| 28 JAN 2011 at 6:51pm |
TravellerGuild Master
Posts : 4040
Joined: 3 JUL 2010
Location: US
Status : Offline | So Ray... ...decided on a score for Lux-Pain yet? [smiley=laughing.gif]
Heh heh heh, sorry, but that "out of mercy" really stuck with me- I thought it was classic. 8-)
Yes, reviewing is not easy, eh, especially if you know some people either side of the line are going to hate you for it. : ..and some will have contempt for you regardless.
* * * Just call me Trav. * * *
“Despite my ghoulish reputation, I really have the heart of a small boy. I keep it in a jar on my desk.” - Robert Bloch
"They are not reciprocally sublated--the one does not sublate the other externally--but each sublates itself in itself and is in its own self the opposite of itself" (Hegel, from The Doctrine of Being)..."
|
| 28 JAN 2011 at 6:55pm |
SirDaveGuild Master
Posts : 4941
Joined: 17 OCT 2002
Location: US
Status : Offline | Originally Posted By Ray (28 JAN 2011 6:42pm)
Originally Posted By CrisGer (28 JAN 2011 5:42pm)
what the reviewer likes or does not like that is not their job...
That is preciselya critic's job. The theory is that the person reviewing the the subjective item (book, play, movie, game, painting) brings all of his/her enthusiasm, knowledge and experience of the topic to bear. He does all the things you listed -- put the piece in context, describe its nature, etc. But all of this comes down to the end goal of the reviewer: Whether this piece is worthy. The distinction between "this is good" and "I like this" is meaningless in the context of a review. It's the same thing.
I agree that critics can and will bring their own 'perspective' to their reviews, however, there is a line that can be crossed if that perspective is too 'out there'. In other words, the best critics to some extent will represent the common man/woman otherwise their reviews will eventually be ignored.
Of course, there can be broadly differing tastes when it comes to the common man/woman which is why the Siskel/Ebert & Ebert/Roeper reviews were so useful (and entertaining).
The future ain't what it used to be!
|
| 28 JAN 2011 at 7:17pm |
RaySorcerer Apprentice
Posts : 361
Joined: 21 OCT 2002
Location: US, CA
Status : Offline | Originally Posted By SirDave (28 JAN 2011 6:54pm)
however, there is a line that can be crossed if that perspective is too 'out there'.
What is "too out there"? Again, this is a purely subjective judgment. What's too out there for you may be right in there for me. So it all comes down to opinion. Opinion on the part of the reader, opinion on the part of the reviewer. It's alllllll subjective.
I'm not saying it's not possible to find common ground. I remember in the late 1980s a critic named Georgia Brown (she was the basis for the character Laura Linney played in the movie The Squid and the Whale) in a matter of two weeks gave bad reviews to Gone With the Wind and Lawrence of Arabia. There was a general agreement that a person who isn't susceptible to the charms of two of the five best films ever made should perhaps be reviewing something besides movies.
BUT. It's still subjective. Always.
Remember, procrastinate now. Don't put it off!!
|
| 28 JAN 2011 at 7:19pm |
RaySorcerer Apprentice
Posts : 361
Joined: 21 OCT 2002
Location: US, CA
Status : Offline | Originally Posted By placeholder (28 JAN 2011 6:51pm)
So Ray... ...decided on a score for Lux-Pain yet? [smiley=laughing.gif]
Heh heh heh, sorry, but that "out of mercy" really stuck with me- I thought it was classic. 8-)
Yes, reviewing is not easy, eh, especially if you know some people either side of the line are going to hate you for it. : ..and some will have contempt for you regardless.
I fully admit, Lux-Pain made me want to kill people. I felt very guilty, actually. I don't enjoy hating games. I love game developers. I have been known to call or email game studios before my reviews come out to warn them when I'm about to give a very negative review. I wish all games were good and fun.
Remember, procrastinate now. Don't put it off!!
|
| 28 JAN 2011 at 7:43pm |
SirDaveGuild Master
Posts : 4941
Joined: 17 OCT 2002
Location: US
Status : Offline | Originally Posted By Ray (28 JAN 2011 7:17pm)
Originally Posted By SirDave (28 JAN 2011 6:54pm)
however, there is a line that can be crossed if that perspective is too 'out there'.
What is "too out there"? Again, this is a purely subjective judgment. What's too out there for you may be right in there for me. So it all comes down to opinion. Opinion on the part of the reader, opinion on the part of the reviewer. It's alllllll subjective..
