Newspaper and magazine reviewers pretty much ignore this stuff.* There’s little mention of whether a book would be good to read on a Kindle, if you should buy the audiobook version instead of the hardcover because John Hodgman has a delightful voice, if a magazine is good for reading on the toilet, if a movie is watchable on an iPhone or if you need to see it in 1080p on a big TV, if a hardcover is too heavy to read in the bath, whether the trailer is an accurate depiction of what the movie is about, or if the hardcover price is too expensive and you should get the Kindle version or wait for the paperback.

(* Ja, ja, die traditionellen Medien schlafen mal wieder.  Meine Hervorhebung.)

Auch in Vorträgen auf der Game Developer’s Conference, berichtet Sirlin, wurden herkömmliche Besprechungen als unzulänglich kritisiert.

Another ranter said that “reviews” are not really what people need at all. They need analysis and criticism. They need someone to explain how the game actually works and what idea it expresses. That’s a whole lot more valuable than “buy / don’t buy” or telling you it’s “epic” or that it has “mind-blowing graphics.”

Eine der Ursachen für den Qualitätsmangel sei das Diktat wirtschaflicher Sachzwänge:

Not actually playing through an RPG but “reviewing it” makes more money.

Die Verbindung ist klar: keine richtige Auseinandersetzung mit dem Produkt führt zu oberflächlicher Erfahrung der Spezifika des verwendeten Mediums.  Dann kann in der Besprechung nicht darauf eingegangen werden.