A Review of Reviews: The Good, the Bad, and the Gaming |
Ó
Whether you love them or hate them, game reviews (and the writers who
write them) hold an important place in the gaming industry for one
specific reason: they're the ones the gaming public read to make our
final decision: "Do I buy this game or not?" For fans of a given genre
or series, the review might not really matter, but for the rest of us
gamers, we need good advice on spending our money on good games. But
what makes a good game, anyway? Short answer: "One that gets a good
review."But then, what makes a good review? To give us an idea, Omar dedicates an analysis piece over at ProductWiki on the matter.
What makes a good review? Omar cites the following qualities, based on his analysis of four reviews of the Xbox 360's Enchanted Arms RPG.
It should answer the all-important game buyer's question: "Should I buy this game or not?" If reviews seem too long and rambling, it's because they sometimes do more than just recommend whether the game is worth buying. They also serve as fact sheets; sometimes they criticize minor points in the game. Useful stuff for someone who doesn't know the game, but it's just annoying extras for gamers who've followed the game's development.
Since many reviews feature score systems, the scores - or at least the final score - should be related to the recommendation to buy the game or not. This is why metacritic sites like Gamerankings have become popular, says Omar. It's easy to decide on games ranked 9 out of 10 (or 1 out of 10 for that matter), but when the score falls in the "middle range" it leads to more questions than answers for the reader - and the buyer. "Is a "7" Good enough to buy or not?"
When it compares two games, it does so in an effective manner: the games are closely related (genre, platform, age or release date), and compariosns are often used to help illustrate a point. Omar's recommendation is that the game being compared to must be available on the same platform as the title being reviewed, in the same genre, and released no more than two months before or after the review date.
Reviews should be personal. Why? Simple reason: trust. No one can assume what their audience expects them to write, period. But if the reviewer sticks to what he knows best, what he enjoys, then what will happen is that gamers who share his taste in games will start reading his reviews on their favorite games more. And trust what he has to say about a new game.
Reviewers should be known by their audience. The best way, Omar notes, is by the games they like to play. For example, combat flight sim fans will definitely trust the word of an Ace Combat or Combat Flight Simulator veteran. In web reviews, the review should link to the reviewer's biography. Omar rates IGN and Gamespot well on this one because the sites link the reviews to the writer's blog, though he comments that the blogs aren't exactly a precise source of information for what games the writer likes or is good at.
The review should focus on the total experience. Modern game reviews are notorious for "segmentation," Omar says. You know those points where the review would dedicate a couple of paragraphs to lighting and texture, sound effects, nitpicking and highlighting - in other words, "the critique." It's probably fun to read from a technical perspective, but it doesn't answer that all-important question in the first place.
Finally, Omar also rises to the defense of those besieged reviewers, reminding gamers that reviewers - even as they sometimes enjoy the games they play - aren't gamers. At least, they aren't average gamers. There will be important differences in the way they look at games and the gaming public looks at games.
- Reviewers play for long game sessions, to try
and complete the game in the shortest amount of time. It makes it hard
to "play to enjoy the game" and review it from that perspective - the average gamer's perspective.
- In
multiplayer games, remember that the pre-release multiplayer the
reviewer plays may be different from the post-release multiplayers the
public will play.
Something to keep in mind when you read a review of a game you'd like to buy. Something to keep in mind when you're the one writing the review, too.
43 Jumps PSP homebrew - PSP live TV v0.3
28 Jumps PSP homebrew - PSP Live TV v0.4
17 Jumps Buy two, get one free at Best Buy
14 Jumps PSP homebrew - QMixer v1.0
Contact Us:
The QJ.net Network |
 |
| Site | Feed |
| QJ.NET | RSS |
| Nintendo DS | RSS |
| PlayStation 3 | RSS |
| PSP Updates | RSS |
| Wii | RSS |
| Xbox 360 | RSS |
| MMORPG | RSS |
| Personal Computer Games | RSS |
| iPhone - iPod Touch | RSS |
| QJ.NET Forums | RSS |
Add QJ.NET
User Favorites - December
User Favorites - December
Categories
Archives
December 2009
November 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
July 2009
June 2009
May 2009
April 2009
March 2009
February 2009
January 2009
December 2008
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
August 2008
July 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
February 2007
January 2007
December 2006
November 2006
October 2006
September 2006
August 2006
July 2006
June 2006
May 2006
April 2006
March 2006
February 2006
January 2006
Comments [refresh]
reserved
when did you break into my house to make that pic
360 sucks
amen
to be honest, i dont really rely on reviews.