BUT. It's still subjective. Always.
I am basically agreeing with you on the subjective matter, but merely pointing out that if a critic does not represent or 'appeal' to enough of a cross-section of the readership then eventually the critic's output is going to be dismissed.
A critic can be as subjective as he/she wants, but there are limits that the readership, not the critic, will determine.
(Essentially, all good AG critics rave about Myst games. )
The future ain't what it used to be!
|
| 28 JAN 2011 at 7:47pm |
SirDaveGuild Master
Posts : 4941
Joined: 17 OCT 2002
Location: US
Status : Offline | Originally Posted By Ray (28 JAN 2011 7:18pm)
Originally Posted By placeholder (28 JAN 2011 6:51pm)
So Ray... ...decided on a score for Lux-Pain yet? [smiley=laughing.gif]
Heh heh heh, sorry, but that "out of mercy" really stuck with me- I thought it was classic. 8-)
Yes, reviewing is not easy, eh, especially if you know some people either side of the line are going to hate you for it. : ..and some will have contempt for you regardless.
I fully admit, Lux-Pain made me want to kill people. I felt very guilty, actually. I don't enjoy hating games. I love game developers. I have been known to call or email game studios before my reviews come out to warn them when I'm about to give a very negative review.
I understand that they referred to that as Poison Ivey.
The future ain't what it used to be!
|
| 28 JAN 2011 at 7:55pm |
RaySorcerer Apprentice
Posts : 361
Joined: 21 OCT 2002
Location: US, CA
Status : Offline | Originally Posted By SirDave (28 JAN 2011 7:46pm)
Originally Posted By Ray (28 JAN 2011 7:18pm)
Originally Posted By placeholder (28 JAN 2011 6:51pm)
So Ray... ...decided on a score for Lux-Pain yet? [smiley=laughing.gif]
Heh heh heh, sorry, but that "out of mercy" really stuck with me- I thought it was classic. 8-)
Yes, reviewing is not easy, eh, especially if you know some people either side of the line are going to hate you for it. : ..and some will have contempt for you regardless.
I fully admit, Lux-Pain made me want to kill people. I felt very guilty, actually. I don't enjoy hating games. I love game developers. I have been known to call or email game studios before my reviews come out to warn them when I'm about to give a very negative review.
I understand that they referred to that as Poison Ivey.
Wow, I've NEVER heard that one before!
Remember, procrastinate now. Don't put it off!!
|
| 28 JAN 2011 at 8:00pm |
Terry PenrodGrand Inquisitor
Posts : 6693
Joined: 16 OCT 2004
Location: US, Texas
Status : Offline | .
Originally Posted By Ray (28 JAN 2011 6:28pm)
Originally Posted By Terry_Penrod (27 JAN 2011 8:32pm)
Heck, the majority of the global PC game market is focused on shooters
This isn't really true. What's the biggest selling PC game of all time? The Sims. What game did it knock off of that top spot? Myst. What are the three fastest-selling PC games of all time? The three World of Warcraft expansions.
The biggest-selling PC titles of recent years include versions of The Sims, Starcraft, World of Warcraft, and others. Not to mention the incredible rise of casual game sales for PC. While I'd never deny that shooters are important, but they simply do not "own" the market in any way, and they haven't for a long time.
Yes, I probably should have broadened that statement to include all games in all genres on all systems online and off that focus on action and/or combat as being dominant compared to intellectual games like PC adventures, deep RPGs and really complex strategies /sims.
Perhaps it would be even more accurate to compare the overall popularity of deep, complex games with a relatively high degree of mental / intellectual difficulty to simpler / easier / shorter games in general.
The main point was that most people prefer faster, intellectually easier games with some action as opposed to slow, hard games with little to no action.
As for Myst, it came along at the perfect time before 3D shooters, 3D action-adventures, CRPGs, realistic sports / driving / flying games and other newer choices truly exploded on the scene. The fact that it was the first or one of the first games to be released on a retail CD also pushed sales over the top - which led to a long, successful franchise. But most adventure games or adventure series never come close to matching those sales numbers.
Conversely, many shooters and other action titles sell extremely well as do top games in several other popular genres that offer a number of advantages / added value to the player like SP + MP, modding, EPs, etc. Adventure games just don't lend themselves so easily to those important extensions, which in turn increase popularity and sales.
