P3

PlayerUnknown's Battlegrounds

a) Genre

'PlayerUnknown's Battlegrounds' or 'PUBG' is a multiplayer online battle royale game developed and published by PUBG Corporation, a subsidiary of Korean publisher Bluehole. 

b) Target Audience

A gaming trend in the past two years has been the battle royale-style game, meaning players are virtually connected on a constantly shrinking map with 99 other gamers, and the goal is to be the last player standing. The idea of the game is to establish a survival of the fittest type "sport" where the best player is the person who survives the longest. The battle royale genre has had a growing gaming community lately with many players waiting on a breakout title with e-sports aspirations to be released. The game is rated a 16 due to the violence, meaning that the age group varies between 16 - 60. 

c) Narrative/Storyline

PUBG takes place on different islands, but the main island for PUBG is called Erangel. An abandoned Russian island where a military occupation was controlling the island. The military occupation tested chemical/biological experiments on the islands population. However, after a resistance attack on a biological facility, the island had to be abandoned.

d) Characters

The characters are all independently designed by the player, choosing from male or female. The character can have different clothes from striped shirts, to trench coats, to gas masks, and so on. This feature means that each player is unique in their own way, making the game more fun and gives it a variety of fun features. To get more clothes, you can open crates with 'Battle Points' that contain a random item of clothing. You earn 'Battle Points' through killing or the position you come in the game you played out of 99 players.

e) Gameplay

Each match starts with players parachuting from a plane onto a map area approximately 8 by 8 kilometres (5.0 mi × 5.0 mi) in size. The plane's flight path across the map varies with each round, requiring players to quickly determine the best time to eject and parachute to the ground. Players start with no gear beyond customized clothing selections which do not affect gameplay. Once they land, players can search buildings and other sites to find weapons, vehicles, armour, clothing, and other equipment. These items are procedurally distributed throughout the map at the start of a match, with certain high-risk zones typically having better equipment. Killed players can be looted to acquire their gear as well. Players can opt to play either from the first-person or third-person perspective, each having their own advantages and disadvantages in combat and situational awareness; though server-specific settings can be used to force all players into one perspective to eliminate some advantages. Every few minutes, the playable area of the map begins to shrink down towards a random location, with any player caught outside the safe area taking damage incrementally, and eventually being eliminated if the safe zone is not entered in time; in game, the players see the boundary as a shimmering blue wall that contracts over time. This results in a more confined map, in turn increasing the chances of encounters. During the match, random regions of the map are highlighted in red and bombed, posing a threat to players who remain in that area. In both cases, players are warned a few minutes before these events, giving them time to relocate to safety. At random, a plane will fly over various parts of the playable map and drop a loot package, containing items which are typically unobtainable during normal gameplay. These packages emit highly visible red smoke, drawing interested players near it and creating further confrontations. On average, a full round takes no more than 30 minutes. At the completion of each round, players gain in-game currency based on how long they survived, how many other players they had killed, and how much damage they dealt to other players. The currency is used to purchase crates which contain cosmetic items for character customization.

f) Platforms

Microsoft Windows, Xbox One and Xbox One X.

