| Sumario: | This article presents the position of the author in issues related to the improvements in video-game coverage in the U.S. Games are undeniably difficult to review. They are a form of entertainment that at times seems to contain all other forms and so the range of possible standards can be unwieldy. In one sense their roots are in sports and board games, interactive and competitive experiences whose enjoyment is often predicated on what the rules and playing field allow. Many game reviews consequently focus on what the player can and cannot do. Video games are also elaborately designed computer programs, running on technology that is improved every few years. This encourages reviewers to write about how good a game looks and how well it runs. Often a game is most like a book or movie, exhibiting story and spectacle and thereby inviting a critical focus on aesthetics. Recently though, there are signs that this is beginning to change. On Web sites such as The Video Game Ombudsman and the blog of the London newspaper "The Guardian," for instance, a debate has broken out about how games should be reviewed. Thus, they argue that most critical writing about games undervalues one's personal experience.
|
|---|