How do you read game reviews?

[Goofonian]

I'm sure we are all well aware that the accuracy of game scores is a bit of an issue these days and it is still true that many people will simply look at a score and not bother to read the review.

While I would like to say that I've not been a culprit of this, it's true that some game reviews (especially for highly anticipated games) can get exceedingly long and I'm usually not all that interested in the quality of the rock textures in level 3. I was thinking about this today and realised that I couldn't remember the last time I read every word of a game review. I find myself more and more just reading the last paragraph or two to try and get some idea of if the game is fun before I head out and spend my hard earned cash.

Is this something that other people are finding as well? How do you read game reviews?

 

[Bongo Bill]

Usually, what I do, if I find a review that mentions something I hadn't otherwise heard, then I go back and read other reviews by that same reviewer, and see how his tastes compare to mine. Thus I can more accurately judge what I might like about it.

Also, I completely ignore scores.

 

[Lara Crigger]

I don't think you can get an accurate picture of what a reviewer thought of a given game UNLESS you read the entire thing. I know that when I write reviews, I include everything in them for a reason, and if someone only read the last paragraph, they'd miss a good portion the ideas I'm trying to convey. It's hard to persuade someone to either play or not play a game if he or she only reads one paragraph. They'd miss the entire argument!

After all, finding a good reviewer is like finding a good hair stylist: You have to search for awhile until you find someone you trust. You must find someone whose tastes fit yours, and you're never going to get that if you don't read the entire review. Yes, it takes effort. But I'd rather expend effort before I spend my money than after.

 

[infernomatic]

I don't.

I check out as many screen shots or vids as I can get my hands on, cruise through forums for opinions and then if I'm still unsure I rent before purchasing (as I'm strictly a console gamer). So far, I've never purchased a game I've been disappointed in.

 

[Narrator]

I read reviews obsessively. And I think that ignoring a score is part of not-getting-the-whole-story. A score can spin someone's overall perceptions considerably, which is an important tool in a reviewer's repertoire.

 

[Russ Pitts]

I tend to ignore scores and look for whether or not the reviewer evaluated things that are important to me, or spent their time angsting over things that aren't. A review that starts out with "In spite of a lack of multiplayer ..." for example will usually go straight into my "ignore" pile.

 

[Goofonian]

Ok, so it seems that everyone has a different opinion on this (most of which are different to mine........), but that leaves me still curious. Since a lot of the guys on the escapist forums are actually people that review games, or have reviewed games in the past, in public forums (not for the escapist mind you) what do you guys think about when you write reviews? are you trying to get a particular message across? perhaps trying to write a big ass article to express how much you love a particular game? or are there times when you will pad out something to meet a minimum word count that you have been givien? (come on, be honest )

Depsite being relatively new to the posting scene, I've been around the traps for a while (a "lurker" at GWJ and planet gamecube among others for many years) and there are people that i have come to trust. I'll have to admit to being a big Matt Casamassina fan, regardless what you guys think of ign in general. Are there people that you guys will listen to more than others? or perhaps more importantly, people that you will try and imitate when you write reviews/reports/etc?

and just on a side note, as far as podcasts go, i think russ and shawn have the podcast thing perfected. Despite how much I love the "grown up" attitude of the escapist magazine, generally when i'm after a radio show I'm after something light and entertaining with just a little bit of seriousness holding everything together. That is exactly what they provide and I really couldn't ask anything more. Despite the little bit of negative feedback about the last show, you guys have hit something special here. Don't ever let that go, PLEASE!

 

[Joe]

When I do write a review, I prefer to talk about the experience rather than bulleted technical points. Think about a movie review: Sure, some people talk about lighting, cinemetography and so on in every review, but that type of writing doesn't take into account that movies are greater than the sum of their parts. I think gaming is the same way, at least with good games. If some aspect of the game is truly stunning, be it graphics, storyline or even direction, I should be able to express it without saying "Graphics: 9/10."

I tend to prefer reviews that work the same way, because really, I don't care if the sound is bad or the graphics are good if they don't detract or add to the fun factor, and I'm most concerned with whether or not the reviewer had fun.

 

[Goofonian]

Think about a movie review: Sure, some people talk about lighting, cinemetography and so on in every review, but that type of writing doesn't take into account that movies are greater than the sum of their parts. I think gaming is the same way, at least with good games.