Comparison Grid

GAME
DIRECT MODE OF ADDRESS - “Indeed, only when you fall back out to the clumsy menus do you really appreciate how good a job the team has done to make control feel natural in-game.”	COLLEQUIAL EXPRESSIONS - “motion tracking can go a little squiffy at times.” - “Movement can occasionally feel a touch sluggish.”	EXPLETIVE LANGUAGE - “bite Microsoft in the ass.”
INDIRECT MODE OF ADDRESS - “a mix of audience cuts and far cleverer boss battles bring the budget production angle screaming back to the fore.”	FORMAL EXPRESSIONS - “really test the developer’s mettle.” - “The Gunstringer’s implementation is perfectly serviceable” - “infrequent fisticuffs or sword-wielding sections, feel a little shoehorned in just to introduce new gestures”	TECHNICAL LANGUAGE - “As the first real attempt at a hands-free controller that can work with both casual and core games”
EDGE
DIRECT MODE OF ADDRESS - “You wait ages for a novel narrative conceit and then two come along at once.” - “that sees you using your non-gun hand to pull the puppet”	COLLEQUIAL EXPRESSIONS - “the speaker’s rambling stories and nuggets” - “The shooting, however, is more prosaic.” - “does a valiant job of wringing out what variety it can”	EXPLETIVE LANGUAGE There’s no expletive language, which tells you that the writer is professional and doesn’t want to age restrict their review.
INDIRECT MODE OF ADDRESS - “the narration’s mostly played for laughs, the portentous tones of the speaker” - “players ‘paint’ their targets with a reticule before firing”	FORMAL EXPRESSIONS - “accompanied by the laconic, timeworn tones” - “move at a rattling pace” - “the portentous tones of the speaker”	TECHNICAL LANGUAGE - “While Kinect manages the gunplay,” - “One death attributable to Kinect rather than your abilities”

Vloggers

Jim Sterling

What kind of image of themselves does each vlogger try to project?
- Jim Sterling presents himself as a comedic reviewer, who finds the worst part of the game. He does this for entertainment purposes, to keep the viewers watching. He shows the flaws of the game, such as how the horse you're given at the start is too slow to win a race. In my opinion, he's projecting his image through the flaws of the game, because he doesn't mention one positive about the game, as that would change his image. Furthermore, he swears a lot to prove his points, to emphasise the bad parts of the game.

Give examples from the video to support your answer.
- "The horse they start you with is just bull**** artist."
- "Imagine beating a horse to death so badly you both die. That's a f***ing horror show right there."
- "Trying to find out what the f*** this game's problem is."

What kind of viewer do you think each vlogger is trying to address?
- The viewers that Jim Sterling is trying to address are older audiences who find entertainment out of a more comedic review, as compared to a more formal serious one. The viewers prefer seeing the flaws of a game, instead of the positives; because that's not entertaining. However, he does have good subject knowledge of the game.

Give examples from the video to support your answer.
- "Anyway that's it, this game is a load of all f***. I'm done"

Matthewmatosis

What kind of image of themselves does each vlogger try to project?
- This vlogger is very informative and knows many facts about the game. In my opinion, the vlogger is projecting his knowledge for the game. For example, he gives a lot of information, so he doesn't want to come across as informal or uninformative. The vlogger is very serious and the overall review comes across as professional.

Give examples from the video to support your answer.
- "This might be another reason why the controls are so simplistic - requiring only three buttons total."
- "There are some visual details worth praising."
- "When you get down to it, the biggest problem with the game is that it doesn't encourage you to play it forever."

What kind of viewer do you think each vlogger is trying to address?
- The vlogger is aiming for viewers who want a serious review, most likely looking to buy the game and want to listen to an in-depth review. This type of review normally drones on with all the facts and information, meaning that if he wanted a different audience, he would be less formal and start adding in funny parts. He uses very formal words that make the review sound high standard as a whole.

Give examples from the video to support your answer.
- "Weapon switching is incentivised with it being combined with health and energy pick-ups." 

Pushing Up Roses

What kind of image of themselves does each vlogger try to project?
- This vlogger uses some 'cheesy' sentences to keep viewers watching by adding a form of entertainment to the review. As a result, the vlogger talks very positively with lots of energy in her voice, which makes the review much more enjoyable to watch as compared to a monotone voice. But overall, the vlogger projects themselves as a positive and formal reviewer. The vlogger definitely has a playful tone of voice.

Give examples from the video to support your answer.
- "I'm telling you this game will ruffle your feathers, owl tell you all about it."
- "The more I played, the more phenomenal it became."

What kind of viewer do you think each vlogger is trying to address?
- The viewers this vlogger is trying to address are younger audiences. I say this because of her tone of voice is up-beat and uses certain positive phrases that an older audience wouldn't find entertaining. Furthermore, sometimes she draws away from the script, and adds in extra words at the end to make the review sound less scripted. Again, this attracts in younger viewers who don't want a comedic, formal review, but at the same time doesn't want to listen to swearing.

