I've been wanting to write an article on destructoid (I signed up for a community blog...lots of good ones actually) but part of me feels it will be lost in all the noise.
Personally, the idea that those two reviewers have is idiotic to some degree. I find that NO ONE every talks about intent when describing a game. It's something I'm noticing more and more in the way most reviews are written (game, book, movie, whatever). Most games just want to be about the fun. Artsy games want to be artsy (and often pretentious). Some games try to be bad (Earth Defense Force...so awesome) and are great because of it. Some are merely tech demos (Doom 3, Crysis) and some are self indulgent (Metal Gear Solid).
Personally, if a reviewer to were to try and define the possible intent for a game (or at least define it in their own opinion) the review would instant gain context to the writer and reader.
Anywho, waaaaaaay off topic now, but since it's just me and you in here, who cares right? LOL
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2010-03-24 08:44 pm (UTC)From:Personally, the idea that those two reviewers have is idiotic to some degree. I find that NO ONE every talks about intent when describing a game. It's something I'm noticing more and more in the way most reviews are written (game, book, movie, whatever). Most games just want to be about the fun. Artsy games want to be artsy (and often pretentious). Some games try to be bad (Earth Defense Force...so awesome) and are great because of it. Some are merely tech demos (Doom 3, Crysis) and some are self indulgent (Metal Gear Solid).
Personally, if a reviewer to were to try and define the possible intent for a game (or at least define it in their own opinion) the review would instant gain context to the writer and reader.
Anywho, waaaaaaay off topic now, but since it's just me and you in here, who cares right? LOL