Printable View
When I wrote "technical quality", I meant the quality of the writing techniques used in the process of creating the review, i.e. remembering not to split infinitives, avoiding run-on sentences, so on.
I'm not suggesting that all reviews need to conform to some classic essay format; personally, I'd be happy if reviewers just edited their copy before it was posted.
Stone: You expect too much...though whether they're enthusiast or pro, I agree.
I came back with a good-sized stash of magazines from E3, and I was exposed to writers I hadn't read before. As I recall, Greg Orlando from Xbox Nation stood out (he was the guy that demolished the PS2 on Daily Radar, for those that were fortunate enough to see that) - though I had seen his articles before. I think there was also a writer at Play - NOT Dave Halverson - who seemed technically proficient and very entertaining at the same time, although the issue overall was a bunch of gushing, fawning nonsense.
I think good grammar and usage and care in spelling and punctuation go hand-in-hand with enjoyable writing and go a long way in enriching the reader's experience, even when the reader is terrible at those things in his own writing.
I have composed a few internal memos on style since I came to TNL, but our writing, as bahn said, is evolving. Sometimes the Manual of Style is pushed aside in service of keeping a writer's authentic voice, but my religious zeal for correct English usage will not be denied.
We're still working it out.
Or replacing "them" :lol:
I'll buy that. Club-swinging Neanderthals who don't use proper grammar have no business writing for a living.Quote:
Originally posted by Stone
When I wrote "technical quality", I meant the quality of the writing techniques used in the process of creating the review, i.e. remembering not to split infinitives, avoiding run-on sentences, so on.
I'm not suggesting that all reviews need to conform to some classic essay format; personally, I'd be happy if reviewers just edited their copy before it was posted.
I dig Stone's idea. There has to be some level of quality control in place. Having one that is too strict is better than not having any at all. Having a system in place gives you a chance to refine and fine-tune it, whilst not having one in place can be disasterous.
Well, sure grammer and facts are good. Over used phrases and sayings are bad. I know I always try to stay away from them, unless I'm trying to make a point.
Something that hasn't been mentioned yet and I think deserves mentioning is word count. Print mag reviews have to be under a certain word limit, internet reviews do not.
That's why you have a six page GTA:VC review. Not having a word limit can lead to sloppy writing for sure, but trying to talk about every last damn detail of a game can do far more damage.
I'd like to think that a good editor can hammer any writer into shape.
That's a great point, and one of the key reasons that I like having my reviews be long. When I did reviews for my school's paper, I was limited to maybe 400 words, tops. Now, I don't have those boundaries, and the freedom allows me to explore games on a deeper level than I could with a 400 word review. Was I pushing it with a 3,000 word VC review? Probably, but quite a bit of that 3,000 words went to looking at the game from new perspectives, and seeing how it worked on multiple levels.
"I've been reminiscing about the past recently." - IGN GTA:VC Review.
That's the opening. Hysterical. I'm very much relieved that he wasn't reminiscing about the future. Recently, that is.
My anal retentive side disagrees. I may be nitpicking, but I think the most important thing is to make the reader WANT to play the game. You don't want to give too much away (and, as a reader, you don't want spoilers....right?), but you want to reveal just enough to leave the reader wanting more. As in "Aw man, I GOTTA play that!!" Tell too much, and the resulting enthusiasm might be lessened.Quote:
Originally posted by burgundy
I think the most important thing is to make the reader feel like he's played the game, even if he hasn't.