The Sad State Of Gaming Reviews

I know I have written an article in the past that has to do with how videogame reviews are very sloppily created and how they lack real criticism on a games basic points. People play videogames because they keep them entertained and are fun. Reviews should focus on the entertainment value as well as if they are fun and keep the player excited.

After reading an article about why videogames aren't considered "art", I had the following rant to say:

Videogames aren’t considered Art because we have people who don’t even play videogames fueling controversy about violence and people who review movies saying games aren’t art. How would they know? They’ve never even played a game from this era, let alone a Super Mario Bros. game that came out back in the 1980s.

The people who have never actually played a game such as these movie reviewers, Jack Thompson, and news reporters shouldn’t even be allowed to comment on the situation until they have actually played a game.

The gaming industry also lacks a competent reviewing criteria. The movie industry has a review criteria in place, so why can't games?

It's simple, these so called game reviewers can't seem to agree on a straightforward criteria, as well as with their mentality that a game should be rated based on a review of a game that is similar in experience or a predecessor. They have meaningless scoring systems, and people who don't play games often or are looking to get in on the gaming scene, are going to believe these terrible "reviews" and could possibly miss out on what they may have thought would be a good game.

Honestly, someone or something needs to come up with a game reviewing criteria that the industry can agree on without any kind of corruption taking place, that is simple and easy to understand for everyone from your kid brother to your grandma. Sadly, I don't expect this ever to happen with horrible sites like IGN and GameStop in existence. Hell, I've seen better reviews from everyday people; even I thought one of the reviews I wrote was more in depth than anything written by one of those "big" sites and could really help the game player decide on whether the game is worth their time and will provide enjoyment.

That's just my two cents/rant/article on the object of game reviews. I know I need to start writing them again, but when I look at my reviews now, I see their flaws...they are mostly just unorganized, but I still feel as if I'm missing a key element of reviewing a game. But then again, how could I possibly know what it is that I'm missing, when we don't even have a reliable review criteria available?

Thanks to GoNintendo's news story for inspiration of this article!