Task 6 – Games, previews, reviews, commentary and lies

Games, previews, reviews, commentary and lies
There are many problems which reviewers can come across and face when looking at magazines newspapers, journals and etc... For example when a game company announces that they will be launching a new product or making changes to their existing products and etc... It is straight away made public and the reviews may and will be disappointed or existing on the other hand with what is happening and the new occurrences. Game journalists can only try and do so much to tell all of those game players how the game may be and this can be telling them that the game is, fantastic, the can do such and such things, they can change such things around in the game, they can play online, they can. However on the other hand they can not tell or be able to have much influence on how if the individual player with enjoy any game as different people have their own preferable tastes. For example I may enjoy action fighting game like Black Cops that my friends or brothers may not. When new games are released to the market existing customers wait for hour seven sometimes in the cold and outside camping to be the firsts once to get hold of this new gate or game, even through customers do not know what to expect from the new game.

A famous study which had occurred through observation when journalist Kireon Gillen from the New Games Journalism (NGJ) is that it is essential for journalist when they are investigating about a game to not talk about the game its self but to talk about how they felt when they was using the game them self’s. This is all about the journalists personal experiences which will help players understand why he felt such a way and therefore gives a better image of the game. Talking about what features and thing you can do in a game, players can get hold of this through the booklet that is attached to the game which will go against the fact of having game journalists.

I believe for journalists to engage with the reads an idea would be writing articles as in first person, using testimonials which is very affective and etc... when we look at how journalists are doing some agree that the NGJ is working on the other hand there are writers which will go against and criticise that NGJ is actually maybe but performing as well leading to poor journalism and loss of objectivity so not meeting a journalists needs which may need changes to be mad. On the other hand from a personal view I would have to go against this statement and say that yes NGJ seems to be very effective from what I have read and gathered.

Finally looking at my self and how I feel my writing form is, I believe that I will need to work on my writing which will benefit me in the future, doing so this will then mean that I can value objectivity and or subjectivity.