"What's wrong with video game reviews?"

[bahn]

http://www.gamesarefun.com/gamesdb/e...?editorialid=8

Sounds inspired from the extensive piece conducted by InsertCredit.com a few years back.

Preface:

Boy, that's a negative title, is it not? Video games have been around for quite some time now--in many cases much longer than the people playing them. Video game reviewing has been around almost as long. Since video games became available for home use, people have wanted to know which ones to get. I'd like to name off some of the first publications to have these reviews, but I'm not quite that old nor that knowledgable. But I am old enough to know one thing: there is something seriously wrong with video game reviews. By something, I mean many things and they aren't all the fault of the reviewers. No, in many cases it is the mere concept itself.

[Zerodash]

I really don't see what his point is. He seems to be talking in circles and just complaining about subjectivity.

My only problem with videogame reviews is the general lack of maturity in print gaming mags...

[gameoverDude]

It could be the use of number or letter grades. Some people will look at the grade and say "Oh, D" or "OK, 42- must be awful" followed by "I'm not buying that one, NEXT!". Not using a grade compels the reader to see the entire review.

[Roufuss]

It could be the use of number or letter grades. Some people will look at the grade and say "Oh, D" or "OK, 42- must be awful" followed by "I'm not buying that one, NEXT!". Not using a grade compels the reader to see the entire review.

Go to GameFAQ"s right before any major release, and they'll flip the fuck out if a review site even gives a game a B or an 80-90, without even reading the review.

So yea, I believe this. Or maybe it's because they don't want to read a 5 page IGN review so they just skip to the end.

I usually just read over the closing comments, and sometimes it prompts me to read the review, or sometimes it's just enough for me.

[Salsashark]

I didn't read the article you linked because...well, I don't really feel like it right now. But still within the bounds of the topic, I was just reading some interview with Michel Ancel and he said this:

I think it's interesting because when you look at the movie industry (I am talking a lot about the movie industry, but...), while they are pure entertainment, people are also talking about the subjects. In video games, people are just talking about the controls, the graphics, the number of polygons -- all those things. OK, it's interesting, but you could talk about other things than just the superficial things. Why don't we speak about what is the emotional content in Ico for example. Then we talk about different things. We are not just talking about all the tools, polygons, and such. I think it is interesting that in the movie industry you can talk about special effects or you can talk about the story, the meaning, what the director wanted to express. I think we could interest more people who are not into video games [if games had more meaning].

I'm not so sure every game deserves this treatment, but I think it's the kind of thinking that makes for an interesting article or maybe even encourages the maturation of the industry. Most game reviews are so full of the same cliches that if you look at a handful of them they could easily be by the same author (albeit maybe with different opinions).

[MarkRyan]

Who's Michel Ancel?

[Salsashark]

Who's Michel Ancel?

The guy that created Rayman and Beyond Good and Evil.

[Jeremy]

I love him going off on sectioned reviews, which have been discouraged on GameFAQs for quite some time now, thank God.

[AstroBlue]

I love him going off on sectioned reviews, which have been discouraged on GameFAQs for quite some time now, thank God.

Jemery, are you the No.1 GameFAQS Review Contributor?

[haohmaru]

I really don't see what his point is. He seems to be talking in circles and just complaining about subjectivity.

My only problem with videogame reviews is the general lack of maturity in print gaming mags...

Yeah, but you have to remember what the percieved target market share is: adolescent males. If they were writing to appease 25-35 year olds, they would collapse even sooner.