Crappy videogame writing

[MarkRyan]

Why wouldn't it?

Because the price has absolutely zero to do with the game's content.

Would you buy a movie on DVD for $20, if it was only 45 minutes long?

If it was 45 minutes of something I wanted to own, absolutely.

It would seem like a poor investment, even if it told a great story in that timeframe.

Yes, spending money on DVDs is a poor investment. Luckily, DVDs and games are for entertainment.

Midway's Arcade Treasures is a great investment at $20, but at $50 it just isn't worth your time.

My leisure time is worth way more than my money. When it comes to game reviews I want to know a person' opinion about game--the opinion should be timeless no matter how the game drops in price or goes up. If I got Panzer Dragoon Saga for free it'd be the same game as the PDS on eBay that goes for $200. The free game isn't a 10 while the $200 one is a 3.

Even if you downloaded crap for free, it's still crap.

Exactly.

It's all about bang for the buck. Would anyone buy a Mustang GT, if it was selling for $150,000. Hell no! But at $26,000 it's worth the price for what you're getting.

Except game quality isn't dependent on price like cars and electronics.

[gamevet]

Because the price has absolutely zero to do with the game's content.

Why wouldn't it? If I sold you a burger at joint A for $2 and at joint B for $5 and they were of equal quality; wouldn't you rate the $2 burger at a higher rating?

If it was 45 minutes of something I wanted to own, absolutely.Yes, spending money on DVDs is a poor investment. Luckily, DVDs and games are for entertainment.

Okay! So, let's say you go to an amusement park. One guy gives you 3 trips on a ride( 5 minutes long)and it's a blast. Another guy lets you partake on his ride ( 5 minutes long) and charges you the same price as the guy giving you 3 rides. Both rides are equally enjoyable, but the guy offering 3 rides compared to the guy giving you one ride, would seem like the better deal. How would you rate them?

My leisure time is worth way more than my money. When it comes to game reviews I want to know a person' opinion about game--the opinion should be timeless no matter how the game drops in price or goes up. If I got Panzer Dragoon Saga for free it'd be the same game as the PDS on eBay that goes for $200. The free game isn't a 10 while the $200 one is a 3.

See above.

Game reviews are based on the now, not on when the price drops. Sure there are exceptions, like when they suggest that the game is great for a rental, but not as an investment of $50. The latest Starfox (GC) is a great example.

[mollipen]

Whoops!

I read the top date, but still, he said 13 years later in the review.

I like reviewing old stuff. The way I see it, I'd rather review something that people out there might not know about, that is still worth checking out, rather than reviewing a game that isn't worth talking about anyhow. I think, that as magazine only have a certain amount of review they can put in, why waste a page talking about a mediocre or crap game when you can find something from the past to expose new gamers to?

Of course, that's probably why I don't run a game magazine. And that indeed was my GameGO PS review.

The second review is too damn wordy, there's not a videogame on Earth that needs 3000 words to be written about it.

I 100% agree. I prefer having to fit a review into a limited amount of space, because I then indeed can't just ramble on about every little thing. It makes you think harder about what points really need to be told to the reader, and which can probably be left unsaid.

[Fe 26]

They were founded by the same people at least. I know PSM (and GamePlayers) were both published by Imagine (which is what IGN used to be).
http://www.futurenetworkusa.com/about/management.html

How and why do you people know this shit?

I also dont like reviews that spend the first 2 or 3 paragraphs talking about the history of the franchise. I dont care, Im reading the review because Im interested in the game, I know about the franchise. All it needs is 2 or 3 sentences.

And no, no need to bloviate about the storyline, if I wanna know about the storyline Ill play the fucking game. Its not like storylines are that good in games anyway.

Same with individual feature sets. There's no need to tell me about each weapon in the game or each game mode. Just tell me if the game is fucking good, and worth my money. Really, a review only needs to be 1000 words MAX.

And no "try before you buy" or "try renting it first" bullshit.

So all you want in it is "Hey youz, buy dis here game." or " You dontz want this here game. It sucks" ?

Man, I see that mag flying off the shelf.

[catty]

I'm with diffx. I want the executive summary. Screw the backstory synopsis, the bulleted lists of features, the technical descriptions of graphics. Tell me if the game is good and why. How does it compare to the genre benchmark.

TeamXbox is the worst. Check out this 8100 word beast:http://reviews.teamxbox.com/xbox/940...rsport/p1/#top

Good lord it has a 630 word description of the HUD.

And the highlight is this insightful bit of game criticism:

"There are no big surprises when playing Forza Motorsport with a standard controller. Here’s the Forza Motorsport Controller S layout:
• Left thumbstick – steer
• Right thumbstick – look left, right back
• Left trigger – brake, reverse
• Right trigger – accelerate
• A button – E brake
• Y button – look back
• X button – reverse
• Black button – cycle camera views
• White button – cycle HUD information (damage and tire heat indicators)"


And I don't like the price to be factored into a review score. My free time is much more limited than my money so I'll gladly pay more if a game is actually great.

[Clash!]

Why wouldn't it? If I sold you a burger at joint A for $2 and at joint B for $5 and they were of equal quality; wouldn't you rate the $2 burger at a higher rating?

Splinter Cell: Chaos Theory is a great game, its $50. Katamary Damacy is a great game, its $20. Is Katamary Damacy a better game because its $20? Should Katamary get a higher score because its cheaper?

Okay! So, let's say you go to an amusement park. One guy gives you 3 trips on a ride( 5 minutes long)and it's a blast. Another guy lets you partake on his ride ( 5 minutes long) and charges you the same price as the guy giving you 3 rides. Both rides are equally enjoyable, but the guy offering 3 rides compared to the guy giving you one ride, would seem like the better deal. How would you rate them?

You keep talking soly in how long the game is vs. how much it costs. We are talking GAMEPLAY. Dragon Quest 7 is a gazillion hours long, and I think it sucks. I give it a 5. It cost $50 when it came out. Should I bump it up to a 7 because I get a shipload of game for $50?

[RoleTroll]

I would say, then, reviews of the PSP and its games should never reach a 9 because of price. And no console game should ever reach a 9 if it costs $50 when released. A 9 is a near perfect console game released at $10.

We'll have to agree to disagree. Honestly, I don't mind the reviewers giving a little bump to $20 console games when most are released at $50. But this curve grading should be system-specific. It's fine to give a little bump to a PSP game released for $20 if most games are released for $50, but it's not okay to trash every $50 PSP game reviewed because they cost more than new DS games.

[Diff-chan]

So all you want in it is "Hey youz, buy dis here game." or " You dontz want this here game. It sucks" ?

More or less, yea. Thats what Next Generation did, after all and it worked fine. I havent read a full IGN review in years.

And the highlight is this insightful bit of game criticism:

LOL. Seriously, if its in the manual, it shouldnt be in the review.

[Drewbacca]

The critic should be mindful of the price in the review and the amount of delight generated from the game. The final overall score and attitude in the review should not be swayed by this information.

[MarkRyan]

LOL. Seriously, if its in the manual, it shouldnt be in the review.

Pretty much, unless it serves a purpose to prove a point the reviewer is trying to make. In fact, everything in a review should just be support for their point--if their point is, "The game is great even if the graphics suck" then everything in the review should relate to explaining why. Button configs, storyline details, sound effects analysis, gameplay mode descriptions, etc. really don't need to be in a review unless there's something worth mentioning about them (i.e. they're particularly bad or particularly good and support the main points).