Absolutely! Below is a completely rewritten, optimized, and expanded version of the original piece. It’s designed to sound natural, reflective, and engaging, while keeping every detail and message intact. I’ve also added a conclusion, advanced insights, and a mini FAQ section to deepen the piece and make it feel more structured — without changing the original narrative voice or intent.

---

🎮 From Self-Doubt to Self-Discovery: How Death Stranding Changed the Way I Critique Games

Back in 2019, I was a few months into freelancing for Digital Trends, laser-focused on writing Destiny 2 guides and reviewing its expansions. I hadn’t been around long when my editor messaged me with a question that would change everything:
“Would you be interested in reviewing Hideo Kojima’s new game this November?”

Of course, I said yes — over text, confidently. But in reality, I was terrified.

Even though I’d been writing about games in some capacity for over a decade — going all the way back to high school blog reviews — this assignment felt different. I wasn’t just playing a game and jotting down notes; I’d be reviewing something that was sure to be a significant part of video game history. My words would represent a major tech publication. It was a standard assignment on paper, but to me, it felt like all eyes were watching.

---

✍️ The Weight of a High-Stakes Review

Fast forward to earlier this month. My review code for Death Stranding 2: On the Beach landed in my inbox. This time, there was no anxiety, no hesitation. Just a quiet acknowledgment that this job — which once felt overwhelming — had become second nature.

Still, I paused before redeeming the code. Something pulled me back to 2019. I couldn’t help but wonder:
How much have I changed as a critic since I first reviewed Death Stranding?

Truth be told, I’ve never been totally happy with my original review. At the time, I was proud of it — it was my first big critique for a high-profile site — but looking back, it felt like a product of insecurity. I was obsessed with getting the “right” take, worrying that a lukewarm opinion would make me look like an amateur who didn’t belong. I hedged my bets, softened my stance, and turned the review into something more like a book report than a real analysis.

I played it safe, and in doing so, I lost sight of the game’s message.

---

🎯 The Missed Opportunity

Sure, I wrote that Death Stranding was about reconnecting a divided America, and I pointed out the social features that rewarded cooperation. But I didn’t engage with what Kojima was truly trying to say. I hit all the checklist items — graphics, acting, controls — but never connected with the soul of the game.

It was like I was reviewing a laptop, not a piece of interactive art.

That realization forced me to rethink my approach to criticism entirely.

---

🎮 Rethinking What Games Can Be

I started asking myself a simple question:
Why don’t I engage with games the same way I do with movies or books?

I could go on for hours about the camera angles in Citizen Kane or the symbolism in a Kubrick film — but when it came to games, I was focusing too much on mechanics and checklist features, not meaning. Yet, even the most basic gameplay decision can carry meaning.

Take The Last of Us, for example. Its crafting system doesn’t just add realism — it reinforces the idea of a harsh, resource-starved world. The marriage of mechanics and message is what makes games such a powerful medium, and I was missing it.

That’s when I stopped treating games like products and started asking a new question:
What is this game trying to say — and how well does it say it?

---

🔄 From Fun to Function

This shift in mindset changed everything for me.

Instead of asking “Is this game fun?”, I started exploring whether it was communicating something meaningful. That’s why I loved Pikmin 4 — a game that uses its tight, tidy strategy mechanics to echo its themes of organization and harmony.

It’s also why I heavily criticized the roguelike mode in The Last of Us Part II Remastered. That mode felt like a betrayal of the base game’s message — turning a story about the cost of violence into a high-score bloodbath.

And it’s why one of my favorite games this year is Despelote — a small title with more emotional resonance than games 1000 times its size. It may not have flashy visuals or endless content, but it speaks. And I listen.

---

💡 A Deeper Love for the Medium

The surprising part? This critical lens didn’t burn me out — it made me fall deeper in love with gaming.

I don’t just play and forget anymore. I stay engaged. I interpret. I question. That’s opened the door to titles I once would have tossed aside. I used to bounce off games like The Banished Vault for being too slow or too harsh. Now I can see how that harshness reflects the hopelessness of its world, and how the game’s difficulty is part of its narrative.

I’ve learned to embrace friction in games — the awkward mechanics, the tough learning curves, the uncomfortable emotions — because those things communicate, just like the comedy of slipping in Death Stranding makes the eventual building of a shared road feel like a miracle.

---

🌍 Redefining the Role of Criticism

My personal growth has led me to a bigger mission:
I want readers of Digital Trends to feel the same connection to games that I now do.

Video games are evolving — and the way we talk about them should evolve too.
It’s no longer enough to praise a game for realistic graphics or hundreds of hours of content. The question we need to ask is:
What is this game making me feel or think? What is it showing me about myself or the world?

This shift in how we approach games isn’t about gatekeeping or “deep thoughts only.” It’s about being open to the idea that games are art, and they deserve to be talked about with the same passion and depth as any other creative work.

---

❓ FAQ: Evolving as a Game Critic

Q: Should all game reviews be deep and philosophical?
A: Not necessarily. Every review should match the game’s intent. But we should allow room for deeper conversation when the game invites it.

Q: Is it wrong to focus on fun and performance in reviews?
A: Not at all! But sometimes the most important things a game has to say have nothing to do with “fun” — and that’s worth exploring.

Q: What’s the biggest difference between your 2019 and 2025 reviewing style?
A: In 2019, I wrote about the game. In 2025, I write about what the game is trying to say.

---

🧭 Final Thoughts: Maybe I’m the One Who Changed

I’m not writing this to dictate how game reviews should be done.
All I really hope is that readers — and fellow writers — realize that art asks for interpretation, not perfection. There is no pop quiz. There’s no correct answer.

If anything, I wish I’d trusted myself more in 2019. I wish I’d felt brave enough to engage with Death Stranding for what it was, not just what I thought people wanted me to say about it.

Maybe Death Stranding 2 isn’t some revolutionary leap forward.
Maybe I’m just better equipped to hear what it has to say.

---

Let me know if you’d like this in article format, PDF, or if you want an editable Google Doc version with layout suggestions!