,
12 tweets,
2 min read
Read on Twitter
There is no debate. Game journalists should be good at games. If you're not, go find something you're good at and write about that. 
You also shouldn't do game journalism if you're not good at writing.
Let me go on a little rant and explain myself here. A lot of people have said people need to be competent, not necessarily good.
I agree with that when you talk about specific games. If someone's competent they can give a decent review. However!
To be competent and knowledgeable about many games, you need to have a good base of experience in past games.
You can present a noob perspective, sure, but most of us gamers have been gaming for a long ass time (personally, since the Atari 2600).
So if your review of a platformer is going to be relevant to me, then I hope you've played the truly great platformers of the past.
Also, the most interesting writing always comes from people who are passionate about their subject.
For example, you have Colin Campbell's famously bad article about Rock Band 4, where he doesn't give a shit. polygon.com/2015/6/1/86878…
It shouldn't be hard to find a reviewer who is knowledgeable about the genre and competent. Game journos are a dime a dozen.
And if someone is competent and knowledgeable about a genre, then I'd say that person is good at gaming. Enough to do reviews, anyways.
This is also why you likely won't ever see me reviewing card games. Bleh. :)
