bugs etc).