Editor's note: While I agree with Suriel that movie critics valued Avatar's eye-candy over narrative, I don't agree that video game journalists are much different from their film counterparts. Too many game reviews only offer shallow analysis of actual gameplay, and too few even attempt to put games into historical context. Additionally, I suspect that critics too often inflate review scores of high profile games simply because those games are high profile. Although games criticism has a long way to go, at least one player believes the enthusiast press is on the right path. -Rob

That James Cameron's Avatar so easily captivated film critics with 3D lights and sound -- to the point of bestowing four and five star ratings -- was strange to me. Even Roger Ebert, an esteemed critic who's often seen as the film industry's most prominent authority, gave the movie his highest rating.

Although the visuals are the best I've seen so far, the story was a shoddy framework for the colorful splendor of wild beasts and grand-scale battles between the conquering mercenaries and proud natives. You could extract a certain amount of political commentary from the narrative, but it seemed too shallow for that to be the movie's purpose.

Los Angeles Times film critic Kenneth Turan articulated this oddity best when he wrote:

Perhaps the most surprising thing about Cameron's visual accomplishments is that they are so powerful we're barely troubled by the same weakness for flat dialogue and obvious characterization that put such a dent in Titanic.

The reason I was so baffled by many critics' love for a film they admitted put such an emphasis on visuals over story may be because that's something we so actively try to avoid in video game criticism.

Yes, many reviews geek-out over "jaw-dropping visuals," and many smaller sites seem to praise or hate a game simply due to the logo on the box. But I feel that video game critics are less likely to ignore gameplay faults than film critics are to ignore problems with narrative.

If a game had spectacular visuals but lacked the gameplay to back them up, I suspect the title would receive middling reviews. You may disagree with my assessment, but I tend to find that this is generally true.

My observation highlights the endless grind video game "journalism" endures to prove its legitimacy. Because games are themselves often viewed at the bottom of the artistic totem pole, their critique, by extension, must also be inferior to any other medium.

So when I see "respected" movie critics falling over themselves to praise Avatar simply because they saw the film in IMAX 3D and were wowed by its aesthetics, I question our hobby's "lesser" position among the arts.

Two things likely put video games in this predicament: their largely superficial content and their misunderstood nature. When people outside our industry look at games, they only see the sexy librarians, thickheaded marines, and juvenile gangsters. This generalization causes them to dismiss any sort of potential value. The Mountain Drew-chugging frat boy and the antisocial otaku characterizations of the average "gamer" don't help mitigate this attitude, either.

These outside observers don't see what game critics usually spend most of their time evaluating -- gameplay. The problem lies with the fact that the people who tend to demean the medium often don't play, and thus, don't understand that a game's mechanics are separate from its narrative context.

You can't "see" gameplay; you actually have to play to understand. Of course, aesthetics and story can define a game; however, their interactivity is what makes them different from any other medium, which is crucial to evaluating them.

While people often complain about the lack of professionalism from the so-called "journalists" and the uncomfortably close relationships between some publishers and media outlets (claims that I won't attempt to refute here), I stand by our industry's ability to more ably evaluate the games they play. Because while there will always be a certain amount of subjectivity to a review, a publisher would have a much harder time pulling an Avatar on our turf.