I write my own game summaries. I read a lot of other people's summaries, too.
I realized there are some things I like a lot in summaries.
- Omniscient GM perspective. I want to see this through the GM's eyes.
- After action reports (AARs). How did it go? What went wrong?
- Rules commentary and reflections on the rules. "ACKS does this." "In GURPS, we see PCs do a lot of this." "In D&D 5e, I noticed monsters do less X and more Y."
- Maps and pictures, if possible.
- A cast of characters at the beginning, so I can see who to look for. Games are like Russian novels, so please let me look up who they are before I confuse Ruslan Ivanovich Kotin with Ruslan Illych Kotin during actual play. Or, to go all Robert E. Howard, confuse Amlaric with Almaric or Amluric.
- Matter-of-fact summaries.
- Notes. I love end notes talking about the good and bad of play, decisions, rulings, etc.
There are things I don't, too.
- in-character writeups. Maybe entertaining for the other players, but "let me roleplay my guy for you" is right up there with "let me tell you about my character" for me. They're fun when you were one of the players, honestly, but I'm less interested in what Grondar thought of the session and more in what Grondar's player did.
- fiction. I don't want to read stories, but game summaries.
Just my opinions. Pretty much I seem to like the matter-of-fact GM-written AARs more than the punchy fiction approach. I learn a lot more from a GM reflection on a game than from stories about game, too. My own writing reflects these, I think.