Give examples from the video to support your answer.
- "This is an amazing hook for the game, and very relatable. You feel sympathy for Otis right off the bat, you're immediately cheering for him, but you also want revenge... or maybe that's just me."

Geek Remix

What kind of image of themselves does each vlogger try to project?
- This vlogger projects her amount of subject knowledge, with a formal tone of voice and a serious, but a slightly playful attitude. She uses rhetorical questions to prove her points too. However, she speaks in an un-scripted way, her views sound genuine and not too formal. As a whole, this vlogger is projecting her creativity in a way of recreating her own short film with the game and real-life.

Give examples from the video to support your answer.
- "That's legal... right?"
- "This game is not for everyone"
- "I feel that I want to look away, like I'm invading her privacy."

What kind of viewer do you think each vlogger is trying to address?
- This vlogger is going for a range of audiences. The game appears to be for teenagers and adults, but she talks with a playful tone of voice; which would tell you that she's aiming for a younger audience. However, with the scenes included near the end of the video, this clearly shows that it's aimed at older audiences, proving to me that even if the vlogger has a playful tone of voice, uses formal language and has lots of subject knowledge, it doesn't necessarily mean that because of this you have to aim at younger audiences.

Give examples from the video to support your answer.
- "Past this point is spoiler syndrome, so I convince you to play this game on your own, which I hope I have, stop watching and come back after you've done playing."
- "Sometimes that's just how romance is, it sucks."
- "First love is a very confusing thing, and sometimes it really hurts, but I'm glad I had mine with you."

