Answers have been cut if they misunderstood question – ie, if the answer to 4 was referring to what they linked in q3, rather than the quote given in q4.
Some answers may have been merged – ie, where I’ve been given the same link/article/answer multiple times, I will just include link with a note of how many people answered with this in the format: [article](x5)
Some answers may not be included if they misunderstood the question – they may instead have moved to ‘bonus’ as a section. Will highlight if that is the case.
People are anon if they didn’t explictly say “call me x”. Email me again if you want to change that 🙂Anon referencing consistent within this topic, but not with others.
1. When you say “objective game reviews”, what do you mean?
Anon16: “No review is truly objective. I would appreciate it if pople stayed away from reviewing or talking about the games of people they have close relationships with or are supporting.”
Anon17: “To me it means a review in which the consumer is given a factual breakdown of core aspects Within the game. I personally like a formatted breakdown detailing story elements and length, details on unique/overused mechanics and possibility for multiplayer/repeat playings. What should be key however is that the game not be treated with a more enthusiastic or negative attitude due to the hype surrounding it or they reviewers own personal bias/feelings. There are plenty of people who can write and there are many kinda if gamers, So there are many solutions to this I feel based on website/staff.”
Anon18: “speaking as someone who doesn’t put too much weight on reviews, an ‘objective review’ is less of a goal than objective news. i think when a reviewer is too close to the subject of their review it hurts their credibility and if they fail to disclose said relationship it can come off as outright deceptive. ”
Anon19: “Journalists that either reveal that they are linked to the subject (not how linked just that they are linked), or they recuse themselves from the article and have another writer write it.”
Anon20: “I think the “objective gamer reviews” idea has a bit of a range with people satisfied with having disclosure of any personal/financial connections, those who just want gameplay/technical details, those who want to avoid politics (having to be PC) when they play games, etc. That will be hard to satisfy everyone, but a compromise might work for most. Discussion might not move much for a while though.”
Anon21: “I think some people confuse objectivity w/ impartiality. And perhaps are confusing reviews w/ news. So I don’t look for objectivity in reviews, but impartiality. In *news*, I look for objectivity, however.”
Anon22: “When gamers ask for ‘objective game reviews, what we’re asking for are reviews that help us make an informed decision about whether or not to purchase the game being written about. When I read a review I want to know about the quality of graphics and music and sound. I want to know about how well the controls work when playing the game. I want to know about the game’s difficulty curve and whether or not it’ll be to difficult for me. When the reviewer goes beyond that and starts interjecting personal biases, the review itself becomes less objective.”
Anon23: “I haven’t asked for “objective” game reviews, but in my opinion, a game’s review should be about the actual game. I mean it should be about its mechanics, its methods of storytelling, the story itself, but also the technical work put in by developers.
A game review should be about how good of a game it is: wether it is good enough to be enjoyable, or it is so bad it becomes enjoyable ; wether the story makes you want to keep on playing to learn what happens next etc.
A game review shouldn’t be about how the reviewer thinks it fares against their political views because the “political stance/message/whatever” that the reviewer perceives to be carried by the game may or may not actually be real.
In short, the reviewer should tell what their opinion on the game is, not what their opinion on the political subjects they think the game is addressing is.”
Anon24: “Game reviews free from personal and political bias (ex: “Great game, plays perfect, but the character models offended me: 5/10” or “Inclusion of token minority character: 10/10″ or as we saw reviews from people who had personal or monetary relations with the developer(s).”
Ashton Liu: “As a game reviewer, I realize that game reviews can never be 100% objective, as each person has different ideas of what good gameplay is. For example, I dislike games with overly linear gameplay in service to the game’s plot, while others may enjoy that kind of structure in storytelling. There’s no problem with a reviewer decrying or praising particular gameplay or narrative elements in their respective reviews, so long as those reviews educate the reader about the details of said elements so that they can come to an educated decision themselves. I think what many demand – and I personally agree with this – is an end to the overt politicization in game reviews. Consider Kotaku and Polygon’s Dragon’s Crown reviews. A sizable portion was dedicated to complaining about the assets of a particular character within the game, and saying how it was offensive and childish. Long before that, they had run smear pieces against the artist of the game. The larger implication and accusation is thus levied at readers and players of the game – “If you enjoy this game, you secretly hate women.” These kinds of implications do not belong in a video game review.”
