Sunday, 17 September 2017

Shock and Pause - Three Months On


It's been three months since I made my first post on Shock and Pause. As I expected it's been a slow build, but I'm okay with that. It's given me a chance to hone my writing a bit and narrow down the kinds of features I want to produce here and the format I use to publish them. Unfortunately most of the ideas I've had have yet to make an appearance.
 
When I started the blog I had a lot of ideas for different features – and still do. My intention was for this blog to be as much about the industry as the games themselves and my “Words to Know” features have allowed me to show that a little, though not as much as I'd like. The features that I really want to produce require more time and research than I'd anticipated. Features like “Know your Dev's” where I can profile individual game developers and showcase their backgrounds and the games they've worked on. And “Studio Spotlight” Where I do the same thing on a broader scale with game development studios. It became clear to me early on that my work and real life schedule wouldn’t always allow me the time I needed to make sure I could produce the features I wanted of a quality I was satisfied with. But I wanted to commit myself to posting at least once a week, and barring the last few weeks during which I was on holiday I've been largely successful in that.

This is why there's been such an abundance of “Words to Know” features. They are relatively easy to research and write, provided I have an idea for them ahead of time. But “Words to Know” was never supposed to be the backbone of this blog, which unfortunately is what it's become. When I was outlining the features I wanted to do my intention for “Words to Know” was to be a platform for me to define gaming terms that I pick up through osmosis, sort of spontaneous learning. I envisioned it as something I would post in addition to the weeks main feature, possibly several times a week or even daily as a sort of word of the day type thing. At this time and in it's present form that isn’t feasible. I'm always listening for terms I don't recognize in the gaming media I consume but I don't always find them, even with of most of the terms I've defined already I had a rough idea of their meaning before writing the piece. The simplest solution may be to go looking for terms that I don't recognize or that I think would make good content and it may yet come to that, but I feel that would somewhat dilute the spirit of “Words to Know” as I originally intended it. It's something to think about.

Another issue I've been struggling with is the length and quality of these features. I use “Words to Know” as my weekly post so often because it's the easiest thing to do, but even though they are bite sized features it still usually takes me several hours to research, write and publish them. I want to do more than just copy and paste the definitions for these terms from the sites where I learn them. It's important to me that I understand correctly what I'm writing about and that I'm not publishing incorrect information. For my “Words to Know” about Roadie Running I spent over an hour watching gameplay from Army of Two, Kaine and Lynch and Inversion of the player characters just running around, trying to work out if what they were doing actually was Roadie Running and if I could draw the connection to what Gears of War does and cite those games in my piece. There are a lot of conflicting opinions in the gaming world and some people use and define things differently than others so I try to take that into account as well. Ultimately this level and speed of production isn’t acceptable to me. Professional games journalists are expected to be able to produce and publish multiple features a day which are much longer than “Words to know.” This is something I'll need to work on.

The other notable feature that I've published are my two “What am I playing?” pieces on Hitman and Wolfenstein: The New Order. Though I tried to model the structure of those pieces after game reviews that I've read I don't consider them to be reviews in and of themselves. At the risk of seeming rhetorical they’re more like reflections. As I said way back in my inaugural post I don't yet feel that I have the critical skills necessary to really judge a game based on how others will think and feel about it so I focused on how I felt. In both cases how I felt was very positive. I encountered no technical issues of any significance and I greatly enjoyed the gameplay of both games as it was presented to me. However, I played both games long after they received their final updates and patches from the developers, and had I played them when they were first released I may have had a different experience. The “What am I playing?” feature is how I plan to improve my critical thinking and gain experience writing reviews - even though that's not how I think of them, the principal is largely the same. I'm playing a game and writing down my thoughts. The main difference is that I try to include both my own personal experiences (or lack thereof) with the game and the franchises they belong to and some anecdotes about the development process, which are things that you don't typically see in actual game reviews. Time will tell whether this is beneficial to the process or whether it would be best to focus on learning to write traditional reviews.

The WAIP features on Wolfenstein and Hitman were very different to write. I wanted to keep them in the range of 1000-1500 words and so there were things that I wanted to talk about or talk about in more detail that I decided to cut short. Another thing to note is that I wrote the Hitman piece in about four hours on a Sunday afternoon and I worked on Wolfenstein for several hours a day over the course of a week, and ultimately – though I can't put my finger on why exactly – I feel like the Hitman piece turned out better. Probably because I went back and forth and changed a lot of things about the Wolfenstein piece before posting it, whereas with Hitman I didn’t second guess myself as much.

So there are my thoughts on the first three months of Shock and Pause. It has been a slow build and I don't think it's going to ramp up dramatically anytime soon but I have a better idea of my capabilities now than when I started, and a good idea of what I need to do to take things to the next level. I'm still committed to weekly posts and I wont make any promises but I'm going to try and add more variety to them in the future. I know where I want to take Shock and Pause, and however long it takes I'm going to do my best to get there.

As always, thanks for reading.

No comments:

Post a Comment