Surfing the internet I often come across corporate funded websites that are "all inclusive" and review/promote/advertise games, where I used to find fans who just played games and thought it would be a service to write an honest opinion about it. So OK, I say, times have changed and I'm just acting like an old bitter man. Then I watch videos of gaming experiences/reviews/etc from people who are "in the know" and I just can't stand it. 99% percent of "journalists", "game reviewers", "video game hosts" and other imaginative positions, are fucking clueless. They have only recently started to play games it seems (PS1 being the earliest), or even if they did TOUCH a megadrive or an NES (God forbid anything older) they never had the skill to beat a game (back when games were real games, not just dragging your feet with hints, overpowering characters and the internet). So now I see these folks acting it out like they are the shit, the cream of gaming elite, gurus in the eyes of many!! While we're at it, not to be a sexist, but women too! Ladies who can't coordinate their fingers for shit and who consider themselves gamers because they have completed some generic 3D piss-easy game get jobs as "journalists" or even put in more creative positions. [Disclaimer: before you call me a chauvinistic pig or something, let it be known that there are women who are good gamers. Compared to good male gamers their ratio is much much lower however, sort of like what happens in motosports, but worse=p ] Anyway, to round things up, I m sick of seeing both unqualified men and women taking the jobs of decent dedicated gamers. People who have shown remarkable skill, patience and mastery of the digital gaming world, often at the expense of developing other skills. Just like any other popular money-pumping medium (see sports) I think we deserve better as consumers as well. When someone less qualified than myself reviews a game I can only laugh yet it doesn't help me form an informed opinion. Just to make my point more clear: I consider myself average in skill in gaming standards. However, both online and offline, I find myself in the top 10% in most cases which is unthinkable. I barely put any time and effort into games compared to others and I m in the top 10%, what gives?! Where have all the good gamers gone? :shrug:I mean, I have NEVER 1CCed a game in my life (fair enough, arcades weren't popular here but still) and many people actually have! Finally, the fact that gaming convention comparisons only go as far back as the PS2 makes me feel both old and weird. So many concepts were born before the "popular" gaming age, yet no one seems to make mention of them when reviewing or criticizing games. It's no wonder how so many boring games these days get high review scores. To me most current games offer nothing original in terms of fun, they're just repackaged, dumbed-down and expensive versions of mediocre challenges that aren't all that challenging. The "game" part of gaming has somehow gone soft and I often stand alone in conversations when I say this. It gives me that eerie feeling of belonging to a race almost extinctOH: PS: I m not making any discretions between hardcore and "casual" games, because games are games and each person is good at a different set of skills.
Strangely enough, I've felt the same way...your post mimics my thoughts almost exactly. Today's games journalists and programmers with their "I'm a geek and I'm cool---look at my trendy tattoos and piercings" appearances based all their gaming experiences on crappy PS1 games and this is precisely why we're seeing so many uninspired and dull games flooding the market now. It's too bad, and this probably why I find myself losing interest in the industry with each passing year.
Modern gaming journalism is nothing more than a different form of advertising. True "gamers" as you would call them are not the target demographic any more it seems, so the "hipsters" are hired to sell to their own kind.
I do agree with Barc0de. I mean i was watching a thing about Halo ODST and the women who was trying out the 10 minuite stated that she was a less-experienced gamer and was dying often which isn't a good thing IMO when i'm trying to gauge how good a game is. Are there many journalists who are real gamers that have played games since the NES/SMS when they were tough and not just the 3D stuff from the PS1 era onwards as i notice many reviewers going on about PS1/2 when doing comparisons but the never seem to go any further back. I am an average to less than average gamer but i've found myself with a bigger ratio of completed games vs games tried to complete on consoles like ps2 and Xbox than i ever did on say a Megadrive or SNES. it wasn't the fact that i was younger but becuase i found those harder to complete and many of them didn't come with in-game help telling you what to do and how to do it and back then i don't think there would have been as many ways to get hints and tips on the internet.
