It’s like someone whose trained for years as an actor doing Shakespeare and studying Pinter and the playwright giants, yet can only get a job as a childrens entertainer doing parties, but that doesn’t stop him doing 30 minute monologues from Landscape to a bunch of 8 year olds. Its Gamespot, if i go to Gamespot i want the review equivalent of fast food. If I want sociopolitical critique of the Japanese interpretation of Western stereotypes I’d read one of the columns in the giant pile of Edge magazines I have in the loo.
Or it is just a review, which is an essay describing one individual’s personal experience and reaction to the game. Thankfully there is a cornucopia of reviews to choose from so everyone can find the source that best fits their confirmation bias.
Also thankfully, reviews are not forced upon unwilling audiences like your children’s entertainer analogy.
-Todd
Denon A-4x Speakers.
by someone who left Gamespot for a job at What Hi-Fi.
Upon entering the room I note to my disgust, that we are all men, no women are present. Quite how the audio equipment media industry can live with itself I don’t know. The man from Denon demonstrates the new speaker, and I note the heavy lines, muscular build, dominating dials and switches, with an aggressive cone in violent shade of grey, erupting from the table in a phallic manner. The misogynerd neckbeard vermin around me ask about some technical nonsense so they know where to put it their stupid basements, and my question on how many women were on the design team was ignored.
Denon A-4x Speakers
Looks - 1/10
Sound - N/A
Bass response - Irrelevant
Mid Range - Don’t care.
Tweeter range - Not interested.
Overall - 1/10
Oppressive engineering, the only reason Denon sell well is you so called audiophile scum keep buying it. Please check out the new #AudiophilesMustDie tag created by the reviewers here at What Hi-Fi.
It’s a silly argument, though - “You’re not perfect, therefore, anything you do that isn’t purely self-interest is trivial/irrelevant/hypocritical”.
None of us are perfect, and that doesn’t invalidate efforts of folks across the board to advocate or work towards a world that’s more to their liking.
Between all the demands of work/family/education/sleep/somebody-is-wrong-on-the-internet I think it is great that so many people actually volunteer/donate/activism-of-your-choice.
RickH
2014
I think Play has a point, though. It’s the reviewer’s job to know his audience, not the audience’s job to live up to the reviewer’s expectations.
Case
2015
Pauline Kael and Roger Ebert would beg to differ.
Tom Chick’s most recent review (Planetary Annihilation) has a comments section that is once again filled with vitriol, conflict, and false accusations. Did Tom not know his audience or did he just articulate his personal experience and reaction to the game which unfortunately upset a vocal minority?
-Todd
Honestly, reading this thread has made me realize that there are some really horrible human beings that post on QT3.
TurinTur
2018
Because the game has barely been reviewed in any other site, it has been linked as a review to read in other forums that aren’t his normal audience, including hardcore fans of the game (whom, surprise, didn’t love the negative tone). If they would have another 20 reviews to read, they could pick and choose and disregard Tom’s opinions easily, but because it’s basically the only review, they can’t ignore it.
sharaleo
2019
See, one of the trends running through this thread is the propensity of people to call others names or otherwise label them based on a dissenting opinion. Thanks for contributing.
Internet forums are probably not ideal places to have these discussions (though better than twitter), so unfortunately people too easily fall into hyperbole in their arguments in order to get a point across with minimum word count (the TL:DR effect). That does not mean they are horrible people.
Sadly, the last couple of pages of this thread have begun to veer bit to far into the realm of ‘personal attack’.
Exactly. This is a similar situation to #gamergate groups seeking out and identifying reviews that outrage them and linking to them within their own circles to help pile on the vitriol.
Also I am not interested in Tom’s writing being influenced by a perception of audience–normal or otherwise. I know writers cannot completely compartmentalize, but I prefer as pure a distillation of Tom’s experience (or any reviewer’s experience) of a game without having him adjust the final product to match a given audience which has amorphous boundaries and is ever changing.
-Todd
Reemul
2021
The fact you think you get this from reading a few posts on a forum says more about you than those you judge.
Let’s be honest there are assholes everywhere in life, I’ve met them everywhere, some people will even think you are one or I am one.
My wife is catholic, my children are brought up catholic I am not. If i took offense at every comment re religion I may think every other person is a horrible, small minded asshole, instead I realise people have different beliefs, opinions etc and move on with it.
Still I could easily post an all covering, but naming none post like yours that makes me seem superior.
Or you could actually post who, why and allow them a chance to defend themselves or even prove yourself correct and they are horrible people, still as long as you feel good about your post all is well with the world.