Anon25: “By “Objective” reviews, we are asking for Game Journalists such as myself, to review video games fairly, without bias or outside influence. ”
Anon26: “Objectivity is what any reporter or journalist should strive for. Their job is not to form peoples opinion for them, it’s to give them the facts in an unbiased manner which allows them to make their own opinion. I don’t care if the lack of x/y/z character/sex/race offends you, it’s not objective or relevant to video games. I want to know if the games good, I want to know what’s good about it, I want to know if the budget was spent well and it performs properly or if it runs like ass. I want to know about the music, I want to know about everything that impacts the actual video game, and not someone delicate personal sensibilities.”
Anon27: “I can not speak for others, but I would strongly prefer that journalists within the gaming industry be more transparent in why/how the feel the way the do. There is no real objective review; rather I want honest reviews free from outside bias (as far as possible) such as social pressures and monetary gain. Reviews should be the reviewer’s opinions on the game and whether it is fun/worth the money.
Social issues (feminism, racism, classism, ect.) are valid concerns and have every right to influence a review. Who am I to say otherwise? The issue is that many popular sites are engaging in textbook Yellow Journalism and Muckraking. (The latter has a place in investigative journalism, but that’s another conversation).”
Anon28: “Generally speaking Gamergate does not so much believe objective game reviews are possible. What is being looked for is an objective view about the people they attack that they call games journalism. However Game Reviews will always have bias, this does not mean one should not strive for at least some degree of objectivity. IE I may hate the taste of a particular food, that doesn’t mean I give the restaurant a 1 out of 10 while ignoring the ambiance, the presentation of the food, and the helpfulness of the waiter.”
2. Do you think reviewers with very obvious biases against certain genres – ie, like Yahtzee + MMOs – have a role in game reviews?
Anon16: “Yes. It gives a view of someone who isn’t a fan of the genre/game and isn’t blinded by fanboyism or nostalgia. I personally don’t even use reviews anymore but I think everyone should have their say, even if they are overly critical because they hate a genre.”
Anon17: “Yes I do. Only as critiques or in Yahtzee’s case in particular, for comedic effect. Yahtzee to myself at least, is a critic and personality not a reviewer. He comments on games that most people already have formed an opinion on.”
Anon18: “zero punctuation is first and foremost entertainment; putting any weight on yahtzee’s reviews seems foolish. people gravitate to reviewers who share their opinions.”
Anon19: “yes i think they are bias against first person shooters and those associated with them. other than that not really”
Anon20: “Biased reviews do have a part since they show negative/positive points of games that people don’t notice or skim over.”
Anon21: “Yes. I think you get used to the colour thing bring to their work.”
Anon22: “Reviewers like Yahtzee should be regarded as entertainment. While they do have a tendency to be poignant on occasion, the true appeal of these reviewers comes from the humor of their exaggerations and obvious bias. I look at them the same way I look at Stephen Colbert and John Stewart; entertaining and informative but not to be confused with actual journalism.”
Anon23: “Having a bias against a certain genre may be bad because, let’s face it, if you hate a certain type of game, you shouldn’t be playing it in the first place. However, someone who isn’t particularly a fan of a genre reviewing games from that genre may bring up beneficial arguments. E.g. some game mechanics may be accepted as “genre defining” but sometimes they make for a very boring part of the genre and can be annoying. Someone who isn’t numbed by the habit may point out ways to improve the genre by suggesting “fixes” to these game mechanics.”
Anon24: “Absolutely. It gives a perspective from someone with similar tastes. I don’t like MMOs for similar reasons Yahtzee doesn’t so his review might be more catered to my interest.”
