When Game Journalists Don't Finish Games
Over at GameDaily.biz, Kyle 'Mr. New-Skool Media Coverage' Orland has posted a column about game journalists playing games, with the fun headline: "Game journalists discuss the biggest gaps in their game-playing portfolios, and why they aren't as important as you might think."
Alert GSW readers will notice a confession from me hanging out in the article: "Many journalists that responded to my inquiry found they just didn't have the time to really get into certain epic games. CMP's Simon Carless lamented that he'd probably "have to take a holiday" to put aside his current pile of games and finally get through Twilight Princess. GameDaily's Robert Workman is waiting for "a lazy summer day" to finally give Oblivion another go."
Anyhow, I found this a fun article (even if I _was_ mentioned), and it seems to have taken the Media Coverage columns in a more positive, well-constructed way, after the former anonymous columnist, much given to snarkiness and complaints about X being broken (where X was pretty much anything you can mention) has now left for whinging pastures new. Now, back to cat manipulation in Zelda!
Comments
I've been slowly working on filling in my gaps (completed Ocarina of Time, Wind Waker, and Twilight Princess in the last 2 1/2 months, among other games) and can feel the pain of others that are just trying to stay afloat in the sea of "must-play" games.
Last year I made a challenge for myself where I set a goal of at least 52 games for the course of the year (beat it by 4 games!) and realized that beating games isn't always the best thing to do. If you have a pretty negative opinion about a game after 5-6 hours, chances are you're going to have an even more negative opinion about it by the time you beat it. For instance, Eternal Darkness is by far one of the worst games I've ever completed, and I was feeling it by the midway point...but people pushed me on, saying it got amazing once the twists started unraveling. Unfortunately, their rose tinted glasses at the second rate schlock that I was subjecting myself couldn't have been more wrong.
That said, I firmly believe that reviewers should be obligated to complete games before reviewing them. I don't really feel there's any point in time where it should be acceptable to review a game after just an hour or two of play (as is what happens far more often than it should) and an otherwise solid game can grow exceedingly tedious after the midway point (hi, Metal Gear Solid 2!) that some reviewers may have stopped at. Likewise, a game that starts off initially underwhelming can turn out to be a rather enjoyable title after a little bit (ChoroQ!).
Tangent -> Everyone seems to agree that Jak & Daxter II was an awful game. Why the hell did it score so damn high? I've heard lukewarm (but still far better) things about the first one as well. I wound up picking up the whole series to play through at some point based on the scores, but the word of mouth has really forced them to the far backburner while I work on more acclaimed titles (I'm playing Okami right now. WOO!)
Back on topic, I think I'm going to actually catch up on my gaming queue roughly 5 years after I retiree, get divorced, and lose my legs to a stray landmine after taking a vacation in Vietnam.
Posted by: RoushiMSX | February 13, 2007 7:33 AM
I'm still working my way through Final Fantasy XII, four months later. And by god, I love it, and I WILL finish it. By the time Revenant Wings ships in Japan. THIS I SWEAR.
Posted by: parish | February 13, 2007 9:16 AM
PICK UP THE CAT
PUT DOWN THE CAT
Posted by: AAAAAAAAAAA | February 13, 2007 11:20 AM