Cheers, Terry
|
| 28 JAN 2011 at 8:20pm |
TravellerGuild Master
Posts : 4040
Joined: 3 JUL 2010
Location: US
Status : Offline | Originally Posted By Ray (28 JAN 2011 7:18pm)
Originally Posted By placeholder (28 JAN 2011 6:51pm)
So Ray... ...decided on a score for Lux-Pain yet? [smiley=laughing.gif]
Heh heh heh, sorry, but that "out of mercy" really stuck with me- I thought it was classic. 8-)
Yes, reviewing is not easy, eh, especially if you know some people either side of the line are going to hate you for it. : ..and some will have contempt for you regardless.
I fully admit, Lux-Pain made me want to kill people. I felt very guilty, actually. I don't enjoy hating games. I love game developers. I have been known to call or email game studios before my reviews come out to warn them when I'm about to give a very negative review. I wish all games were good and fun.
As I see it, the biggest headache of the reviewer is as so: One has to try and at least give the general gaming community a fair idea of what to expect of the game, while at the same time not completely ripping so badly into devs that they walk out of genre, especially if it's their first attempt, (ok, if they have talent, of course - if they really don't it's not so much of a headache, I suppose ) and all this while at the same time attempting to" "to thine own self be true". Not an easy balancing act, as your (Ray's) headache with a game that you reeeallly didn't like demonstrates...
Btw, I knew Starcraft was very popular, but didn't realize that it was on the bestselling list, (compared to shooters and other genres) simply because it doesn't feel to me as if strategy games are as popular as some other genres. This is probably an entirely subjective impression I have, (and I know of a mixed site where people do chat about strategies,) but there's only one member here on JA, for instance, who tends to chat about strategies often, so I always felt it was a bit of a 'lonely' genre. I've also never been able to find a site that covers the whole strategy genre where people chat only about strategies. Therefore I find this tidbit of information interesting, and rather heartening to hear. Anyway, this is OT, I know, so forgive the rambling.
* * * Just call me Trav. * * *
“Despite my ghoulish reputation, I really have the heart of a small boy. I keep it in a jar on my desk.” - Robert Bloch
"They are not reciprocally sublated--the one does not sublate the other externally--but each sublates itself in itself and is in its own self the opposite of itself" (Hegel, from The Doctrine of Being)..."
|
| 29 JAN 2011 at 4:08am |
CrisGerSchattenjger
Posts : 2539
Joined: 28 APR 2007
Location: US
Status : Offline | I am sorry to have been busy today working ....
so i just caught up with the thread.
I must respectfully disagree with the idea that the purpose of a review is to express what the reviewer likes. but that is my opinon and I will let it rest at that as i dont expect to have this view understood in this age of follow the leader.
Admin
3D Worlds and Game Developers
Linkedin
http://3dworldandgamedevelopers.blogspot.com
|
| 29 JAN 2011 at 4:58am |
SirDaveGuild Master
Posts : 4941
Joined: 17 OCT 2002
Location: US
Status : Offline | Re: the above (which has inexplicably been 95% removed w/o comment)
IMO, that's a nice idea, but not practical. All human appreciation of art forms is going to be to a greater or lesser degree subjective. How can it be otherwise, regardless of one's determination to be objective.
I love classical music, but I strongly dislike most of it composed after the 19th century. There's nothing I can do about that. No matter how much I might know that it is technically well-done I could never bring myself to recommend it to people. Same with how I feel about most impressionistic painting.
It's because of this that I think that the best critics will have a genuine appreciation for a broad spectrum of whatever is being critiqued (which is a corollary of what I was saying to Ray above). To me, when it came to AGs, if I knew that one really disliked puzzle-based games, I would discount their evaluation of those games.
Edit: Further, I think good critics (with the emphasis on 'good') are not only important, but necessary for the most part. I never loaded a new AG w/o an armload of reviews (btw Ray's often among them). I also think that game developers take a risk in totally ignoring critics' output.
The future ain't what it used to be!
|
| 29 JAN 2011 at 5:23am |
InlandAZGuild Master
Posts : 5586
Joined: 4 MAY 2007
Status : Offline | Originally Posted By SirDave (29 JAN 2011 4:58am)
Re: the above: IMO, that's a nice idea, but not practical. All human appreciation of art forms is going to be to a greater or lesser degree subjective. How can it be otherwise, regardless of one's determination to be objective.
