I might start reviewing games

[DimensionWarped]

and honest professional reviews.

Have you read a game reviewing magazine lately? Or ever for that matter? The reviews aren't even worth looking at. They are less than worthless. Seriously, the entirety of reviews as a type of writing falls below that of fan-fiction.

[Pheonix Gamma]

Have you read a game reviewing magazine lately? Or ever for that matter? The reviews aren't even worth looking at. They are less than worthless. Seriously, the entirety of reviews as a type of writing falls below that of fan-fiction.

Which reviews are you reading? You're just making generalizations.

[DimensionWarped]

Try anything in Game Informer... which is just about the only magazine left that hasn't tanked. While we are at it, throw in the vast majority of web-based game review sites.

Making generalizations isn't a bad thing when the media in question is generally the same... bird-cage lining material.

[Pheonix Gamma]

Try anything in Game Informer... which is just about the only magazine left that hasn't tanked. While we are at it, throw in the vast majority of web-based game review sites.

GameInformer is only alive because of Gamestop. It's shit. EGM had the three man reviews, so a lot of the time, you'd see them arguing about different aspects of the game, and you'd get three different scores.

GameTrailers also has superb video reviews that show and tell very effectively.

Finally, you've got the blogs, like Destructoid, Joystiq, Kotaku, etc., which don't have any kind of agenda to act on or notoriety to get bribed by higher ups, Mr. Tin Foil Hat. Other sites, like 1UP and GamesRadar, and more popular, but still make an honest and constant effort to connect with the readers through blogs, podcasts, etc., to explain their reviews a little more personally, so that they know "hey, we really put a lot of thought into this for you guys".

And really, if you can't trust videos, blogs, and carefully organized reviews from respected members of the industry, some of whom have gone on to actually work on games themselves, then who's to say you can trust anyone?

Hell, I might be a robot trying to lure you into a false sense of security so that I can suck your brain when you go to sleep tonight.

Making generalizations isn't a bad thing

It is if you're trying to make an argument.

[DimensionWarped]

Video reviews aren't writing and thus fall out of classification. And again, if the whole point of the argument is to classify an entire category of writing as garbage, then generalizations aren't just not a bad thing, they are the point.

And just because it isn't biased doesn't make it good writing. It's still just arbitrary discussion and again, my gripe stands. They contribute nothing, they are scarcely entertaining, and they just plain don't require any grasp on writing to make. More creativity goes into a bad fanfic than into a good review. And that says a lot.

[Pheonix Gamma]

Video reviews aren't writing and thus fall out of classification.

The words are prewritten and are posted on the site, seperate from the video. They just have a guy read it and mix some clips with it.

And again, if the whole point of the argument is to classify an entire category of writing as garbage, then generalizations aren't just not a bad thing, they are the point.

No, they're fallacies.

And just because it isn't biased doesn't make it good writing. It's still just arbitrary discussion and again, my gripe stands. They contribute nothing, they are scarcely entertaining, and they just plain don't require any grasp on writing to make. More creativity goes into a bad fanfic than into a good review. And that says a lot.

They aren't supposed to entertain. They're supposed to inform so that you can decide if you want to spend the money on a purchase or not. If the person writing can effectively convey the mechanics of the game while expressing his thoughts on what worked well/poorly, then it's well written, and fulfills its purpose, much like an essay documenting the findings of an experiment and drawing conclusions. It's not literature, but it's not supposed to be.

[DimensionWarped]

The words are prewritten and are posted on the site, seperate from the video. They just have a guy read it and mix some clips with it.

No, they're fallacies.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_fallacies#Faulty_generalizations

See, it's an amateur mistake to assume that all generalizations are falacies. Actually, you could even say it's a self-contradicting paradox. See, it's a faulty generalization to say that all generalizations are falacies. Anyway, looking at that list you'll probably realize that the existence of fallacies of generalization is enough to say that ergo, there are generalizations which aren't falacies.

They aren't supposed to entertain. They're supposed to inform so that you can decide if you want to spend the money on a purchase or not. If the person writing can effectively convey the mechanics of the game while expressing his thoughts on what worked well/poorly, then it's well written, and fulfills its purpose, much like an essay documenting the findings of an experiment and drawing conclusions. It's not literature, but it's not supposed to be.

Which is why I say people shouldn't talk about them as if they are literature.

And really, they are the lowest form of writing. They are actually below adverts when it comes to the creative process.

[Pheonix Gamma]

See, it's an amateur mistake to assume that all generalizations are falacies. Actually, you could even say it's a self-contradicting paradox. See, it's a faulty generalization to say that all generalizations are falacies. Anyway, looking at that list you'll probably realize that the existence of fallacies of generalization is enough to say that ergo, there are generalizations which aren't falacies.

