Doug the Dork

Just gonna be a short post tonight as I'm going to go celebrate my roommates 21st birthday.

I got around to reading a video game review (Dark Sector) from the Oregonian that my mom printed out. Within the first two paragraphs I had already spotted something that the reviewer got wrong, and I haven't even played the game (actually I din't think it's out to the public yet, but I could be wrong). It wasn't even what he got wrong about the game, or the fact that he gave such a mediocre game a grade of B+, but his writing was terrible.

Worse than this, however, was the terms used for this review. The column is known as Game Dork: Tales from joystick land (really legitimizes the article don't you think), but really Elfman manages to alienate both gamers (from his lack of knowledge and language choice) and non-gamers (He uses a specialized vocabulary and assumes the reader knows how games flow). I understand that as a newspaper column he doesn't have a lot of space to work with, but he should at least told us why the game deserved a B+ and whether certain things (such as enemies being hard or puzzles being difficult) were pros or cons.

Worst of all is that this column (Game Dork), is printed in newspapers coast to coast. It's clear from this article that Doug Elfman hasn't played very many games, which makes me wonder how he can review them. The guy isn't a gamer, he doesn't have the experience, and he doesn't have the talent. But, since he made a name as a music, film, and television critic, he's become the voice on games for the non-gaming public. And here I wondered why people are so misinformed.

Thanks Doug Elfman, can I have your job?