Alstein
2022
Tom’s reviews do have a tendency to cause outrage, but usually it’s from publishers not the public.
I agree with this review, and its why the Uber folks have made my do not buy from in future list after this and SMNC.
I know good folks on both sides of this argument, who are not speaking to each other at all due to this. I’m just afraid each side is sinking into their own echo chamber- you need your opinions challenged.
magnet
2023
Sarkeesian’s reviews have a wide audience that appreciates her work, as evidenced by the success of her kickstarter. Game journalists are naturally trying to capture the same audience.
If PWK can amass a similar following with his stereo reviews, then he should keep writing them.
sharaleo
2024
Correction, the successful KS was based on an audience that appreciated the potential of her work! ;)
Though that might be splitting hairs for all intents and purposes.
RickH
2025
Tom’s reviews on his site are from the perspective of a self-employed guy writing what he wants. His site, his rules.
I would assume that does not apply to a Gamespot reviewer, who is most likely an employee or a freelancer. And I would also assume that Gamespot would have a style guide and review policies to be followed. But maybe I’m wrong, editors and their responsibilities appear to be the first things to get cut when the belt-tightening is required.
Nesrie
2026
We’ve discussed Roger Ebert in the past, and not just because he made an unfortunate comment about games. I don’t think Gaming will ever get a someone like that in the industry. I am not sure movies will either, but at least they have a huge amount of reviews, and they don’t all sound the same. It’s eerie when the reviews in gaming almost parrot each other. I don’t see eye to eye with what Tom enjoys out of games, but I do appreciate that occasionally he bucks the trend.
I think the only time I’ve ever accused a reviewer of anything is when they wrote about something that is not in the game… as in they spoke about a feature that was labeled on some box, or clearly didn’t play that part of the game to know it was not implemented like they think it is. Even then it was not a personal attack so much as it sounds like you didn’t play some of this game, or you would know that there’s no fighting in this MMO for resources, everyone gets it.
I don’t get the anger against reviewers, even the ones i disagree with. Some of my favorite series have never topped 6 or 7 scores for years. I just read the reviews for key remarks and issues, ignoring the parts that I always found charming about the game… such was when the Settlers just a slow, sit back and relax builder.
RickH
2027
Well. Did Kael’s or Ebert’s reviews actually have much of an impact? (does ANY reviewer? I know they’d like to think so…) From this outsider’s perspective, I’m not so sure.
Kael made her bones as a contrarian (According to Stein, “I [fired her] months later after she kept panning every commercial movie from Lawrence of Arabia and Dr. Zhivago to The Pawnbroker and A Hard Day’s Night.”), and I’m pretty sure she didn’t invent the intellegencia looking down on the masses, she just merchandised it. She found a home at the New Yorker, and they marched together into high-minded, unreadable obscurity, accompanied by a few amusing cartoons. The precence of a laudatory quote from Owen Gleiberman on the Wiki doesn’t help, either. I find him an arrogant, self-obsessed twit who has come to loathe the medium that he covers and would rather talk about himself and what he thinks. If he’s for it, I’m pretty damn sure it’s useless.
And then there’s Ebert, who I find a more interesting person. Anyone who gets out there and actually works in the medium has my respect, even if it’s script for a Russ Meyer cheapie. More than most of those who would judge for a living. But is he a household name thanks to his film reviews, or his TV show? And if there was ever a medium that did not allow its performers to challenge the sensibilities of its audience it’s TV. The great homogenizer. Sweaters, thumbs, and arguments. (also, I found Ebert was way too easily swayed in his opinions by the presence of a pretty girl in the cast)
Did I like Ebert’s public persona? Sure, the interplay with Siskel was entertaining. Did I ever feel like I was being talked down to by Ebert? No, which was my original thesis. And was the TV show worth watching after Siskel’s passing? No. Roeper was a tedious lightweight who had nothing to say. Ebert was half of something successful, which is better than most of us get out of life.
You are probably right about this. I often forget about that editorial intervention since I stopped reading the big sites long ago and gravitated to smaller operations like QT3. They are also worse for it as well. I would prefer a distinctive voice and interesting writing even if I disagree with the assessment.
-Todd
flyinj
2029
What is happening now is an inevitable growing pain of an industry that is becoming more than it’s original core demographic. It had been decades in the making.
Gaming is now dividing into two camps- status-quo and critical critique. Like I said earlier, I believe the best course of action and one which will most likely result from this are media outlets that cater to both groups.
A Fox-news-esque status-quo media for the people that want things to remain the same, and a more inclusive and critical media for those that want to move forward with the medium.
