This is just my opinion, and if you agree with it, then spread the word or fap this post or whatever. If you disagree with it, then don't do anything.
I think game reviews are often "too well-written" and don't just cut to the chase quickly enough. C'mon reviewers - you're reviewing a game, not writing for the New York Times. I'd rather you use your writing skills to write more interesting gaming features, such as Jim Sterling's awesome "Oil on Water" article, Geof Keighly's Valve features, etc. etc. Most people just look at the score anyway, so why bother? Maybe if the write-ups were shorter and more to the point people would actually read them.
I recently saw this review of Aladdin on YouTube, and I fucking loved it. I think by most standards of writing, it's probably considered "bad." His vocabulary is pretty limited and he doesn't use many clever analogies or anything. He just tells it like it is without any flourish or whatever. It's a game where you jump and throw apples and occasionally fly on a carpet or something. I would love to see more game reviews in this "dumb" style, because they just tell me what I need to know, give their honest opinion on it, and leave it at that. That's really all I want from a review.
Anyway, if you're an aspiring game reviewer and this resonates with you, lemme know and I'll check out your game reviews!