Many people think that the best profession is that of a gaming journalist. Play games and write articles about them, it’s interesting and simple. But in reality it turns out that it’s not quite that simple. Or even not at all easy..
Lately I’ve been seeing less and less glimpses of thought in articles. A clear, expressed thought that links the whole text together. There is a theme, sometimes a general idea flashes through, but most often it is either too amorphous or simply banal. What’s the problem? To answer this question, let’s look at how reviews are done.
So, the person completed the game, collected his thoughts, started typing the first sentences… Stop, stop, stop! Let’s rewind a little. The man just finished the game. Here we turn to psychology, because it will allow us to understand what is happening in our heads. Let’s use the standard thinking layout. At first – image. A person has created a holistic image of the game based on personal feelings. By the way, this is where the first rookie mistake lies*. An attempt to transfer an image into a text ends in complete failure – a review in the style of “what I see is what I say”. The listing of features and unexpected moments falls into a heap, as a result of which the reader does not get a holistic impression and the attempt to describe the game fails. But our hero does not make such a mistake and confidently proceeds to the next point – analysis. Analysis, in essence, is the decomposition of an image into its components, the study and comparison of each of the individual pieces and the beginning of the formation of a conclusion. But more on that later. While our reviewer is gutting a fresh corpse, I’ll tell you about another mistake that awaits an inexperienced reviewer. Under no circumstances should you stop with the analysis. And this, by the way, is what most inexperienced scribblers do. After all, it seems that the mental work has already been completed – just write it down and that’s it! This is where the subheadings “Gameplay, Sound, Story” etc come from.d. etc.n. Besides the fact that this often shows the flawedness of the analysis, its superficiality, the reader can also create a holistic image only with difficulty, and, as a rule, there are no thoughts in this sorting into shelves – a simple listing of advantages and disadvantages. Look, our ward has already overcome this stage! And now comes the most interesting and difficult part – synthesis. At this moment, the scattered pieces must merge again, becoming a whole image, but in a different form, in writing. But the most important thing is different – at the same moment a thought built on the basis of analysis is formed, at this moment the oddities noticed during the analysis find their explanations and appear in the text idea. The most important thing at this moment is to press on, to push to the limit, to draw all possible conclusions that are possible. Otherwise, you will end up with an amphora substance spread evenly throughout the text. Wow! Yes, the reviewer has already finished scribbling. I edited it a little, corrected it in several places, and is now sending it by e-mail. Let’s look at the result… Now, now, yeah, here it is!
Yes, this review clearly looks like https://wilddicecasino.co.uk/games/ a professional one, but has it avoided the mistakes that pen pros fall into?? Let’s see… Analysis of the pros and cons, digested through synthesis, there is. There is an idea. It’s okay, but wait a minute. The idea is not just there. It is confirmed by the very analysis of the features, which, in fact, is the core of the review. Amazing! However, let’s take a closer look at the idea, no, not so close, a magnifying glass will suffice. Let’s be clear that the idea is looking at the game from a slightly different perspective. Because she interesting, in contrast to the ideas in hundreds of related topics. And here we will return again to analysis, to that very second step on which most beginners and professionals stumble. The fact is that the analysis always comes from one position. Game, entertainment, work – call it what you want! The essence does not change, because for the vast majority of professional reviewers the object of review is not something big, they see it as flat as a table cover… not suspecting that the table can be walked around.
And this can and should be done. Seeing what seems hidden, seeing the deep mechanisms working inside every game, inside every involuntary symbol. This is what a real reviewer should do. Take the soul of the game into pieces, compare, draw conclusions, and then assemble it whole and unharmed in the text, in the text where the image of the game will be tightly mixed with your conclusions.
P.S. Yes, I wrote this, proudly looking from the height of my exorbitant experience as a reviewer. Three whole reviews, oh. You can shrug it off, you have every moral basis for this. But… maybe it’s better to think?
*In fact, one error in its pure form almost never occurs, they are always mixed and this one disappears quite quickly, giving way to an error at the analysis stage.
In order not to make a meaningless topic, I’m making it here. Get ready for a new, expanded on all fronts, review of you-know-what. My first attempt at an "in-depth" review.