Ashton Liu: “Absolutely. They are important due to the fact that gamers are a very diverse population with a wide variety of opinions as to what makes a game good and bad, and so each subjective viewpoint on game genres have merit. I would go so far as to say that AVGN can be considered a legitimate – if somewhat crude – reviewer in his own right.”
Anon25: “Yes and no. Yahtzee does have a bias toward Massively Multi-player Online games, but in my opinion I feel that shouldn’t stop him from reviewing games that would not be considered MMO’s. For example, I actually enjoy his review of the most recent Divinity game.”
Anon26: “Yeah, yahtzee is taking the piss and everyone knows it. He played wow for a long ass time, he doesn’t hate mmos, but he thinks there are many flaws within them. Yahztee is a difficult example, because his reviews are all parody and not actually legitimate reviews. Were we talking about actual reviewers, who couldn’t be unbiased and separate from it to be objective? Then no, they shouldn’t be reviewing the game. A guy who hates jrpgs isn’t going to have the first clue about what makes a good jrpg or what other people might be looking for in a jrpg, they don’t know where the bar for the genre, and for each aspect of a game within the genre, has been set previously because if they hate them, they’re not going to have played them over the years. It’s a waste of ink/bandwidth to have them review it in that case, and disingenuous to readers.”
Anon27: “Certainly. I actually prefer it to general reviewers. With such a reviewer you have a baseline to work with. Let’s say reviewer X doesn’t care for the MMO genre. If I also do not care for that particular genre, I can feel more trusting of his/her opinion since I know we have similar tastes. However journalists with these biases should NOT be general reviewers in most cases. If they do opt to review games that they do not care for, other members of their team should ideally be present to act as a foil.”
Anon28: “Absolutely. However when such biased reviews are consistently the only review it could become a larger issue. This is thankfully not the case.”
3. Can you give me an example of what you consider to be an “objective game review”?
Anon16: “No, sorry. I don’t really use them anymore. See the first two answers”
Anon17: “Honestly I have disregarded most reviews on sites unless they are purposefully comedic (I.e Yahtzee) . I would say to any gamer the best review is your own, and forge your opinion based on the information gathered before release and voices you relate to and trust. However that is becoming harder to to do nowadays. So look up gameplay videos and read some comments on sites. Heck games have their own wikis now so go there if you really want depth.”
Anon18: “i would prefer reviews to make a clear separation between critique of mechanics and cultural analysis. total biscuit does this pretty decently ”
Anon19: “a game review in which the author isn’t connected and makes an honest opinion on the game”
Anon20: “At this point, I’m not sure what I could answer with that someone couldn’t find as biased in some way… maybe a manual.”
Anon21: “Nope. See #1”
Anon22: “I honestly can’t think of any at the moment.”
Anon23: “In my opinion, a game review cannot be perfectly objective, but the reviewer can try to address both sides of a same point: the good and the bad. The reviewer is doing a review for people who don’t necessarily have the same interests and doesn’t have the right to push THEIR opinion on their readers.
“UI is counterintuitive but you get used to it after a while”
“Story may be relatively generic but the humor factor makes it enjoyable”
“Some people may find doing X repetitive but I believe it is good mindless fun” every once in a while”
“Framerate is alright but could have been better””
Anon24: “Any game review that focuses on the gameplay and the mechanics involved therein. Art assets, story, characters, set pieces, level design, etc. are ALL good or bad based on the subjective. Whether or not a game actually “plays” is not.”
Ashton Liu: “I may be biased, but I’m going to link to RPGFan here. My colleagues are all incredibly professional writers, and here’s a review by one John Tucker, on Mugen Souls: http://rpgfan.com/reviews/Mugen_Souls/index.html
Mr. Tucker not only mentions what he likes and dislikes about gameplay mechanics and story elements, but also writes about the oft-described “sexy gameplay elements” without judgement – ultimately he only mentions it and leaves it up to the reader to determine if they are comfortable buying a game with that kind of content.
