One of the issues that games journalists face is that not everyone or should say not every gamer would be on the same side as the journalist. What I mean by this is that if a journalist wrights a review and gives a game a rating of 6/10 and mentions a lot of bad aspects, a gamer can say that the review is wrong and should be given a higher or lower rating. There’s even a few times when there have been conflicts between reviewers as to who is right and who is wrong. Some journalists can also be biased, as they can review a game which they like and give it a high score just because they like the game.
If a journalist is part of company such as IGN; then IGN would pay them their salary. However if a journalist is a free lance then he/she would put their review on some sort of webpage or even send a copy to companies. This in turn might make the company see if he/she is a good reviewer and hire them.
There are lot of games that are incorporating the use of the ranking system this is mainly because it allows the users to rank their characters according to their desired needs. I do not really think it is necessary; however I think it does drive sales. This is because a gamer could rank up as much as he wants due to the time he spends playing the game. A gamer can also become emotionally attached to the character he/she has built and nurtured for so long equipping him with new items and perks. Even the big developers have incorporated this technique such as Activision with Cod: Black Ops. They see a potential in the ranking system and more developers are going to use this technique.
I think as a writer there’s a lot of aspects I can improve such as; they way I write and using the right term to explain things. But I think I need to improve on trying to get my point of view to the reader and also trying to implement my feelings across to the reader.
No comments:
Post a Comment