Critiquing the Critics

"Everything is Amazing and no one is happy." -Louis CK

This blog is intended for those non contributing zeroes who fashion themselves as experts of the Gaming Industry. I have focused on Gaming Critics, however, much of this should apply to any critics, be they critics of books, movies, or any other medium. The fact is, the majority of critics spend a day tearing down what they couldn't create in a lifetime. As the saying goes, "Those who can, do. Those who can't, criticize." However, the following guide is designed to help these "experts" to become better at writing about this industry we all so love. My first piece of advice on being a critic is: Don't be one.

But if you insist:

1) Don't just write reviews. Write articles about the industry. If there is something wrong in the industry (ie the plethora of FPShooters) then write about that and explain how the problem would be rectified (a solution to the problem).

2) Write about what goes into reviewing a game. This may help you become a better reviewer because a) it makes you reflect on what you do and b) it helps define how you review the game.

3) Create a rubric for each genre of game you review before you review the games. (That way you are basing a game on its merits and not how it compares to something else you may have played.) Rubrics are also more objective. They hold you to guidelines that are previously set. Show or link the rubric to your review so that people understand where you get the idea that a game deserves what it deserves. It will also erase "system bias" since you have to use the same criteria for a game no matter what system it is on.

3a) By having a genre defining rubric a game like Deus Ex or Mass Effect won't be graded the same as a game like COD or Battlefield. It wouldn't make sense to rate Skyrim on the same grading system as Pixeljunk Shooters.

4) Reflect and admit that you may have bias. For instance, you may love FPShooters. You may loathe JRPGs. Admit the bias before reviewing the next JRPG you come across. Maybe, don't review it at all. Let someone who loves that type of game review it because they will be more knowledgeable. What is your expertise? Don't be afraid to show it. If you are a hard nosed RTStrategy player and have literally played almost every RTS, then chances are your opinions of RTStrategies are going to hold more weight with those who read them.

4a) Do you really want to be another "run of the mill" reviewer? Just another face/ voice in the already overcrowded arena of game critics? Read the reviews at gamesradar. Hell, read their stuff. Those guys really enjoy what they do.

5) Judge every game based on its merit alone. This is hard to do considering that you may want to compare Killzone 3 to GearsOW 3. But that won't make sense since they are completely different games other than being in the same genre. (Remember the whole "Halo Killer" crap?)

5a) This includes sequels. Especially sequels. There are sequels that far outstrip the originals. There are sequels that don't live up to the original. But in considering that, you are biasing your opinion against the game when that should just be a side note and not really mentioned at all except maybe to show your scores for both. (It might look like this: Uncharted 8.9/ Uncharted 2 9.6)

6) Again, getting away from the critic part. Write articles about the developers themselves. Write articles about the designers. EGM does this and does it well. Dan Hsu wrote a great piece about gaming journalists and how awful they behave at conventions. He wrote a piece about how to conduct yourself professionally. Hell, write an article about how much time and effort goes into making a game. This would give you and others insight into what it takes to really craft a fantastic game.

7) If you really want to stand out from the crowd. Stand out. Take gaming journalism in a much needed new direction. Write critiques of critics: Like the Lameness of Top 10 lists or What the hell a review score means anyway... there is no industry standard. Or an article clamoring for an industry standard. Or critiquing the use of Headline Trolls. You know those headlines that are designed to inflame just to get clicks on a website? Sometimes the article itself has NOTHING to do with the headline. Critique other journos that clearly have no knowledge; but instead of calling them out by name, call out all journalists for doing that: claiming knowledge when there is none (ie Kotaku's coverage of the PSN outage). Yahoo! Games published an article wherein the reviewer claimed PS3 controllers had be be bought new once the old ran out of charge.... no lie. It was absurd.

8)I would suggest that you go out and learn basic C and try to learn to create a few dots on the screen and animate them. Do that. See how long that takes to accomplish and skills required to do so. That might give you a glimpse into what it takes to get all those pixels moving at once.

9) This goes without saying: Enjoy what you do. When you find yourself reaching the point that you no longer enjoy writing about the industry (not always critiquing it) find something else to do.

9a) If you want an example of exactly how NOT to be a good, respected authority on gaming and this industry: look at what Jim Sterling does. You can find him at Destructoid. He is hard to miss. And he is what I refer to as a reviewing troll. His reviews ARE Trolling. He is the consummate douchewagon.

10) The coup de gras would be this: Write a series of articles profiling developers' favorite games. For example: I want to know what games the developers who created the Mass Effect series love to play. What are their favorites? What games really push the envelope for them? Developers are the true experts of this field. Their opinion is far more important than a gaggle of critics whose collective opinions are little more than a dung pile.