Ok this is good, but what does it have to do with PSP?
it should be on the QJ mainpage, or something, not here
Agree with above tho whats it doing on this page ?
I just had to throw in one thing about reviews specifically about PSPs, 'cuz it's a pet-peeve of mine. There's so many games that reviewers give low scores to on the PSP due to their "Lack of save points." They're always whining that PSP games NEED multiple save points at every step of the level so that if you get off the train/bus/plane, you can quickly save and not worry about your game...
Now, I've already been flamed for asking this on other forums, but nobody's really answered the question: Is my PSP the only one that's come with the sleep mode? Because, well, if I hit the power button quickly during a game of Tekken, for some strange reason, my PSP holds that EXACT point in the fight flawlessly until the battery croaks. As a matter of fact, it's a pain in the bum to try to turn my PSP right off! So, if this isn't some glitch in just my PSP (which I doubt it is), why are save points an issue? When I get off the plane (which is actually in about 5 hours for me right now), I hit the sleep button, get off, grab my connecting flight (...ugh...), hit the power button again and lo and behold, my game's right where I left it! Fancy That!!!
Sorry to rant folks, but that's something that's driven me NUTS since the first series of PSP reviews. Anybody agree? Anybody have a DECENT reason why RPG games or what have you MUST have open save points?
--Databoy2k
... =)
I like how most of these comments have very little to do with the content of the article.
Which is fine, it just a different way of revealing indifference.
On a related note, I still don't think that this "analysis" of reviewing is that really that worthwhile.
For one thing, it fails to address the videogame industry AS A WHOLE. What is the industry, relative to other outlets of entertainment? How does the "mainstream" gamer see a review? How about a hardcore gamer? What are the differences or similarities between these two perspectives? How can we, as critics of games, close (or shorten) the gap between reviews made for hardcore gamers and reviews made for mainstream gamers?
I also disagree about reviewing "in comparison". Games should be allowed to be reviewed in comparison with anything. At the end of the day, games are just ANOTHER object in a person's life. Humans judge their time based on what they consider worthwhile activities, and if movies / reading books / going out to eat / hanging out with friends are consitently being chosen over videogames, we, as game critics, have to be able to know why and judge it accordingly.
I agree totally! who cares about save points with sleep? At sleep battery drainagge is very low, my psp slept 24h (not from fully charged and still had some batt left to play! Usually i use sleep as ist no use turning off the psp in tekken, then boot up, and go through all the devhook monkey business again. So plz REVIEWERS leave save spots alone and concentrate on how fun the actual gameplay is (#1 for me), how long lasin the games is (#2) and the audiovisuals (#3). Thas my 2 cents on psp reviews
just check a torrent site for if a game is popular or not. game has 5000 seeders and 5000 leechers :D. then u know its goood.if u know what i mean.
hahahahaa, - i never ever ever ever go by what a review says! you must be joking - the only way you'll know if you like somthing is if you play it yourself
About save points, i use sleep mode every time, but save points are important as well, bacause in certain games you would like to save after a big battle/mission/whatever, in case you die and have to do it again, i know it rarely happens, but it does sometimes, and we all know how annoying it is.
This is why i love games where you can save anywhere
erm... this article seems a little pointless to those with common sense and some good logic.
Just because a game reviewer has to play the game quickly doesn't mean he doesn't understand what the average gamer is looking for in a game. That's the mark of a good game review, that the review isn't slanted towards the reviewers personal tastes, and takes into account other gamers perception of the game. Just because Alex Navarro didn't put one hundred hours into Madden 2007 doesn't mean that he didn't give an accurate and fair review that gives a good indication of the end experience of anyone who plays the game.