Yes, but your generalizations are. You sited GameInformer and said "well, all reviews are poop".

And really, they are the lowest form of writing. They are actually below adverts when it comes to the creative process.

You can't be serious. And you just told me videos and reviews can't be compared. Unless there are text-only ads with no visuals or sounds, which only exist as lumps of text. But since you decided we can compare them again:

Some guy sits down and explains his experience with a game, a movie, an album, etc. He recounts what happened, tells you his opinion, and recommends it (or not).

An ad comes on TV. It tells you there's a movie starring Tom Cruise, and that it's going to be really exciting. Doesn't tell you why; just take their word for it. Cue title, End ad.

You can't seriously insist the latter is better writing. I mean, I know you're the same person who insisted that you can't have the opinion that Super Paper Mario was good and that it was absolute fact that it was bad, but even you should realize that the review takes more time and effort, and is way more effective at telling you what to expect from a form of entertainment.

And why are you trying to rank everything anyways? If everything in life was supposed to be ranked, God would have just put a number on everything and have that be the definitive ranking of everything ever made ever.

inb4 argument about God's existence. He's real. He told me so in a dream.

[DimensionWarped]

Correction, I also included pretty much every major internet publication. And it's hardly my fault if EGM died (not that they were particularly exempt from being trite garbage either mind you, I simply didn't read them as often and I certainly don't read them as often now).

As for what I said, I didn't say that videos and reviews can't be compared, I said that I wasn't using them as part of the classification. What you have there is a strawman. When I'm talking about the "lowest form of writing", I can't very well talk about acting and direction of videos now can I?

And I maintain by the way that Super Paper Mario was a game that was terrible and had no idea what the fuck it wanted to be (and thus ended up being less of a game and more of an interactive joke book)

[Pheonix Gamma]

Oh, okay. Reviews are the worst thing ever, and no body has ever taken anything useful from them. No one ever based purchases or started discussions on them. No one likes reading them. No one can think Super Paper Mario is good, and no one can have an opinion different from yours.

Next time I eat food, watch a movie, play a game, read a book, or experience anything, I'll make sure to ask you if my opinion is right or not.

[ila]

PG, DW, I love both of you dearly, but ehh... fe thuck?

I'd rather you guys agree to disagree so we can all be happy. Besides I talk to both of you on AIM on a regular basis so I'd rather we all remain happy.

[Cyber Rat]

Have you read a game reviewing magazine lately? Or ever for that matter? The reviews aren't even worth looking at. They are less than worthless. Seriously, the entirety of reviews as a type of writing falls below that of fan-fiction.

Yes, I have, I write for one, and I am aware who is given a pen and a paper to write down their opinion, and that there are some good writers in that sea of clusterfucks.

Now, considering your theory, I will assume that:

1) Poetry is the lowest form of writing, considering all the wannabe poets posting on the Internet, Facebook statuses, and whatnot.

2) I will also consider drama the lowest form of writing, since Hollywood sprouts only 1 good script every 20.

3) By the way, all those fantasy books in the bookstore I saw are pretty bleak... Prose bites the dust...

4) I've also seen a lot of crappy Sonic fangames based off Next Gen and Unleashed, being posted here and on Youtube. Enjoy the lowest form of game development, everyone.

5) And has anyone read Internet forums lately (not only this one)? The stupidity and poor spelling on them is disturbing. I have no idea why we waste our time writing forum posts.

tl;dr

90% of everything is crap. 90% of books, movies, music, reviews, notes, lego constructions, everything is crap. And it's not crappy because of the genre or form itself, but because of the people who don't know two shits about it. I have no idea where that 'lowest form of writing' came from, but it's so poorly backed up and unfounded, that you really surprised me, DW.

[Eminence]

Lowest form of writing? The arguments going on within this thread! (rimshot)

There are certain times when you need to learn to bite the bullet. All in a hope NOT to alienate those around you.

You guys are obviously opinionated on the side of which you are arguing. However whichever one of you ends up feeling like they've won this argument. Whilst stroking ones ego, you've also been a nuisance towards:

1.) The original poster. You've completely hi-jacked his thread. Replacing his original attempt (although bleak) at reviews.

2.) The people who simply don't care. (In this case the majority of the board.) Many of us don't care for petty drama over technicalities, such as "the lowest form of art".

I know I have little to no throwing power around here. But! It's simply a suggestion that you continue this little feud via:

-Personal Messages

-Smoke Signals

-Etc.

Feel free to let us know who wins.

kthxbi

[DimensionWarped]

In the case of reviews, it isn't just 90%. I have read hundreds, if not thousands of reviews, and not one of them has left me truly more informed about the subject matter than when I started. None of them have ever covered the nuances of an activity in a way that could be considered meaningful analysis. It's just idle banter written for a magazine or an ezine targeted at teenage gamers.