I love classical music, but I strongly dislike most of it composed after the 19th century. There's nothing I can do about that. No matter how much I might know that it is technically well-done I could never bring myself to recommend it to people. Same with how I feel about most impressionistic painting.
It's because of this that I think that the best critics will have a genuine appreciation for a broad spectrum of whatever is being critiqued (which is a corollary of what I was saying to Ray above). To me, when it came to AGs, if I knew that one really disliked puzzle-based games, I would discount their evaluation of those games.
Wow - if he'd posted with a wacky avatar I suppose I would have picked up on it right away. So much for passing myself off as an adventure player.
Ray's one of my favs.
|
| 29 JAN 2011 at 5:59am |
SirDaveGuild Master
Posts : 4941
Joined: 17 OCT 2002
Location: US
Status : Offline | Originally Posted By InlandAZ (29 JAN 2011 5:23am)
Originally Posted By SirDave (29 JAN 2011 4:58am)
Re: the above: IMO, that's a nice idea, but not practical. All human appreciation of art forms is going to be to a greater or lesser degree subjective. How can it be otherwise, regardless of one's determination to be objective.
I love classical music, but I strongly dislike most of it composed after the 19th century. There's nothing I can do about that. No matter how much I might know that it is technically well-done I could never bring myself to recommend it to people. Same with how I feel about most impressionistic painting.
It's because of this that I think that the best critics will have a genuine appreciation for a broad spectrum of whatever is being critiqued (which is a corollary of what I was saying to Ray above). To me, when it came to AGs, if I knew that one really disliked puzzle-based games, I would discount their evaluation of those games.
Wow - if he'd posted with a wacky avatar I suppose I would have picked up on it right away. So much for passing myself off as an adventure player.
Ray's one of my favs.
Likewise. Never really read any of his reviews that I've thought were way off base. Quality stuff.
The future ain't what it used to be!
|
| 29 JAN 2011 at 7:55am |
CarolineJA+ Overseer
Posts : 16540
Joined: 28 JAN 2007
Location: AU
Status : Offline | I won't buy a new game nowadays without reading the comments and opinions of others who have played it already. So reviewers are important - and they ought to be professionally impartial just like CrisGer says. But they aren't. Sloppy journalism seems to be the norm now as the entire population has a keyboard. And as has been noted previously, it's all about expressing self-opinion instead of producing a neutral-bias, informative critique. :-/
I know whose opinion I trust: folks here whose tastes mirror my own and Ray Ivey.
|
| 29 JAN 2011 at 8:17am |
TravellerGuild Master
Posts : 4040
Joined: 3 JUL 2010
Location: US
Status : Offline | Heh, welcome to Enlightenment. :-* If you have a reviewer called Ray, and a poster called Ray talks about his reviews, perhaps there might be a link? Ray posts on and off on the forum every 6 months or so. He seems to be keen RPG-er too. 8-)
Anyway, if what I think Chris is saying, is indeed what Chris is saying, I have rather mixed feelings about that. Let's take it to a review of literature. I hate reading reviews that lit. grads do about SF and fantasy books. Most of them have some background of formalism and positivism and modernism and post-modernism and literary rules, and then they try and show off that they have some formal background in the study of literature with every single little review that they do, and they often try to force it into a literary pigeonhole where it doesn't even belong. I hate that. So I'm not all for a "specialist" reviewer reviewing for the man on the street.
Sometimes (actually often) they are trying so hard to show off the knowledge sitting in their memory banks that what they say does not even pertain to the work they are reviewing. That is of course also a form of grandstanding, and I abhor that. That kind of thing should be reserved for scholarly forums, not popular forums that the man on the street visits to get info.
If you really want to use the Fine Arts (as opposed to pop art) and classical music (as opposed to pop music) ast examples regarding the whole 'reviewing' issue, let me use another example. I'm sure you'd agree with me that someone with no background in art history is going to look at a Mondrian (as I do too ) and say: "Heck, but all his works are just red, bue and yellow blocks - the kind of thing you'd put in a kiddie's nursery... [smiley=rofl.gif] (Chris would understand what a Philistine statement that is). ..and of Kandinsky's later works: "Gee what a mess!" (Actually you could throw Picasso in there with Kandinsky too) [smiley=laughing.gif] , ...and on the musical scene they'd say of Bartok "Ugh, what a discordant, jarring noise!"
