Hey taking a short break to voice some things I've been thinking about regarding the Dead Cells plagiarism thing. Hope you don't mind a few tweets in a row coming your way this morning.
First thing's first: the reviewer did definitely copy that YouTuber. It's too close to identical. I don't want to talk about that but rather the reaction to it and implications going forward. If I was a reviewer on a big site and I'd shitting myself right now.
I don't read many reviews on those sites anymore because I don't get much from them. This isn't the fault of the reviewers (usually) but the format. Games require a MUCH larger commitment of time to understand than books or film. At the most basic level: look at the "runtime".
Most games are arguably more complex to review (to be clear: not talking about artistic merit here. Just reviews). Against film: they have the same visual component. Many have cinematography and acting performances to judge. Then sound. Then gameplay as a HUGE thing on top.
Reviewers aren't equipped to deal with gameplay. It takes too much time on two levels: how much time they have to play the game to fully understand it, and how many words they have to work with in their reviews. These things have a high cost. Most games take SO LONG to finish.
The result I noticed was that gameplay in these reviews is delegated to explanation only. Here's how it plays. Simple. Informative. But there's only so many ways to say that and, considering how limited the vocabulary still is when describing gameplay, many reviews sound similar.
In this game you run and jump. You explore and shoot. Hey there's a grapple mechanic. It's like a Metroidvania. It's like Dark Souls. It makes you feel like you're Batman! This isn't plagiarism, it's a fault of the format imo.
More interesting points in reviews, and where the highest amount of deviation occurs in my experience, is when they're describing personal anecdotes that happened while playing--usually the review opens and closes with one of these. Then there's the story. Easier to speak on.
But then you get a game like Dead Cells that doesn't have much of a story. And anecdotes are only going to be relevant through gameplay terms. You're back to mundane explanations and elementary terms. It's hard to talk about gameplay. It requires time and experience.
Reviews should be difficult. I saw a few people say on this plagiarism thing: that writing reviews is easy so there's no excuse. If that's how people in the industry are really seeing them, then it's no surprise so many reviews read the same. Now that's under scrutiny. Good luck.