Now, no review site is perfect – there is always going to be someone who injects a little too much, or not enough, of their personal opinion into reviews – even I have been guilty of this at times (http://www.rpgfan.com/reviews/Grotesque_Tactics_2/). However, so long as reviews maintain a respectable amount of objectivity, one can easily forgive a little preachiness on the part of the reviewer, I believe.”
Anon25: “As of right now, there are no “Objective” game reviews. User Reviews compare “Game Y” to “Game X”, or make up a one line reason as to why someone should buy the game, and most of the places we would have gone for these reviews have been revealed to be taking some form of payment for good reviews.”
Anon26: “Not really, unless I could find magazine articles from the 90s. I can outline one for you though, it’s pretty simple; no lifestyle oriented nonsense, all the available facts about it, all the technical aspects, from performance to music to writing to art – without any ‘this art is sexist and offensive because i say so’ nonsense. Say how the game felt to play, how immersive was it, how responsive was it, was it value for money, are the systems in it complex or deep, is the difficulty toned well, how is the ai. And absolutely no bitching about the game being too hard and trying to rate it down if you’re just plain bad, that’s not the game designers problem. A decent scoring system, not weighted nonsense where 0-7 is terrible, 8 is okay and 9+ is decent. 5 is average and decent, 10 is near unattainable.”
Anon27: “As I’ve said before, I don’t believe there to be such a thing per say. A review is opinion. Opinions are not objective.
However: Honest game reviews are extremely desirable. The site that comes to mind first is Giant Bomb. This is a collection of reviewers from the industry that have diverse tastes. Members such as Jeff Gerstmann and the late Ryan Davis were particularly notable for being forefront with their feelings. (The former was fired from a position with a large review firm for not giving a positive review for game that his company had been paid to give positive press for.) (Also, site member Patrick Klepek has a history of being influenced by social pressures in his reviews. I am neither endorsing or condemning this. I would just like to point out that this is a departure from the norm of the site for better or worse.)
Youtube personality Totalbiscuit is also known for being upfront in his opinions. If he is producing a video as a result of a partnership or contractual obligation, the fact is presented immediately whether asked for or not.”
Anon28: “Objectivity in game review includes a few factors. One factor being dealing with series. Two scores should be given, one assuming a first time player of the series, the other assuming someone who has been with the series for a while. There should also be multiple reviews. This avoids a single narrative deciding the fate of a game. What if the game was absolutely fantastic and received all 1’s for instance because a competing game paid off many journalists for positive review, or threatened main sites with pulling coverage. These are other large issues of course, but mostly not associated with Gamergate.”
4. Do you think that this is a neutral/objective statement about a piece of media, or an example of bias and opinion? Explain why please. “The most novel thing about [this piece of media] is how lumpy, labored and relentlessly episodic its narrative is.”
[PixieJenni note: this line is an extract from Godfrey Cheshire’s review of The Notebook via www.rogerebert.com. The paragraph it’s taken from in full is:
“The most novel thing about “The Notebook”…is how lumpy, labored and relentlessly episodic its narrative is. If one went into it knowing nothing of its origins, the film’s lack of dramatic structure might suggest a singularly inept screenwriting exercise that somehow made it into production. In fact, it’s close to impossible to imagine this movie being made had it been based on an original screenplay rather than a well-regarded novel, “Le Grand Cahier,” by Agota Kristof, a Hungarian who writes in French.”]
Anon16: “Looks like gibberish to me. Did Leigh Alexander write that? Girlfriend needs to lay off the lagers. – I’ve finished all of the other questions and have come back to reread this one and it still doesn’t make sense to me. Maybe it’s because I’m not learned but it seems like a very convoluted way to say something that could be said simpler in order to seem like the person knows something. But uh, it feels neutral in nature I guess.”
Anon17: “No it isn’t. The reason is it uses abstract metaphors and imagery the the reader then associates with preconceived ideas and notions that are associated with those words, which by themselves are inherently negative.”