It likely has to do with the pay. Salaries for games journos are shit, mostly because there is no shortage of people that want to do it. Those that are good, go on to higher paying jobs elsewhere in the industry. As a result, you get lots of turnover with little in the way of experienced journos. There are some good old timers out there, but most are new to the field. -hl718
The second half explains the first. While gamers were learning to master games, the incompetents were learning how to get ahead in life without having any skill in anything. This phenomenon explains a lot about my beloved, beleaguered America, incidentally. But really: 99% of game buyers are clueless too, so this is actually just calibrating the message to the audience. And so we are all connected in the great circle of life!
I have similar experience. A few years ago (3 or 4 ) I made few record to Czech Twingalaxy like system and when I conected 2 weeks ago I was still in first Top 5 or 10 in most games. Not to mentioned that I spent not more then 2 hours with each game. Also when I was active there was 100 playing members and now there is about 1000 members playing.
My girlfriend kicks my ass at street fighter and most retro games. and shes only played since Last gen. And ive played retro games all my life so it goes to show your rule doesnt always apply
there's no such thing as a rule that always applies (unless you get some anal judge, but that's not our topic). I m not saying female gamers can't be good gamers, but statistically speaking men have had the torch of gaming for 30 years now, and for most of this time it is perceived as a male sport of sorts, so no surprise why the ratio of "good" gamers is in favour of men. What really surprises me however is the NES factor. I mean there are SO many people who had an NES and/or GB - they're old timers too, no? - so where did all THOSE people go? don't they play games anymore? Weren't they good enough to begin with? I can't imagine the whole NES empire built on the shoulder of butter-fingered individuals, there's bound to be some legends that have lived to this day. What I have noticed with most game designers is the following: They claim that doing X or Y is original, but games really boil down to their fun factor. I have found Tetris to be much more of an entertaining gaming experience than Assassin's Creed - a game that I struggled to get past the tutorial and within 5 minutes lost interest in. It felt like a job.
If you're referring to 30-40y old guys who played NES or SMS back at thje time, i think many of them qui video games during 90s or some years ago..That was a time video games was considered a geek thing,and to evolve in our society you had to get rid of that "childish hobby".SO i think many NES/SMS players quit video games years ago, and didn't get back into it by now... Now video games are better seen by society,but that wasn't the case in 90s...just my 2cents.
I just play games that I hear are fun or cool. I never pay attention to reviews, just word of mouth. I never even visit sites like IGN etc. Just play the games you and your friends like and forget everything else.
Don't forget that this only apply mostly to Europe. In states, japan or australia was playing games normal even when there was NES/SMS.
I'm assuming you're referring to online reviewers and journalists who post videos, or other such things you see on TV. Otherwise, I would start to wonder how you know how old these people are. Anyway, I'm surprised this hasn't been brought up yet, but when most companies are selecting their staff for TV and video personalities, it's 10% job knowledge and 90% looks. You gotta look pretty for the camera to work in front of the camera. From that point, you just have to be able to read off the cue cards or teleprompter. You also have to take into consideration that many companies can be "bought out" by publishers, and told to say certain things about the games they are reviewing. Tell me, how often have you heard critics say a game is brilliant and fun, only to try it out and almost vomit over your controller? Like any other business, gaming is an industry easily swayed by both money and our own corrupt sense of appearance. It's just the way the world works.
why read a review? Rent a game, if it sucks, dont get it. If its good, get it. Not hard to figure out XD The prob is that people trust other's un-needed opinion, rather than using common sense.
I used to read magazines and go to IGN when I was younger, but even then I didn't do what the reviewer said. I was a bargain hunter unless I really wanted the game when it came out (Arc The Lad collection & FF9). BUT websites like GIA.com (gamers intelligence agency) and RPGamer.com I'd go to and follow what they had to say about a game as they were true gamers writing about what they felt about the game..
