So I've been putting up reviews here on the C-blogs for a few months, they seem to be getting some attention which is good and all but my question to people is what are the expectations for review blogs and if you make review blogs, what is your style? Also do you even read review blogs?
I know a few people on here appreciate review blogs though they don't seem to get half as much attention as other blogs do. My theory behind this is that review blogs cover a particular game, if you are not interested or do not know of said game, you likely won't be interested in reading it. I find this is a problem that reviewers such as Lord Spencer often has. Whenever i see his reviews, he doesn't seem to get many comments which is a shame because of the amount of effort he goes into writing it and even formatting it, something which i have yet to do or care about, props to him. I tend to not read his blogs that much though, why? It's silly really, it's mainly because half of the games he reviews i have likely never heard of, in a way, i should read his blogs more but it's due to my own stupid judgement that i don't and i feel that the same thing is happening to mine and other peoples reviews here on the C-blogs. The point is, there just isn't an audience for reviews unless the game has just been released within a week.
Sure i like to go into the past and play the games i missed and reviews help me find the gems but there are a lot of people out there who don't care, or so I'm led to believe. I find that a lot of people are too quick to forget the past and it saddens me a little to see people with that perspective. You could say that I'm stuck in the past but you'd only be half right. I do play games of this generation but i honestly couldn't care less about console generations or anything. All i care about is games. Considering the fact that my gaming history started off as me being completely driven by the mainstream is an embarrassment as a gamer. Put metaphorically, my gaming history is that of climbing a giant apple tree, sure i've found many good apples and a few golden apples here and there but the quantity of apples is starting to dwindle and i may have to wait next season for more and even then, the apples never seem to get sweeter. heck half of the games i reviewed i haven't even played and that's due to many reasons, firstly being that unlike many of you older folks on here (not meaning to offend here) I'm only old enough to experience the late 90's of gaming and even so, back then my tastes in gaming was narrow. I have gradually become the gamer i am now by looking back and playing games that i would never have played back then and i believe that there are others out there who should follow my footsteps or encourage me to do the same. That is why i do reviews in the first place and is why i try to give games as high of a rating as possible.
There are many reviewers out there that indulge in giving a game a bad rating, to me i find it quite saddening to have to give a game a bad rating and that's because if a game is really, really bad, i give it a rant usually due to the fact that i wouldn't want my hateful emotions to contaminate the review and because it would be extremely biased to the point that i would fail to emphasize the good points properly. This is an issue that certain popular reviewers such as Spoonyone and Pro Jared (to name two of them) have and don't get me wrong, these reviewers are very entertaining individuals and are talented at what they do but they aren't reviewers, they are ranters at heart (well for the most part though i believe they are mostly game analyzers) and you can tell by the format of their reviews, heck the Angry Videogame Nerd could be considered the same. I believe that reviewers should go out of their way to give a game as good of a rating as possible whilst keeping an eye out for potential flaws and issues the game has giving neither any imbalanced emphasis. It turns out that many of the reviewers i watch are not very well known or are only slightly well known. This is mainly because they are just plain simple reviewers who do their job well.
And then there are the front page reviewers on here. I believe their status and experience in other areas lead to their popularity. There is already a lot of controversy about video game journalism, something i don't want to get involved in but i believe that the individuals on the front page use their talents to manipulate an audience in the sense that their writing is a form of marketing. It would be interesting to see a front page reviewers standpoint on this as they may have completely different viewpoints on it which is completely understandable. Deep down i believe that there are a lot of unrecognized talent amongst the reviewers and that they merely lack the ability to get themselves known. Then again brings another question, does reviewing actually require skill? This is a question i ask myself a lot, how hard is it to analyze a game. Yes there are some who do it really poorly and to be honest i question how it is possible to make a bad review. To me, the only skills required is good English, vocabulary and knowledge of marketing, these are traits that i do not have but it doesn't stop me from making reviews and they seem to get positive feedback whenever someone comments. Perhaps reviews such as mine aren't really needed anymore, that is what i theorize at times.
However this is where the community comes in, it really doesn't matter what anybody says, i will continue to make reviews because i enjoy doing it but are reviews really that important? Do you even read them? Does it really require skill to write a review? What do you believe makes a good review and what skills do you believe got the front page reviewers where they are today? Do you plan on getting/playing a game from the past? I've given my thoughts now it's onto you guys.