Here’s a question for you — do you prefer a reviewer who speaks about a game in a mass market sense, or someone who can get down to it and talk something up (or down) as a fan?
This is a question that’s cropped up from time to time in the industry, and one that our Editor-in-Chief recently penned a somewhat controversial editorial on the subject (which you can find here). Now the debate is sort of taking on a life of its own thanks to Resident Evil 6. Capcom’s newest has been seriously shaking the foundations (if I can borrow from Danny Bonaduce) of gaming criticism.
In short, some people are liking the game for what it is, while others are hating it for what it isn’t. There was even enough rancour around this latest dust-up for this long time Resident Evil fanboy to lose his enthusiasm and skip over part 6 (at least for now).
Sometimes a reviewer knowing the game and series in question can be a very good thing as they can talk right to you as a fan, but it can be a major hindrance if you’re a reader with no brand history. What if you don’t particularly care if game ‘X’ is more action oriented now, whereas it used to be slower paced and more atmospheric?
So pour yourself some java, grab a comfy seat, and dig in, because here’s the question of the week: What do you prefer, a review that plays to the masses or one that speaks directly to you as a fan of whatever’s being reviewed?