Is The Technical Quality of a Review's Writing Important?

[Mr_Furious]

It's REALLY rare to find a journalist who's also a gamer that's been around for longer than 5 years.

Gamer>Journalist

[skelly]

Not too rare. I know two fellows who've been writing in the industry since the 80s.

[UndeadKing]

Eh, I'm a "reviewer" and I am not a good writer. If you don't like it, don't read it. I don't write to get paid, nor do I do it for fun. I do it to possibly help someone out. If you are going to sit and moan that there are grammatical errors, then screw you. I don't ask for money from you to read my work, so you should be happy with what you get.

As for the topic at hand, I feel as long as the writing doesn't sink to sub-Gamefaqs quality, it is acceptable. Having a review in all caps, or done with loads of 1337 speak definitely detracts from the quality. However, if someone makes a small typo or misuses a word, I am not going to write the review off as worthless. Sure, it's nice to have a well writen, polished review, but as long as te general idea gets across, I'm fine with it.

[Mr_Furious]

Originally posted by BenT
Not too rare. I know two fellows who've been writing in the industry since the 80s.

From what I've read most of today's gaming journalists are young fellas that haven't been around long enough to enjoy the games of eons past (8-bit/16-bit or even earlier).

[Master]

For me, more important than anything else is a well developed prose that effectively captures the attention of the reader. Thats why I loved Gamefan, because the way it was written wasn't neccessarily the best format for learning about games, or even getting amped about a certain game, but it was enjoyable all the way through.

Reviews can be well written and flow wonderfully, but if the writer doesn't know crap about games, it doesn't matter a lick. For examples of this, check the reviews written for cnn.com or for any major non-gaming magazine, such as Playboy or Maxim. Good writing and style, zero quality content.

[sleeve]

I actually enjoy reading game reviews in the New York Times, MSNBC, and other non-industry publications. They judge the games by a different set of values than mainstream reviewers -- sometimes they'll rate a less-conventional RPG like Shadow Hearts above FFX, for example. Charles Herold (the NYT guy) has kind of a breezy style and he's kind of a gaming wuss, but he has a unique perspective. Steven Kent, the MSNBC writer, has had a lot of experience with games and has a pleasant, conversational style. Neither reviewer does a great job of telling you whether a game is actually good or not, but their opinions are still interesting.

[Ex Ranza]

Actually, I don't read and take stock in too many reviews any more, however technically proficient they may be... I usually just check out the opinions of other people at TNL, and factor that feedback into my purchasing decision.

[Tracer]

Steven Kent is great, I don't know why I forgot about him. Lots of experience that one has.

ºTracer

[Zenigata]

Just to clarify (if you were sort of referring to me UndeadKing), I don't mind if something isn't 100% grammatically correct (unless it's something official/professional, like a magazine, in which case I demand it), I just don't want to bother reading something if it's written like this:

"I liked the game, it was fun. The control was good. And the graphics. They were good too. The whole time I was playing I like "wwow this is fun". There really isn't anything too bad I can say about the game, meaning, I really like the game, and I'm telling you all you should buy it."


No |337, no caps, but still bad writing that I don't care to read.

[Jeremy]

As long as their writing is free of too many grammatical errors, and their opinion is expressed well in it, I don't really card. 1337 speak is horrid, I had to wade through a shit load of that on Monday when I did the review of the day scoring for GameFAQs.