Zombie Cow's Marshall: All journos should have to make a game
by Justin McElroy 
{ Oct 12th 2009 at 5:00PM } 
"As a developer I think you're slightly more understanding of the process involved, but as a gamer you know whether or not you're having a good time," Marshall said. "I think all games journos should be forced to make a game somehow, see how they get on. It gives you a more rounded perspective."
Luckily, we've got Marshall's request covered.
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
Mr French @ Oct 12th 2009 5:07PM
Personally I want a gaming "journo" to have the same perspective that I, the potential customer, is having. Does that mean every single person who buys games needs to take a course in game design just to know how to appreciate the game?
Next up: Readers can't read books without being a published author first.
ProfessorBort @ Oct 12th 2009 5:15PM
I agree completely. The whole adage that art is only subject to criticism from other artists is completely without merit. It makes him sound like sour grapes.
Courtney @ Oct 12th 2009 5:22PM
Did you actually read Joystiq's post, or the source article? He writes about games and makes games, which he felt that gave him a more well rounded perspective. He's not criticizing games journalists, he's just pointing out that they would be more informed if they had actually tried to make a game (and he's right).
The best science journalists I know have a fair science background (even if they never worked as one). The best economic journalists come often have economics degrees. Having deeper, even hands on, knowledge of the subject you are writing about makes you a better journalist. Period.
Besides, games journalists will never have the same perspective as you. When your job revolves around gaming, you think about it differently. When many of your games are free (either from pubs or from the entity you write for), you don't think about the experience the same as if you had shelled out the money yourself. You might try to think that way, but it won't ever be exactly the same.
Matt @ Oct 12th 2009 5:39PM
While this post makes sense in a way, at the same time reviews are currently published under the pretense that they are reviewing the game and the experience said game gives to the player.
Reviewing a game on the angle of how to develop games doesn't help Little Billy in his pursuit of the latest and shittiest new Spiderman game, for example.
Arashikou @ Oct 12th 2009 6:19PM
I think it's important to note that not all gaming journalists are reviewers, and not all game reviewers are journalists. The original article isn't aimed at reviews and reviewers specifically - it's aimed at gaming journalism in general.
Mr French @ Oct 12th 2009 6:35PM
Courtney, yes I did read the Joystiq article and I agree that creating a game would give a journalist a more rounded perspective, but my issue is when he says, and I quote, "I think all games journos should be forced to make a game somehow." Forced. Somehow. Those are pretty strong words. I just got the impression that game journalists who don't make games are a little less valid to Mr. Marshall, but that's just my opinion and translation of the article.
Oh and people who call journalists "journos" don't get much respect from me. Very douchetastic.
Courtney @ Oct 12th 2009 6:49PM
I don't personally like the term journo, but I see it pop up from the British more than anything (have even seen it in BBC headlines), and assume it's just more of an accepted colloquialism for the Brits than Americans.
They are strong words, but it was also an off-the-cuff answer to what was likely an unexpected question. I tend to try and take such quotes in context. If he had taken the time to write out a blog post on Zombie Cow's site about how games journalists ought to be forced to make a game, then I think that's a different situation than glibly answering a question he's been asked about whether one informs the other. I took it as a bit of hyperbole.
Shadsy @ Oct 12th 2009 5:16PM
Exactly what Mr. French said. It helps to be well-versed in subject matter when reviewing it, like how literary critics should review books and film critics should review movies. And it helps to see the process behind making games so you know the effort involved, kind of like how it's fun to watch a movie with commentary and see how things were done. But it knowing the process involved doesn't make the core experience itself any better.
CH3BURASHKA @ Oct 12th 2009 6:47PM
Mr. Marshall's perspective is one I can appreciate: to understand the game process, creating a game is an excellent step. However, the majority of consumers probably will NOT appreciate that perspective because they haven't made a game. They care mostly about the fun factor and if the game is worth the money, and after learning the amount of effort that goes into games, I think the 'journo' would be more inclined to say that yes, it IS worth the money. I'm not insinuating that understanding can lead to worse journalism, but a broader perspective is not necessarily a better thing.
superberg @ Oct 12th 2009 10:30PM
Although the unique perspective is something to keep in mind, asking game journalists to make a game is a little bit much. Creating a game of any substance requires years of study and practice beyond a "standard" education.
You can disassemble something much more easily than build it from scratch.
Brazell @ Oct 12th 2009 11:23PM
Meh, I'm indifferent to this. The same idea exists amongst some sports analysts: the idea that you cannot properly analyze something without having played it, but I take the opposite approach: perhaps you can appreciate subtle things, but your job as an analyst or journalist is to communicate a game to an audience that is primarily NOT made up of game experts. Just as there aren't many former athletes who are good sports journalists, it could be rare that there are many programmers and game designers who are also strong writers and communicators.
Generally, I think that game journalism needs to improve its command of journalism before its command of videogames. Joystiq is one of the few videogame websites with generally very strong writing.
Gnoll @ Oct 13th 2009 8:32AM
Someone may have already said this same sort of thing, but here's the deal: most people who set out to make games fail. That's fine and dandy, but that's not a good perspective change! Game journalists are there to look at the finished product. The problem is that if you get them involved in the process and they can't handle it, all of a sudden they might be more forgiving of amateur games. Too forgiving. You see this all the time in indie gamemaking communities, people put together the absolute WORST crap that they put very little effort into and everyone around them praises it because it's better than the crap they're working on. Sure, it sounds like a good idea for journalists to have some hands-on experience, but what you'll end up with is journalists forgiving bad games (or bad aspects of games) far too often, beyond the point of being reasonable.
Gonzo @ Oct 13th 2009 9:42AM
This is a bad idea. Programming games are by and large not that much fun, and polish takes a lot of effort. If a journalist is willing to let go of a game that isnt as polished simply because he understands how hard it is, he is no longer holding up the developers to a consumer expected standard. This will only lead to lazier programming.
Oew @ Oct 14th 2009 1:53PM
Let's force Roger Ebert to make a movie before we let him review another one.
MasterInsan0 @ Oct 22nd 2009 12:11AM
No one should ever be "forced" to make a video game. It's a long, arduous task, mostly thankless, and will forever ruin your perception of games. It's a lot harder to have fun with a game when all you can think about is how much better you could have done it (or how much better it is than your game). You have to sort of relax your mind and forget about game development while playing a game, because otherwise it'll drive you crazy.
A lot of developers, for example, don't really play games anymore. Usually it's because they're too busy with balancing ridiculous crunch cycles and their families, but it's also because once you've gone through the process of making a game, you don't really see them the same ever again.