Task 5. Its early and I'm ready for some gaming

Its early this Friday morn and I want to get out and get the new DBZ:Tenkaichi 2 which means I need to have a free afternoon to play it. (Thank god for part exchange I couldn’t get it otherwise) So its blog time folks.

The first link shows games journalism as a manic rush to produce the magazine in time therefore the content is somewhat lacking. It also highlights the area that due to the lack of time they don’t write about anything interesting and the underlying want to do their job (I guess) makes them want to write something decent about something interesting. However I think this is slightly over critical. Personally I like reading games reviews and some are very aware of more than just graphics and game play. But I do agree that reviewing in the past seemed much more in depth than what is shown in today’s magazines, which might explain why I haven’t bought a games magazine in a year. This shows how money is much more a driving factor to the industry than quality assurance and just getting the issue out on shelves is proving much more important than the actual content.

The second link I read was an amateur review about project gotham racing. Now I know this sounds a bit controversial but in true xbox style “make it look pretty and no one will notice that its rubbish” seems to have this guy hook line and sinker. He seems totally fixated on the visual effects and much less on the actual game play and features. But this is expected as people not in the business will obviously notice the graphics before the immersive story or intuitive game play as it’s the most obvious attribute to a game.

The ranking system of games I believe only gives us a partial insight in basic areas like sounds, graphics, game play and longevity. A game has a very personal reviewing system. Its like art not everyone will like the same thing in the same ways. Like me I’m very storyline orientated while someone else might play for the adrenaline rush or live action. So I think a subjective reviewing system can only be used as a guide for the masses. While this objective ranking system gives a much more personal view and it would allow like minded players to realise whether they would like the game much more accurately. But for this to appeal to all audiences you would need each type of gamer to review the same game, which is greatly impractical in a business sense.

New games journalism seems really interesting as this offers the objective reviewing rather than subjective and as my own writing seems to match this reviewing system it allows me to translate games reviews much more clearly. Also gaming is a very personal thing; lots of stories are made and linked to certain games. Like Final Fantasy 7 for me that turned one of my enemies into one of my best friends. So I think games for some people play a much higher role than just good or bad. It’s linked to experiences, good or bad, and similar to music it may invoke certain feelings when playing certain games experiencing those nostalgic stories when you played a game originally. So I think NGJ may insight us into a different reviewing system for gaming and I for one will embrace it.