I try to avoid being a nintendo fanboy when i can, but seriously. Zelda: Ocarina of time - graphics 8/10, sound 6/10, story 6/10, game overall 10/10. don't know why, that game just really works for me.

 

[Lara Crigger]

Since a lot of the guys on the escapist forums are actually people that review games, or have reviewed games in the past, in public forums (not for the escapist mind you) what do you guys think about when you write reviews? are you trying to get a particular message across? perhaps trying to write a big ass article to express how much you love a particular game? or are there times when you will pad out something to meet a minimum word count that you have been givien? (come on, be honest )

When I first started writing reviews, I felt like I had to meet a checklist: Talk about graphics--check; sound--check; gameplay, characters and plot--check, check and check. But I soon learned that in discussing my opinion of a game, certain aspects would be utterly irrelevant. For instance, who cares about the sound in an adventure game, unless it's really bad or really good? So now I try to focus on the entire experience, without worrying about meeting some arbitrary checklist of topics.


(On a side note, I think it's a sign of lazy writing if you need to pad your article up to meet a word count. If that happens, you probably haven't thought hard enough about the game and what you want to say about it. Besides, I usually have the opposite problem, that is, figuring out what to cut!)

Are there people that you guys will listen to more than others? or perhaps more importantly, people that you will try and imitate when you write reviews/reports/etc?

As far as reviews go, I tend to like and trust the reviews I've read in CGM; sure, I also may be biased. Still, I was a reader before I wrote for them, and I've always felt like CGM's reviewers knew just what I was looking for and why. I feel the same way about the reviewers at GWJ, particularly Adam "The Fly" Lamosca and Cory "Demiurge" Banks, for starters.

 

[Goofonian]

I feel the same way about the reviewers at GWJ, particularly Adam "The Fly" Lamosca and Cory "Demiurge" Banks, for starters.

Ya know, Cory Banks was the name of my old boss at toys r us. I'd be somewhat excited and disturbed all at the same time if it turned out to be the same guy!

 

[Demiurge [deprecated]]

I feel the same way about the reviewers at GWJ, particularly Adam "The Fly" Lamosca and Cory "Demiurge" Banks, for starters.

Golly... you're making me blush.

Ya know, Cory Banks was the name of my old boss at toys r us. I'd be somewhat excited and disturbed all at the same time if it turned out to be the same guy!

How I wish this were so, purely so I could yell and scream at you for slacking off at work. But I've never worked at Toys R Us. If it'll make you feel better, though, I'll pretend.

The message a reviewer should be trying to get across is whether they like the game or not. That's a fundemental problem with being a critic, though ... not everyone shares your tastes. My approach is a lot like Lara's in that I'm looking to convey the experience of the game to the reader, but I feel that the checklist (sound, graphics, gameplay, etc.) is important to keep in mind. I don't know if I could ever write a review that assigns values to each aspect of the game and still feel like I'm getting my point across, but the checklist helps you keep in mind which attributes of the game need pointed out, for better or worse.

Lots of people don't like them, but I love writing reviews. The bulk of your content is right there, waiting to be described. But I don't really like reading reviews, outside of finding out general information about game mechanics. If I don't know where the reviewer is coming from, experience-wise, I'm not going to be able to translate their praise or complaints to my own tastes. There are a few reviewers I trust (most of them write for GWJ, one of them for The Escapist) but otherwise I take most reviews with a grain of salt. I expect the readers of my reviews to do the same.

 

[FunkyJ]

Whilst it's true that not everybody shares the same tastes in games, I like to describe what I like and don't like, and spend time justifying why.

And I think it is important to talk about sound and graphics, especially in the Next-Gen era. If a game doesn't look / sound like it's giving you the most a 360 can, then that should be stated.

Sure, a good game is a good game, but when you've paid over $600 for your console and $100 for your game, you should get the best out of it.

 

[Slybok [deprecated]]

I write semi-professionaly for Game-Overdrive.com and I'm the head writer over there.

That doesn't mean I'm an initiated writer of any type though as I'm not paid for my work and still consider myself a neophytte. Over the past year or so I've been with GO, I've seen the review system adapt to our ideas of scoring each category individually and dividing the review into categories to our latest review system iteration which involves a general flowing essay format coupled with a final score element.

I'm personally a fan of not assigning any score to a game and letting the readers decide from their reading but sadly, the majority of people who read reviews don't seem to read the whole review and therefore need some sort of guiding element.

