Writing theory: 1st and 2nd person in Articles

[derboo]

This may belong in the offtopic, I'm not too sure.

I know using 1st person in journalistic work is generally considered to weaken the writing, but in another thread about video game journalism, the question whether 2nd person is a good or a bad thing came up.

I for myself rely heavy on 2nd person in my writing. I find it difficult to talk about game mechanics while constantly avoiding any direct addressee. Or rather, when I do, my writing tends to get quite a bit... bulky.

For example "You can also boost your stats by wearing your shirt inside out" feels more naturally for me to write than "It is also possible to boost the stats of the main character by making him wear a shirt inside out". While not a problem at all with the single sentence, I feel constantly writing in impersonal sentences limits my ways of expression, and makes the text itself feel... well, quite impersonal. More what I'd expect to read in an encyclopedia. I like to assume the reader as a potential player of the game.

While writing my current article, I'm trying to sneak in 1st person, using "we" while explaining the game. I think it works rather well context-wise, as it is a party-based RPG, and I'm hoping it preserves the text's authority through the plurality.

What do you think?

I think I also used an expression like "this author ..." at some time to fake/avoid 1st person. Does that read too scientific? I guess that would also have to be used sparingly, if at all.

[Discoalucard]

I'm not a big fan of using first person too often, and I've been actively avoiding it in any articles written here. Ditto the "this author" stuff, and even "we", although I think the latter can be used for comic effect. (I see certain Action Button articles do this.) Its usage can come off as arrogant unless used correctly. Sometimes I'll keep the first person in submitted articles if I think they work, though.

I do end up using second person the way you've described, although I know other places are against it. I think my problem is I tend to slip in and out of using second and third person, which might be viewed as awkward.

[Garamoth]

"We" seems a bit too pedantic for my tastes. This isn't a scientific journal. It's way out of place for discussing general entertainment.

"You" the player sounds wrong at first, but it's completely understandable. Maybe "one can boost it's stats" works too, but I can see that becoming tiring after a while.

My olde English teacher used to tell us that first and second person writing were all bad form while writing non-fiction in English. The text should be as impersonal as possible and your opinion should exude from the text by itself without pronouns. I'm not sure he was right, but that's the way I try to write, mostly.

[Jave]

"We" should be avoided at all costs, methinks. (uh, that didn't come out right, you know what I mean)

I think the 2nd person situation is one unique to writing about games, because it's such an interactive medium, and you're essentially trying to describe what the player would be doing if they were playing the game.

First person is largely unnecessary when just talking about the game itself, but works well when used for colour commentary, a little bit of which can spice up a dry read.

[derboo]

Hmm, I guess my mother language led me to false assumptions about "we" in English writing. Gotta edit that out of my current text...

Jan 1, 2010 19:07:02 GMT -5 Jave said:

I think the 2nd person situation is one unique to writing about games, because it's such an interactive medium, and you're essentially trying to describe what the player would be doing if they were playing the game.

Yeah, that was the explanation I was looking for, but didn't quite manage to put my finger onto.

[Ryu the Grappler]

Jan 1, 2010 19:51:05 GMT -5 derboo said:

Hmm, I guess my mother language led me to false assumptions about "we" in English writing. Gotta edit that out of my current text...

Jan 1, 2010 19:07:02 GMT -5 Jave said:

I think the 2nd person situation is one unique to writing about games, because it's such an interactive medium, and you're essentially trying to describe what the player would be doing if they were playing the game.

Yeah, that was the explanation I was looking for, but didn't quite manage to put my finger onto.

Describing the gameplay in a second-person tone is way too informal for my tastes. It implies an assumption that the reader is going to play the game. There's really no reason to use "you", when it could easily be substituted with "the player", "the main character" or the name of the game's protagonist. I guess one could get away using the second-person on a review, but it always personally bothered me when I see Wikipedia editors (which is supposedly a formal encyclopedia) write about games in the second-person and sometimes in the first-[erson oddly enough.

[Jave]

Personally, I'm far more concerned about the flow of text than the formality.

[justjustin]

It might take practice, but give writing without either a shot. "Wearing a shirt inside out also boosts stats." The trick is to make it as short and brief as possible, reordering words and cutting them out instead of focusing on replacing them. Then you have plenty of room for extra words to make everything flow together and easy to read.

Despite that, "you" is still okay for the exact reason Jave mentions-- "you" are doing the things in the game. Another possible thing to do is use the word "one" instead. Might sound funny at first, but it's correct and doesn't personalize anything. "One can back stab an enemy when not targeted."

[Warchief Onyx]

It's best to try and not use either, but for articles on gaming, 2nd person's a lot more acceptable than it would be in other journalistic fields.

Stay away from first person as much as you can. It's fine for a blog or a personal narrative, but it really weakens journalistic writing, even purely opinion pieces. And using stuff like "we" or "this author" is especially bad. It not only weakens the writing, but also comes off as very condescending and arrogant.