Anon18: No answer given.
Anon19: Assumed referred to question 3, not included answer.
Anon20: “The statement does not seem neutral/objective itself. The reasoning behind the statement could be neutral/objective though. Would it be possible to write different variations of that sentence and see what people choose as the most “neutral” or propose their own? A sentence probably isn’t enough to determine neutrality/objectivity.”
Anon21: “I think it’s opinion, but see #1.”
Anon22: “Without a followup statement to elaborate, the original statement lacks what I would consider objectivity. The author uses the words lumpy and labored and refers to the piece as being relentlessly episodic. Without knowing the reasons behind the statement all we really have is someone else’s opinion and not an objective criticism.”
Anon23: “This is just trying too hard. People play games to relax, and as a non native english reader I sort of don’t understand this sentence: doesn’t it even mean anything? Games don’t need to be very innovative, otherwise there wouldn’t be so many games released every year. Also, it seems to me that lumpy and episodic narrative are pretty much the same thing.
Moreover, when someone talks about a story’s qualities, it is often purely opinion or bias from being based on their personal experience: what one may find lumpy and episodic may be very predictable and repetitive to someone with more exposure to that kind of story.
Now, what I’d be expecting the reviewer to do is not to tell me how terrible or awesome the story is. I’d want them to tell me if they enjoyed the story and why, or tell me they didn’t like the story and why. This way if I don’t enjoy/dislike stories for the same reasons as them, I won’t be influenced to buy/not buy a game by their opinion on this particular matter.”
Anon24: “It’s a bias, but a relatively benign bias. The way people experience a story varies from person to person, so while it may fell “lumpy” to one person, to others it may feel different. As long as the reviewer doesn’t cultivate a “all games should fit this mold” attitude in a majority of their reviews, it’s fine.”
Ashton Liu: “It is as close to neutral as can be hoped while still retaining the reviwer’s own opinion on the gameplay. There is no specific standard for an “objective game review” – objectvitiy merely means that reviewers elaborate on their opinions so that the reader can come to a conclusion him/herself. For the statement in question, the reviwer has to elucidate WHY the game is lump, labored, and relentlessly episodic. The qualities that make it so may be appealing to some, and not to others. Ultimately it should be for the reader to decide.”
Anon25: “Given what we know about the statement, it sounds neutral. We are not told what the media is, who is giving the statement, or anything about the company that the person works for. (Though, a quick Google search reveals that it was stated by Rodger Ebert, on his two-star review of “Le Grand Cahier”, or “The Notebook” 😉 .)” [PixieJenni note: Close, Godfrey Cheshire!]
Anon26: “That by itself? Bias and opinion purely because there’s nothing else to go on there to back it up. Any such statement has to be explained and reasoned.A game could be lumpy, the textures could be terrible, it could be episodic and that could be a negative to the overall game, but to make that claim you have to explain why or it’s worthless.”
Anon27: “It is somewhat neutral. The statement/opinion in and of itself is not important, it is the follow up that matters. Why is it novel? Why is it episodic? Why is something labored novel? If this is not a good game, am I able to enjoy it “ironically” al la MS3K? Why do you feel this way about the product?”
Anon28: “Due to the nature of interactivity with a game, one should express how fun they personally found it as well. Ultimately gamers are looking for fun. What you said yes it seems relatively neutral, but it does not describe how you also feel about it. Again Objectivity does not necessarily mean absolute objectivity. Being completely objective is near impossible for a human being. It is important to be objective where you can.
Example, marking down a game for lacking say… A story, in a game like Tetris is dishonest and lacking objective truth to it. Saying that the game does not have a story because the game is only about gameplay, would be objective, while informing the reader that the game has no story, if the gamer in question was looking for a story, this might not be the game for them.”
