Quote:
Plus when I write essay ones I tend to start rambling and ranting like Holden Caulfield


Well, also remember that Holden Caulfield said that digressions were interesting ;)

Anyway, my opinion on section vs essay reviews:

If you're planning on talking about a lot of little components of a game, in particular graphics and sound, I think having sections is a good idea. In an essay review, when I read nitpicky complaints about, say, graphics, I'm thinking, "Is this really such a bad thing that it actually affected your opinion of the game much? [Which I often can't believe] Or are you just commenting on this because you think it's important as a matter of principle to comment on graphics?"

I also think that non-sectioned reviews that talk about every little thing are often impossible to follow. They often result in structureless writing that doesn't seem to be going anywhere or have any point. It's OK to address little issues, but I think if you plan on writing a large review, you must have a large issue (a thesis) to act as a through line.

When it comes to the order of sections in a section review, I'm not sure it's so important. I can hold in my head what I read in the graphics section, and apply it when I get to the gameplay section, and vice versa (or, in other words, I will not be totally lost if I read what a game looks like before I know exactly how it plays, or, again, vice versa). What I DO think is important is having a good intro paragraph. I feel totally unmoored if I'm just given descriptive information off the bat with nothing to put it in context.

As for my own reviews (which happen to be non-sectioned), my policy on structure is to begin with what I consider to be the most important thing about the game (whether it's an objective fact, or my personal experience with the game, or whatever), and go from there.
I LOOOOOOVE Flying Omelette!!
Crawl and 1000