Gameplay?

[dissonantfeet]

I've noticed a trend in the reviews/previews lately and I thought I might go ahead and offer my two cents worth. Recently, I've noticed that we are using the term 'gameplay" as a generic term. As a result, it's losing its rhetorical strength. Perhaps when we discuss gameplay in our reviews/previews, we try to be more specific: instead of writing "the gameplay is strong" (vague), discuss a specific part of the "gameplay." "The combat is....." The stealth mode is....." " The narrative is....," to name a few examples. It seems that 'gameplay' is being used more and more often in place of specific details about the game. Examples, details, descriptions are what help to create dynamic prose. Without these, "gameplay" is an empty word.

Maybe we can also work on not using the word so often per article. We can consciously force ourselves to "describe" the gameplay rather than "tell" our readers that its "good."

What do you think?

Sal

 

[BCampbell]

Yes

Any way to be more specific is a good thing. I find myself using the term "gameplay" in a broad sense, mainly because it's in the ranking system. I'll generally breifly mention my overall opinion of the gameplay as a while and then break that down further, focusing on two or three important aspects for that game.

I did just notice that I used it three time in my Mortyr II review, and I probably could have replaced one or two of them with something else to be more specific. That's a really tough one because it's such a catchall term. I'm glad you brought this up.