In order to "understand" these works, you have to know beforehand that the artist was experimenting and/or rebelling against established forms and conventions ; but! to me personally, even "understanding" where the artist was coming from, does not facilitate my personal enjoyment of these works on a sensual, perceptual level.
...so my point is, that if a critic praises an exhibition of cubism and abstract expressionism to high heaven, and because of this glowing review, a person with no formal training in the history of art goes to view this exhibition, and walks away disgusted that he had wasted his time, because he had not seen the point in these works, what has that review achieved?
Then the review has meant less than nothing because it has not addressed the correct audience.
...and to me that is perhaps the crux of the matter. The reviewer should take cognisance of the specific audience he is addressing. If I was going to review the "Enter The Story" series for Gamespot, where a large part of your audience are younger, action and eye-candy seeking gamers, I would stress that this is a series with comparatively rudimentary graphics, that involves a LOT of reading, and would mainly be of interest to nerds, and give it a comparatively lower score than I would give it on Adventuregamers, for example.
If I was going to review it on Adventuregamers, where quite a large part of the audience view themselves as extremely cultured people, I would actually stress the unique art style and the amount of detail re the classical works of literature that the series endeavours to depict as positives, and I'd probably make the review sound a little bit more snooty than I would have with the Gamespot review. [smiley=laughing.gif]
[ Heh, and I do hope no Gamespot or Adventuregamer members take offence regarding what I said. I say these things in good humor and with a gentle tongue in cheek. I am a member
at both those sites, and I regard both of them as valuable sources of information. ]
Bottom line is, that just as people look for different things in their books, art and music, so do different gamers look for different qualities in their games. To me a reviewer has done his job when he conveys to me that even though he personally enjoyed a game, that particular game would not be my own cup of tea. Or vice versa. Tastes differ, and IMO, a reviewer should take cognisance of the fact that he/she is reviewing a game as a service to a bunch of gamers who fall in a spectrum of different tastes and preferences, and I think this might be more or less what SirDave was trying to convey?
* * * Just call me Trav. * * *
“Despite my ghoulish reputation, I really have the heart of a small boy. I keep it in a jar on my desk.” - Robert Bloch
"They are not reciprocally sublated--the one does not sublate the other externally--but each sublates itself in itself and is in its own self the opposite of itself" (Hegel, from The Doctrine of Being)..."
|
| 29 JAN 2011 at 8:24am |
CrisGerSchattenjger
Posts : 2539
Joined: 28 APR 2007
Location: US
Status : Offline | thanks traveler for considering what i said and thinking it over...i appreciate that.
i changed my post...as i dont think what i think and feel will be understood here or most places..
I have been a creative professinonal for almost a half century and have learned the hard way that the middle men/women of the critical professions have their own agenda...and not the best interests of the creators in mind really. There are exceptions and I was not addressing my remarks to any one reviewer here or elsewhere. I was sharing some heart felt feelings of concern that we have lost the impartial and sincere voices that used to help illuminate the arts...and creative work of all kinds
but let me move back from this and any controversy. I care more to enjoy each day and the sharing we all enjoy here..... and will set back in the closet my spears and arrows. To each their own....and peace to all.
Admin
3D Worlds and Game Developers
Linkedin
http://3dworldandgamedevelopers.blogspot.com
|
| 29 JAN 2011 at 8:46am |
TravellerGuild Master
Posts : 4040
Joined: 3 JUL 2010
Location: US
Status : Offline | @ Chris: Though it seems that we do agree after all, and I am sorry if we have misunderstood one another.
I am not saying that an educated person must not do a review. Perhaps I misunderstood what you had meant when you had said that reviewers of today seem barely educated. Of course they have to be, all I was trying to say, is that a reviewer shouldn't be 'talking jargon' to people when he is doing a review for a general audience as opposed to a specialist audience.
When a medical doctor is adressing a group of other doctors, he is surely going to structure his content and tone differently than when he is addressing a group of nurses, and that again differently to when he is addressing a group of rural people and farmers.
...but when it comes to the arts, 'learned' people don't always do that; they jargonise. I think you and I actually agree on our dislike for 'jargonising' though...
We seem to agree also on the fact that a reviewer should strive to transcend his/her own personal likes and dislikes in an effort to be informative. It's one thing to post a rant and rave on a forum where you air your personal feelings about a game; but when you do a formal review, one should take into account that there are other people out there reading your review for information, that might have different tastes to those of your own. It seems to me that we are in agreement about that?