I'm not making an argument and simply ignoring the exceptions, I'm saying outright that I am aware of nothing that could be called an exception. And I'm certainly not seeing any examples being shoved in my face of reviews that actually do accomplish something... at least, not unless they are in actuality a sarcastic theatrical cut and paste comedy play. Fundamentally different in both genre and execution from a written review.

The only review that matters these days is the combined weight of gamerankings and metacritic scores. And the only reason those matter is because they help you pick out absolute duds. Most game review sites have dwindling web traffic, most magazines have gone out of print, and pretty much all of those tv review shows are dead or dying.

As for hijacking his thread, who cares? If he wants people to talk about his reviews he should spend more than two minutes writing them. Also, this isn't really writing. It's more like talking. At least in terms of presentation and expectations.

And one more thing, it's kthxbai, not kthxbi. Oi. Shortening what is already shortened makes me have so much e-rage.

[Cyber Rat]

In the case of reviews, it isn't just 90%. I have read hundreds, if not thousands of reviews, and not one of them has left me truly more informed about the subject matter than when I started. None of them have ever covered the nuances of an activity in a way that could be considered meaningful analysis.

Of course it's not just 90%, it's probably 150%, the laughable quality of all the reviews in the world is so bad, they ruin the paper they're printed on, or in the case of electronic reviews, turn the 1s into 0s.

A review is an evaluation. Do you spend your time on the game/movie/book, or not, and could it be your cup of tea, since there were 10 similar works in the last month? An analysis can be as large, and most of the times even larger, than the subject of analysis. What was the meaning of the big breasted nurses in Silent Hill 2? Why does the main character have extremely stupid lines? What does 'There was a hole here once. It's gone now.' mean?

The fact that reviews don't leave you enlighten has more to do with your confusing the terms 'review' and 'analysis', and the fact that you hold your own opinion much higher than that of others. I suggest not trying to read any review in the future, and limiting yourself to doctorates written by Oxford professors and/or yourself.

[DimensionWarped]

A review is a form of analysis. In fact, the first synonym returned when running the noun "review" into thesaurus.com is "analysis". I'm not confusing anything, I'm simply demanding higher standards.

And it's redundant to say I hold my own opinions above those of others. After all, if I didn't, then I would quickly adopt an opinion which I held in higher esteem than the previous one and make it my own. I assume everyone is that way... thinking what they think until they hear something that they feel explains whatever they think better and then adopting that view.

[Ristar]

wow, this has quickly become a knowitall vs. knowitall topic.

[Cyber Rat]

A review is a form of analysis. In fact, the first synonym returned when running the noun "review" into thesaurus.com is "analysis".

Oh yeah, well I just checked my Longman Dictionary, which is, by the way, more precise than YOUR website, and it clearly classifies a review as a short evaluation. And because I used a book, I am right, and you are wrong.

re-view

an article in a newspaper or magazine that gives an opinion about a new book, play, film etc.

a-nal-y-sis

a careful examination of something in order to understand it better.

Now go read those doctorates if you want an analysis on something. Oh wait, I forgot, your sources are the best of the best of the best, so I must be wrong.

Well, I guess I just can't win a discussion against you. You are the smarter person, I give up. No more reviews, poems, fangames, scripts and forum posts for me.

wow, this has quickly become a knowitall vs. knowitall topic.

No, no, you got it wrong, I don't know anything. How can I compete aginst the wisdom of thesaurus.com and a Ratatouille quote?

[DimensionWarped]

Funny. The definition you cited says nothing about shortness.

If you want to split hairs, American Heritage Dictionary defines the noun form of review as:

1. A reexamination or reconsideration.

2. A retrospective view or survey.

3.

1. A restudying of subject matter.

2. An exercise for use in restudying material.

3. A report or essay giving a critical estimate of a work or performance.

4. A periodical devoted to articles and essays on current affairs, literature, or art.

5. A formal military inspection.

6. A formal military ceremony held in honor of a person or occasion.

4. An inspection or examination for the purpose of evaluation.

5.

1. A report or essay giving a critical estimate of a work or performance.

2. A periodical devoted to articles and essays on current affairs, literature, or art.

3. A formal military inspection.

4. A formal military ceremony held in honor of a person or occasion.

6.

1. A formal military inspection.

2. A formal military ceremony held in honor of a person or occasion.

7. Law A judicial reexamination, especially by a higher court, of an action or determination.

8. A musical show consisting of often satirical skits, songs, and dances; a revue.

bolded the most relevant definitions and I'm especially fond of the use of the word critical... the whole atmosphere of the statements has an air of authority to it that would make it seem as though it's supposed to be something in depth and well thought out rather than a short jab at something.