The following passage is entitled A Question of Style and can be found in the newly announced book, The Videogame Style Guide and Reference Manual.
When it comes to presenting a consistent vocabulary, videogame journalism is sloppy at best. At worst, it's a complete mess.
How much of a mess?
Consider the term Xbox. When reproducing this seemingly simple product name in print, a writer is faced with many different stylistic decisions, including:
- Whether or not to capitalize the first X
- Whether or not to capitalize the B
- Whether or not to capitalize the entire term
- Whether or not to place a hyphen between the first X and the B
- Whether or not to insert a space between the first X and the B
Between these basic quandaries alone, you're looking at around 15 different ways of describing something as simple as the name of Microsoft's first videogame system. And that's not counting the totally wacky capitalizations (Ever seen it spelled "XboX?" Sadly, we have), unnecessary "scare quotes" around the name and the question of whether or not to precede it with the word "Microsoft." (And, if so, whether to do so only on the first reference or each and every time...) Unfortunately, I can assure you all of these different derivatives have been used at one time or another by innocent journalists who were either unaware or just sadly misinformed.
I've been writing about videogames in some form or another for nearly 10 years now, and reading about them for almost twice as long. I'll admit, though, I rarely ever noticed such stylistic inconsistencies until I began taking college journalism courses where I was exposed to the Associated Press (AP) Stylebook. The AP Stylebook, for those not in the know, is designed to arbitrate all those little arguments concerning how to properly utilize the written word (like Presidents Day vs. President's Day vs. Presidents' Day), and it was the AP Stylebook that made me start to take a more critical look at the paragraphs and sentences that fill up videogame magazines and websites.
Things that once seemed like minor quibbles (for example, the fact that "console" and "system" were always used interchangeably) started to get under my skin. I began to wince while reading my favorite magazines. I even remember stumbling across a review where "Xbox" was spelled three different ways in the very same paragraph.
Unfortunately, these sorts of inconsistencies are all too commonplace in our industry. From the most respected magazines to the most obscure websites, from enthusiast fanzines to consumer publications, these editorial gaffes abound.
So where can we turn?
The AP Stylebook features separate sections for business, sports and Internet journalism, but is of little use for videogame-specific issues of style. Wired magazine's Wired Style guide includes a few videogame terms, but it can't tell you when to use "power-up" and when to use "item." If we, as journalists, ever want to see these questions answered, we're going to have to answer them ourselves.
I imagine some of you are thinking, "Lighten up! It's just videogames. Punctuation and grammar are for squares. Who cares how to capitalize Xbox -- the reader will know what you mean. Take five Xanax and call me in the morning!"
So why bother with all of this? I'll tell you why:
A consistent style helps engender trust from readers, and, on a larger scale, lend legitimacy to our industry.
Imagine an average, well-educated videogame player who has never read a game magazine wants to browse a few reviews of recent releases. He/she reads one publication that says the game has great "cut-scenes," then skims another publication that claims the disc's "FMVs" are excellent. A third, in turn, goes on to praise the title's "cinematics."
Sure, the reader can probably use contextual clues to infer that all three articles are essentially saying the exact same thing. At the very least though, this inconsistency makes these stories harder to read. The reader might also stop to wonder: Why is it that three different publications, each supposedly penned by industry experts, can't agree on a name for the short animated movies interspersed throughout most of today's games?
Over the years, avid gamers have developed a sort of organic shorthand that is perfectly clear to them, but perfectly incomprehensible to a larger audience. This jargon is standing in the way of mainstream understanding and acceptance of videogames. However you slice it, having an inconsistent style is embarrassing and detrimental to the cause of our beloved industry. Addressing these issues will inevitably build trust and respect for both our art and the emerging field of gaming as a whole.
It's educational.
What was the world's first videogame? If you guessed Pong, you guessed wrong. Even those familiar with gaming history tend to accidentally overlook more correct answers such as Computer Space or Willy Higginbotham's venerable Tennis for Two.
But if those same people were to go on record in a major news outlet stating that Pong was the industry's true progenitor, the publication would no doubt receive sacks of angry mail from well-read enthusiasts. (Not to mention disapproving glances from the copy desk and angry phone calls from peers.) The Videogame Style Guide is also a reference manual of industry facts and trivia for the benefit of the busy writer or editor.
It's important to preserving videogame history.
In 50 years, if someone looks back at an article that references "SMB," they may well wonder if the author is referring to Super Mario Bros., Super Monkey Ball, the fictitious Sega Marketing Board, or countless other terms with the same acronym. Unless properly annotated, another information seeker might potentially confuse 1989 best-seller Prince of Persia with its 2003 remake, Prince of Persia: The Sands of Time, merely because an author forgot to reference the subtitle. A standardized method for referring to definitive games and terms is essential to keeping the historical record of this growing medium comprehensive and clear.
It's a reflection of the industry's current state.
Has our industry evolved from its component parts of "video" and "game" to become a one-word cultural idiom unto itself? Is the phrase "interactive entertainment" anachronistic or acceptable? Is the term "man" – as in "eat the mushroom to gain an extra man" – sexist? How are "life" and "death" defined in a videogame context? Is "karaoke simulation" its own genre? As the industry evolves, these and other questions about its self-perception deserve consideration.
Finally, with the proliferation of the Internet, it's more important than ever to hold all videogame writers – yes, even FAQ writers – to a higher standard.
Given website message boards that drip with egregious violations of the English language and videogame FAQs so poorly penned they virtually require the help of a translator to interpret, flaunting one's ignorance is dangerously close to becoming fashionable on the Internet. Well-written prose, even in informal forums like online message boards, should be celebrated and valued.
Bearing all of this in mind, we have one more principle to add: This guide is by no means written in stone.
This volume is, as the title implies, simply a suggested approach to navigating previously uncharted waters. No rule featured here is without exception, and we don't expect readers to agree with all our decisions. The guide will continue to evolve, both online and in print, with regular updates and revisions that reflect the latest trends in this ever-changing industry. We welcome your comments and suggestions at authors@gamestyleguide.com.
Granted, in the grand scheme of things, chances are that the correct spelling of Xevious won't permanently change anyone's life. We realize this, of course. But good, sound writing – I'm talking about simple, sturdy sentences, free of "l33t speak," and properly punctuated – is the quickest and easiest way to share your ideas with the world. More importantly, it's also the fastest way to finding the widest possible audience, and therefore the key to becoming successful in this business.
Game on.
Reader Comments (0)