When I write reviews, I try to piece together my thoughts of the game into one simple sentence. This is my general opinion of the game and once I have that sentence down, I expand on why I feel it is like that and what elements make it that way. In all truth, I've never had to pad any of my reviews for a word count as since I write for an online establishment, my word count isn't as limited.

I don't read any publishments actively other than my own site(which isn't as active as I'd like it) and The Escapist although I should be reading WAY more. When reading up and deciding if I'm going to purchase a game, I firstly ask my friends if they have any info on it and then I check out metacritic.com and look at various publishments opinions on the game. From those generalized scores, I decided if I'm to buy or not to buy.

P.S. I'd be interesting in talking to some of my fellow writers here if any of you guys are interesting in speaking to the neophyte to game journalism.

 

[heavyfeul]

When reading up and deciding if I'm going to purchase a game, I firstly ask my friends if they have any info on it and then I check out metacritic.com and look at various publishments opinions on the game. From those generalized scores, I decided if I'm to buy or not to buy.

I use Metacritic before buying any game these days. If I am considering buying a game, I go there and first check out the metascore. I then read the reviews that are close to the overall score, and usually peruse a couple bad and glowing reviews. That way I know (1) if the game if the game is good, (2) what are the drawbacks, and (3) where does it shine. Makes the decision making process very easy. I never get a bad game anymore.

If I am still on the fence after reading up on Metacritic, I go ahead a rent it or give a play at the local game store.

 

[DrRosenRosen]

I only read reviews once I'm actually playing the game. When trying to decide what I want to play I go to gamerankings.com or metacritic, look up the game, discard the highest and lowest scores and then find the mean of the remaining scores. Then I'll see if I like the game's subject/style/genre. For instance, I'm not a huge RTS fan so an RTS has to be pretty freakin' awesome to interest me. Alternatively, I really like horror based games so I know something like Call of Cthulhu will be of more interest to me despite mediocre reviews.

Of course, if I can get a game for $2 brand new like I did with Max Payne 2 from Gamestop.com a couple weeks ago, I'll play it no matter what unless I've heard that it's really really terrible.

 

[Goofonian]

Of course, if I can get a game for $2 brand new like I did with Max Payne 2 from Gamestop.com a couple weeks ago, I'll play it no matter what unless I've heard that it's really really terrible.

I found a big ol pile of dvd's for $2 each at the local electronics store today. Oh boy there was some stinkers in there! haha

 

[uk_john]

While I do read, in a glancing way, magazine reviews, I do not buy a PC game until I see positive User Reviews. I am also seeing more and more reviews where the words do not match the score. Read this review and work out what the score would be, then look below for the actual score and tell me they match...

"Don't worry, it's not as bad as it looks. Space Rangers is one of those games that comes from nowhere, looks from the box like a bad joke wrapped in a bizarre piece of revenge fantasy sent to test your patience by a hated enemy, but somehow defies all the odds and keeps you playing thanks to the magic gameplay juice that developers like to pull out of their arses from time to time.

Anyone old enough to remember such yesteryear 'classics' as Masters Of Orion will have an inkling of what's going on here. For the most part it's the kind of top-down, 2D turn-based space exploration that went out of fashion around the same time as heterosexual boy bands. Throw in a spot of trading, piracy, law enforcement, asteroid mining and alien baiting for good measure, then add some basic yet engaging planet-based stompy robot RTS action, the occasional multiple choice text adventure (go figure) and a strange Asteroids-like mini game and that's Space Rangers.

Sounds like a horrible mess, doesn't it? A car crash of loose ideas, backwards thinking and outdated gaming ideas tied together with a functional yet underwhelming visual style. It isn't though. I've installed, reviewed and promptly uninstalled many, many games in my time on planet Earth, but Space Rangers (actually a package incorporating two previously unreleased Space Rangers games) has somehow managed to remain a fixture on my already cluttered hard drive. Because it's playable. Very playable.

Something just grabs you and keeps you there. Maybe it's the sense of humour (a paragraph in the manual cheekily explains away any translation errors by basically saying, "It's the future, that's how they talk now"). Maybe it's the hidden layers of depth. Maybe it's the amount of freedom you have to play any way you want. Maybe it's just very, very good game design.

Whatever it is, Space Rangers isn't going to break any sales records and may not even stay on the shelves very long. But if you play it you will enjoy it, and you can't really ask for more than that."
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
59+12 is the total percentage that was given!