HappySqurriel said:
So who are they written for? A videogame review is not an academically styled critical evaluation of the artistic merits and themes within a videogame, it is a very technical evaluation of the game in a similar style to a car, movie, music or book review in order to inform potential buyers about the quality of a product to help guide their purchase. If you're not considering the target market you're (basically) an idiot who doesn't know what their job is.
|
Hmm, maybe they should be somewhere inbetween? I suspect it's quite a a fine balance actually. If you go too far in letting the potential market dictate each review's scope, then in the end every one should end with a "buy" verdict ("are you a one-eyed, uncoordinated, male and dense teenager couch potato? Then this crappy shovelware with extra gore and boobs will make you happy"). Every game has some happy buyer after all :)
Seriously, I think that there's nothing wrong with reviewers checking out games that are sort of out of their turf, as long as it's very clear to the reader where they stand. From another point of view, though, it's bad for the industry as a whole - and its relationship with the public - if there's not enough variety and scope in the game critics' perspective.
So the issue should not be that IGN AU reviews badly this game, but if there will be discordant and different voices. A bit like with free press: I don't care about opinionated papers, as long as I know where they stand. What I care about is that there's plurality of voices in the press as a whole.