Taking it from a reader/user POV: I as a reader go to the trouble of reading a review because I want to know if I would like a game enough for it to be worth my while to spend my precious money and time on purchasing and playing it. If the purpose of a review is not information, if it is not to give it's reader an idea of whether it would be worth hiser's* while to purchase and play a game, then I apologise - then I have completely missed the point.
*hiser= his/her
* * * Just call me Trav. * * *
“Despite my ghoulish reputation, I really have the heart of a small boy. I keep it in a jar on my desk.” - Robert Bloch
"They are not reciprocally sublated--the one does not sublate the other externally--but each sublates itself in itself and is in its own self the opposite of itself" (Hegel, from The Doctrine of Being)..."
|
| 29 JAN 2011 at 10:18am |
BrianSpace Cadet
Posts : 117
Joined: 28 SEP 2010
Status : Offline | A reviewer should strive to transcend his/her own personal likes and dislikes in an effort to be informative.
Yes, but with the caveat that no reviewer can be completely objective. At the end of the day, personal opinion has to come into play. We're all human beings, after all, and nobody is interested in a review written by a robot (with the possible exception of the author).
A good reviewer makes an effort to be objective where it's feasible to do so, but also makes an effort to be clear about their biases, so that the reader can take such into account.
|
| 29 JAN 2011 at 11:00am |
TravellerGuild Master
Posts : 4040
Joined: 3 JUL 2010
Location: US
Status : Offline | Originally Posted By breadbox (29 JAN 2011 10:18am)
A reviewer should strive to transcend his/her own personal likes and dislikes in an effort to be informative.
Yes, but with the caveat that no reviewer can be completely objective. At the end of the day, personal opinion has to come into play. We're all human beings, after all, and nobody is interested in a review written by a robot (with the possible exception of the author).
A good reviewer makes an effort to be objective where it's feasible to do so, but also makes an effort to be clear about their biases, so that the reader can take such into account.
Oh, absolutely. Hence I said 'strive to transcend' and didn't say:" A review should be objective. " Like Ray said, that's not possible, since discussing a game is discussing a cultural object, something that is always perceived subjectively. So my whole point was that the reviewer should know and keep in mind that his own opinion is subjective, and might not correspond to that of other gamers.
For instance, I've noticed that compared to gamers in general, I tend to fall into the group that finds atmosphere and story important, and I have a mild tolerance for lots of dialogue. Some gamers hate all dialogue and prefer to have their games puzzle-heavy ; they are the Myst/RHEM lovers.
Some gamers aren't in it for the puzzles, but for the emotional experience - those are the Syberia-lovers. Some gamers love to have witty dialogue and lots of humor and they love a Sam & Max and Monkey-Island type of scenario, while other gamers cannot tolerate humor and cartoons, but prefer a dark/realistic experience.
So if I was reviewing Edna and Harvey, or Ceville for instance, I'd say : I personally enjoyed the humor very much, but this is not a game for people who cannot stand cartoons or wacky humor. Something like that, if you see what I mean.
* * * Just call me Trav. * * *
“Despite my ghoulish reputation, I really have the heart of a small boy. I keep it in a jar on my desk.” - Robert Bloch
"They are not reciprocally sublated--the one does not sublate the other externally--but each sublates itself in itself and is in its own self the opposite of itself" (Hegel, from The Doctrine of Being)..."
|
| 29 JAN 2011 at 4:41pm |
Terry PenrodGrand Inquisitor
Posts : 6693
Joined: 16 OCT 2004
Location: US, Texas
Status : Offline | .
Matching reviewers to their preferred genres isn't a bad idea, but most professional critics have a pretty broad knowledge of and interest in the full range of genres as well as the overall industry they are writing about.
It is much more important that reviewers write to the intended audience, to their level of sophistication and about the things they think are importent in terms they will understand and appreciate. The critic exists for the audience not the other way around.
Regarding formal relationships between critics and creators / publishers - there shouldn''t be any period. Critics simply shouldn't have any sort of business / financial dealings with the people who make and sell games, movies, etc. That would constitute a direct conflict of interest. (Note: Accepting review copies or other related materials from publishers does not comprise a business contract as long as there is no obligation on the part of the critic or editor to produce a positive review.)
Cheers, Terry
|