5. What would you like to see covered in a review ie gameplay, mechanics, story, music, fun, narrative, etc.
Anon16: “Anything that the reviewer feels is relevant to them and what they feel might be relevant to buyers. That might be a little much, but it makes sense in my mind. Gameplay mechanics, length, challenge and maybe story if they can do it without spoiling, are the most important I think. Fun is way too subjective. They may also want to give insight to their history with the series or genre as well.”
Anon17: “Personally I think the model of Story/Gameplay Mechanics/Art style/replay factor, would be best but different people want to know different things so perhaps that is something which is always down to choice.”
Anon18: No answer given.
Anon19: “gameplay mechanics are good but its fun is really important. also if it released all buggy. there are games that received 10’s like gta 5 but you couldn’t even play the online for a month after it was launched.”
Anon20: “I like to see everything about a game, but different people have their own likes/dislikes.”
Anon21: “I have no issue with the majority of what’s covered in reviews unless they veer into heavy commentary of dubious relevance.”
Anon22: “Please see my answer to question 1.”
Anon23: “You have already covered most of the stuff I’m looking for in a review with your question.”
Anon24: “From a utility standpoint, gameplay and mechanics first. Everything else is secondary as I’ve stated before. Story, narrative, etc etc is all based on the perception of the person consuming the media. They have a small role in game reviews but they shouldn’t be center stage.”
Ashton Liu: “Every facet of a game would ideally be covered in a review. However, some review formats preclude this type of reviewing. In those cases, the most poignant and standout parts of the review should be addressed, for good or ill.”
Anon25: “I would like to see Game play, Story, and Music covered primarily. Narrative would usually be considered graded within Story, and Fun would be better left out, as fun can be taken as completely subjective. An example of this could be “Final Fantasy Mystic Quest”. I know enough people that dislike the game, where as I myself enjoy it thoroughly.”
Anon26: “All of it. It’s all relevant. Although with regards to fun, you can’t just give a game a free pass cause it’s fun, particularly with friends, when everything else is abysmal about it.”
Anon27: “All should be touched upon if relevant in any meaningful way. The game is a package, I want all of the package looked at if it matters. That being said, omissions can be made. Say we are looking at the latest Madden Football game. The main things that would likely warrant a in depth look into would be things such as the game’s systems, controls, any changes from the previous version, graphics to an extent, and others. The game’s music would warrant a quick glance, but not a deeper look into. This will vary from game to game, genre to genre.”
Anon28: “All things that the reviewer thinks are relevant should be included.
Here for example is my take on Depression Quest. To stay topical.
The intended goal of the game is to give people a view of what it is like to deal with depression. It is very much like a choose your own adventure book, with the concept of allowing you to potentially view life as someone living with depression. As such, I can say the following. I did not find it fun, but then you have to consider what it was trying to accomplish. Depression is not fun. It was easy to understand, gameplay is point and click and largely depends on your own choices, and requires a reading ability.
The story was depressing. This is unsurprising, given the name and tone of the games intended narrative.
The music was limited, but did accomplish giving me a sense of depression, music by nature is designed to invoke a feeling within you, and it did make me feel very, well, depressed.
The game was not something I would classify as fun, nor does that seem to be it’s intended purpose.
The story seemed very basic, but I kind of felt like I was reading a journal written by someone, which seemed to me to be kind of the goal based off how the story presented itself.
I would classify this game as something more of an experience.
I can not in fairness give this a single score. From a gameplay stand point for how much I “enjoyed” the game I would give it a 2 out of 10, for what I believe it’s intended purpose is however, I would have to give it a 7 out of 10 for accomplishing in fairly good measure, what the game seems to be trying to get across. What I would call Depression Quest, is something one could stand to experience if you want to get some insight to the life of someone who lives with depression. Because of how lacking in fun it is however, it is not something that I can say will or should be enjoyed, or even played by some people.”
6. What do you think the difference between an op-ed and a review is (if any?)
Anon16: “A review is basically informing someone about a game and weather or not the reviewer thinks its worth a purchase. I’m not exactly sure of the exact definition of op-ed but it seems that on gaming websites they are general opinion pieces about things pertaining to gaming but not exactly about(I.e. anything Patricia Hernandez writes).”
