I was surprised at how petty most of Kyle Orland's complaints are. On one hand, I do realize that he wants to find some standard of vocabulary for writing about video games. I agree with him that we need to come to some understanding about how we approach the writing. If you're going to write about Xbox, then you should at least know how to spell it properly. For something like PlayStation, most people probably don't know the difference whether the S is capitalized or not. For that reason, I think it's more about consistency than specifics. In philosophical writing, you never vary your words because when you do, you change the meaning. If you start out an article writing it as Playstation, I don't think there's a problem as long as you stay consistent in the spelling of it. It would be great if we could come to a general understanding of how we, as writers, want to spell it. The problem is that it will be a process to get there.
What I don't necessarily agree with is his desire to make the review and criticism an entirely hands off process. What I mean by that is when I read a review, I'm reading it for me. The phrase "a batarang will be used in the fight with Poison Ivy" is bothersome in that it sounds more like a random observation than an instruction. I don't necessarily mean that they all should be focused on instructing the reader on how to do things, but taking such an approach is taking away from engaging the reader.
On that same note, his argument against being creative is exceptionally bothersome to me. I've read many reviews where the author was being creative in his approach, or witty in his criticism towards certain aspects. Some people like Yahtzee make a living off approaching game reviews with a touch of creativity and wit. What you get is a personality behind the author and as long as they do so to directly make a point, I think that's better in many ways than to be completely impartial and practical. In his most recent review of Wolfenstein, he does the entire review in limerick form. It's not only entertaining, but he makes actual points about the gameplay. As long as the author isn't shadowing his points and his stance, I think creativity can be a way to draw people in and take interest in not only the game, itself, but in the way we view games as a whole.