P3 Compare reviews

	Review one: PlayerUnknown’s Battlegrounds Review – GameSpot.com	Review two: PUBG review: PlayerUnknown’s Battlegrounds is imperfectly perfect – Polygon.com	Your comparison
a)      GENRE	The review explains the game’s genre subtly, which is good. It gives a lot of subject knowledge. For example, “PUBG turns this foreboding gameplay concept into an exhilarating multiplayer shooter.”.	The reviewer is very informative in general, however doesn’t tell you the genre until the end of the review. For example, “as every AAA publisher finds ways to put its brands”. As you can see, even though it’s mentioned, nowhere in the review explains that it’s a battle royale.	The GameSpot review explains the genre better to the reader, as compared to Polygon's review where the genre isn't mentioned.
b)      NARRATIVE	The game’s narrative is explained off the bat by the reviewer, by using a rhetorical question and does so in a way that subtly tells the reader exactly what the game’s about. For example, “You know what’s a great idea? Stuffing 100 players into a plane to parachute down onto a desolate island to scavenge for weapons, armour, and supplies in hope of surviving a bloody Deathmatch.”.	The narrative in this review is mentioned – however, due to the vague storyline, this review shows that. For example, “100 players parachute onto an island. The last one alive wins.”. As you can see, the reviewer uses quick sentences to emphasise the basic storyline.	The GameSpot has a lot more detail with describing the narrative and the games objective, compared to Polygon's emphasis on the basic storyline.
c)      PRODUCTION PROCESS Talk about pre/prod/post-production	In this review, the production process isn’t mentioned, but is only touched upon. For example, “Jumping into a match is less daunting and faster paced than something like H1Z1 or earlier Arma II mods that Brendan Greene himself helped create.”. In my opinion, they did this because this review is more about gameplay, rather than how the game came about. Also, the review generally seems to be focused on keeping the viewer watching and not clicking off the video. This is clearly shown in the video they made, where each sentence is carefully picked out to stay entertaining and on track.	The production process is described by the reviewer in a very formal way, with not a lot of detail. For example, “Battlegrounds is the culmination of years of genre experimentation by designer Brendan “Playerunknown” Greene.”. This quote is highlighted in red in the review to catch the readers attention, which is interesting. The reviewer talks about post-production, saying how the game is released in “an unfinished state”. Furthermore, the post-production is described here, “its creators have had nine months to repair, polish and expand on their baby.”.	Polygon is much more detailed with the production process, as compared to GameSpot's. This is because GameSpot focused more on the gameplay, rather than the history of the game. Polygon also used different text colour to catch the viewers attention, which GameSpot doesn't have. That being said however, Polygon doesn't have a video to go along with the review like GameSpot's does.
d)      CHARACTERS	Players customize their own nameless character, and the reviewer does a good job of showing this. The reviewer refers to ‘players’ a lot of the time, rather than ‘characters’, which tells the reader/viewer that the game doesn’t have a main character. For example, “keeping an eye on the slow yet ominous “blue circle of death” that forces players into an increasingly smaller zone.”.	In this review, the characters aren’t mentioned, but the players are talked about. This tells me that due to there being no main character in PUBG, reviewers tend to talk more about the players. For example, “Because every player knows intimately the effort that goes into building a kit of weapons and armour,”.	Both of these have similarities regarding the character - do to there not being a main character. Both talk about the players rather than the character, however, Polygon has more information about the customization for the player.
e)      GAMEPLAY	Gameplay is the strong point of this review, with lots of informative facts, and a complete guide to how to play the game. The reviewer is a gamer, so he knows exactly what to expect when you play PUBG first time. His clear understanding of the game is expressed in a way that includes absolutely everything that this game has to offer, which is good. For example, “You never know where the final firefight will take place, or which position will be most advantageous when things heat up, until the blue zone comes into view.”.	Gameplay is described in lots of detail, from what the game has to offer – to the details that make PUBG so fun. What the reviewer did so well with describing the gameplay, is how they focused on the players – which is what PUBG is all about. For example, “Military bases and cities house powerful weapons, but that attracts more players, and thus more conflict.”. The reviewer is critical too – saying how newcomers will find it difficult to play as there is no tutorial. It just throws you in, and you learn overtime. The reviewer does this, while also adding in the games features. For example, “Newcomers who don’t religiously monitor video game trends can grok the beginning, middle and end of their first match. Players float onto an island, raid vaguely Eastern European towns or dusty ramshackle forts for randomized gear,”.	GameSpot has the upper hand here, due to their review being completely revolved around gameplay, which isn't always a good thing. GameSpot goes into extreme fine detail with each game mechanic, and how to play, Polygon's review focuses on the players first time playing, and what to expect.
f)       TARGET AUDIENCE	The target audience isn’t mentioned during this review. This tells me that this reviewer has only focused on the gameplay, rather than an important aspect being who plays the game.	The target audience is described perfectly in this review, showing how the player base like to watch PUBG on streaming services such as Twitch and YouTube. It explains how the players have an exciting experience – no matter what their skill is. For example, “This central theme makes Battlegrounds particularly watchable. Since its informal launch in March, millions of players and non-players have flooded YouTube and Twitch to watch matches, whether they’re competitive, light-hearted or both.”.	GameSpot doesn't mention the target audience in their review. However, Polygon goes into detail with the player base and why the game is so popular among gamers.
g)      PLATFORMS	This reviewer explains that this game is very PC-dominant, with no reference to the Xbox edition. He mentions the performance issues of the game. For example, “Even a high-end PC can have trouble maintaining a consistent framerate”.	The reviewer talks about how the game doesn’t run well on Xbox, with a six-month old version of the game. The reviewer explains the platforms positives and negatives, such as PC having performance issues. “With PUBG’s official release, players finally gain access to its second map, a small and open desert stage that, on test servers, often stutters and crashes. And Xbox One owners now have access to a six-month-old version of the game, in early access on console, where its controls and performance leave even more to be desired.”	Polygon has more detail regarding how well the hardware can handle PUBG. Furthermore, Polygon is more detailed when explaining the Xbox edition of PUBG, as compared to GameSpot not explaining much about it.