The Problem with Games Journalism: Part One highly entertained and shocked me.
Of course there are writers out there who think they are above the rest. They are the last to admit that they cannot find a job as a writer, spending months unemployed sharing the cat food with their mangy pet. These are the prentenious writers who think one day they will be writing for the New York Times or having book readings like Truman Capote, drinking Burgundy with socialites, to realize that the only returned phone calls for a job is working as a game reviewer. Stuck on themselves thinking that they are much too qualified for this job, take it and will show up their editor. So they sit down with absolutely no clue on what steps they need to take in order to review a game. Has this person ever picked up a game controller? Probably not but they are intellectual enough, no need to worry.
As a result of these, I suppose over-qualified writers is the reviews are too much for gamers to understand. I am not saying that gamers are dumb by any means, it is the writers for their usage of language no one would use to describe game play who are the dumb ones. Not only that, but the article, I, Gamer by Leigh Alexander was beyond horrible. I was shocked by how she built herself up as this all-knowing person. Everything she writes is more important than what the Bible has to say. I think I may have thrown up a little bit in my mouth.
"Ladies and gentlemen, there is a world in which people do not know that Kotaku exists. And for the record, the GameStop employee, while he seemed perfectly knowledgeable about the titles in his store, doesn't know what GameSpot, IGN ,Edge or anything else of their ilk are, either." Alexander needs to be slapped in the face. A comment like this should cause an up-roar in the gaming world. I am someone who plays a lot of videogames and I do not even know of these sites. Just because you do sweetheart doesn't mean we should lower our standards. Yes I said that because you are not above any other game reviewer. They are all equal in their domain. But this woman needs to have a rude awakening and discover she will lose her following coming down on people like that.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
What if their pet is well-groomed? O_o
ReplyDeleteIn all seriousness though, your point is interesting as it describes the self-important english enthusiast described in another of the articles for the assigned readings. It would stand to reason that some of the ambitious of the gaming fans would be quick to join the bandwagon after they had finished their coursework. Perhaps your archnemesis fits that description to a tee.
Is it possible to be a good writer and try new things without coming off as pretentious? I know it's one thing I would worry about, as I like a nice, casual voice piece, but a literary critique or something a little more cerebral would be something I wouldn't mind reading as well. Just, not if it comes off a arrogant. Hard to quantify, I guess.
ReplyDeleteYou're right in that the holier-than-thou writing community needs to step down. While it is important for high-quality writing to remain in place, shooting down other reviewers and communities is definitely unnecessary. To be pretentious and create articles and reviews that are unreadable to the general audience serves no purpose but to boost the ego of the writer.
ReplyDeleteBut what if some of their audience want that higher level of writing? I get annoyed when people talk down to me, especially in game reviews when they act like nobody else would ever know how to properly play a particular game. I think there is value in the higher educated people writing about it, but I absolutely agree that directing that writing towards the 'lower class' of reviews is a waste of time and breath. Write for the audience you want, and let the rest write for theirs.
ReplyDeleteI greatly resent the characterizations of the article and the assumptions that simply because writing is elegant and intelligent that it is pretentious and the result of someone failing to swing a job for the New York Times; I write as best I can about the field I love because I feel that it deserves a better style of language, not because I want people to think I'm smart or something.
ReplyDeleteWhile I definitely take issues with genuinely pretentious and closed-off forms of writing, I find that a lot of the problem with it lies in the reader; an unwillingness to look up new words, an unwillingness to delve into new ideas, an unwillingness to actually THINK about the material. I'm not writing for that audience, and will not - I've consigned myself to a niche because its what I believe in, not because I think it sounds smarter.