Anon17: “An open editorial can address and provide insight from a writers perspective, which much like what Yahtzee does with his Extra Punctuation pieces. These should be optional and supplement reviews with the pretext that it is someone’s opinion. This could help writers and readers better understand where the other is coming from by allowing debates in comment sections, and giving background to the reviewer previous experiences within the genre.”
Anon18: No answer given.
Anon19: “not much both are opinions, but i’m not a fan of op-eds i come to game sites to get news on up and coming games or new releases. I don’t want politics or personal opinions on things other than reviews interjected into the site because i’m at the site to escape those things”
Anon20: “Not sure what I should write about this since “review” seems to be taking several “definitions” with people calling for objectivity and using biased articles for/against…. Op-ed is opinionated though I believe that some people do want those writers to declare conflicts of interest in those as well.”
Anon21: “I think the only difference is the subject matter. One is to argue, while one is to, to an extent, inform or preview.”
Anon22: “A review is based on the author’s direct experience with the media they are reviewing, using facts to inform the reader. A reviewer should be able to look at something they hate and something they love and write an honest reviews for both without letting personal opinion dictate the narrative. An Op-ed on the other hand is based purely on opinion.”
Anon23: “An op-ed won’t try to check the other side of the coin because its aim is to expose the writer’s opinion, and not study a game and how people with various opinion will judge it.”
Anon24: “A properly labeled op-ed piece is an essential cornerstone of journalism. It lets the journalist express his opinions so you get a clear look at the angle they take when they look at something. It can be as biased and opinionated as it wants to be and should be. When that reviewer sits down and pens that “objective” review, you have that insight on to what might have brought him to his conclusions and gives you a chance as the consumer to agree or disagree.”
Ashton Liu: “One is complete opinion based on a few points, the other is opinion combined with objective facts about the subject in question. A good example would be: “Game A is sexist” vs “Game A contains elements some may consider objectionable,” respectively.”
Anon25: The difference can be found within the name itself. An Op/Ed or “Opinion/Editorial” is usually written as Argument/Counter-Argument, or can be a “Letter to the Editor”. An OP/ED contains a higher risk for a Conflict of Interest due to readers not knowing about a connection between Special Interest Groups and the editors.
Anon26: “I’m not all that educated on the difference to be honest, from what I do know, considering the guy that came up with it wrote “It occurred to me that nothing is more interesting than opinion when opinion is interesting, so I devised a method of cleaning off the page opposite the editorial, which became the most important in America … and thereon I decided to print opinions, ignoring facts.” then basically, it’s total bollocks. Anything that ignores facts has no place in journalism of any kind. Journalists aren’t rockstars or superheroes, they’re nobodies, they’re middle men with a task to provide us with the facts. I don’t care about their opinions, I imagine many people don’t. That’s not to say they can’t have their opinions in articles, but back them up, and if you can’t back them up maybe admit that “I think x/y/z, but that’s probably just me and my preferences” and don’t try some bullshit.”
Anon27: “Prior to the rise of the blogger journalist there was, but since online reviewers (Bloggers, Youtube personalities) the line has become blurred to the point of no longer existing.”
Anon28: “For a game review very little, if anything. A game review will always be subject to subjectivity. Subjectivity does not mean however that having bias is a positive thing. Saying these controls are awful, and then going on to describe to say that say, pushing the down button makes you jump, describes counter intuitive control design does describe why the controls are awful.
In the same way a door you have to pull open, having no handle would be an awful design for a door because it is counter intuitive.
On the other hand, if say down being jump was intended to increase the challenge of the game, and the creator mentioned as such, we could say the game is going about it’s job in a correct fashion. Just like my door example, could be intended for only employees with very difficult to obtain, high powered magnets.
Then while I might not like the design, I could describe to the reader how I feel about it, while still saying what the creator has expressed as intent.”