Reviews and reviewers

Reviews are shown everywhere with many different styles and different products. But gaming views have been around since the dawn of the arcade machines. Some are informative while others are entertainments themselves.
Game reviewers attemtp to rank a game on certain elements that games always have to determine their place in the world. These topics are areas that need to hit to become a professional review. But game reviewers concentrate on flaws of games but with factual evidence and staying away from their personal reaction to the game. If it was a personal rant then gamers wouldn't be able to determine the actual game because it's a matter of opinion. And just because something is popular doesn't mean it doesn't have flaws.
But unfortunately some reviewers work for the company and only state some upsides in order to sell the product. This is a constant battle for the truth about a game but the only way to know how it is, is to play it. But keeping the gamer in mind, they want to simply know what a game is like and wether or not its worth it so an outside comany is better or even a gamer themself.
But according to Kieron Gillen's manifesto, its a constant battle between the companies and journalists as the journalists was more funding to make it better but companies want less money intruduced. He calls them "Money-men" which is a clear picture to the dog eat dog world out there. The NGJ taunt the companies to produce better products and relingquish their money and think of their customers. This is an incrible feat which I admire. He covers the fact that companies sometimes forget what they were there for and lost the passion.
But their are many ways to write about games but it should be enjoyable otherwise your writing is stale and without fact. You want to capture the readers imagination and let them make up their own mind without trying to soley promote the product.
When writing about games I wish to entertaining but informative at the same time. Give my experiences as a gamer but base this on fact. If a game is good then why is it good? What makes it good? If it's, why is it bad? What should be improved? And adress each area with a fresh outcome and then validate at the end. Common areas are the graphics, gameplay, characters, story and audio and any other areas that strike as being significant for the audience to know.