Sigfried1977
Legend
Oh, absolutely. I just don't like sanctimony is all. I actually quite like Polygon.
What do we want from game reviews?
- Thread starter Sonic
- Start date
Oh, absolutely. I just don't like sanctimony is all. I actually quite like Polygon.
D
Deleted member 13524
Guest
No.
Option 1 tells you what's in the game in a professional manner and leaves the reader with enough space to figure out whether he likes it or not.
Option 2 tells the reader what he should think and blatantly insults the reader if he happens to like it. It leaves no space for the reader as it presents its opinion as an absolute, unquestionable truth.
It's indoctrination:
Ok, you want this kind of review ( is it because you seem to agree with its conclusions?). You're free to read them, of course.
It doesn't change the fact of what reviews with loads of embedded political/social remarks really are.
deathindustrial
Regular
Option 1 tells the reader what the author thinks in clear and blatant terms. Maybe you are different but I prefer honesty over "balance" in reviews. By honesty I mean "honest about their views". If that sort of review offends you, you have the choice to read something else or perhaps go join a men's drumming circle to reaffirm your ravaged self-image at the hands of the left wing media cabal.
=)
[nerd trope image]
And your point is what - Western pop-culture tropes are prevalent on the Internet?
Studying console forum posters could be equally groundbreaking.
"Day 452: The subject is still arguing about hidden power in the SoC. Suggests increasing neuroleptics by 50mg."
D
Deleted member 13524
Guest
By suggesting only men are bothered with indoctrination, are you implying that women want to be told what is sexist or not, instead of having their own opinion?
I find that extremely sexist.
Truth be told, I've seen several women claim that they feel empowered by the sexyness of Bayonetta, rather than objectified by it.
Different people can feel different things. But I think this objectification obsession is kind of bullshit. I think every person (real or created) in media becomes an object.
This specific issue of sexism in gaming seems to be an extremely important issue to you. It has some relevancy to this thread but is only a small aspect of the overall discussion. To constantly bring this specific issue into the discussion doesn't really advance the discussion on the thread topic as a whole. I understand it is important to you but there is an appropriate forum to discuss this issue in depth without having to derail this one.
Prophecy2k
Veteran
To be fair he wasn't doing that at all. He was engaging deathindustrial on a particular point. But the main thread of his argument wasn't about sexism in particular at all. At least not to me. It was about the social/political positions of reviews and how they can kludge up reviews by trying to indoctrinate their readers, destracting from the actual object of the review (i.e. the game). I thought that was perfectly clear if you'd gone back and read his posts from the start of the thread.
L. Scofield
Veteran
To disappear. They're worthless in this day and age.
I agree with FarticusMaximus. Rather than reviews I'd like to have descriptions. Keep your impressions to yourself, tell/show me the facts and I'll formulate my own opinion.
I agree with FarticusMaximus. Rather than reviews I'd like to have descriptions. Keep your impressions to yourself, tell/show me the facts and I'll formulate my own opinion.
Which facts exactly ?
Game length ?
graphics fidelity ? What if it's stylised then ?
How to explain that the game is fun ? Could you understand its appeal from being tought the mechanics alone ?
How would you express the atmosphere of the game (if any) ?
Don't get me wrong, I don't really care about how they are today, and I think it would be more interesting to have a gameplay cut down rather than impressions, but then very few people would be able to do a good job at it, and you wouldn't read a review long after release...
(And you'd still have subjectivity inside...)
Prophecy2k
Veteran
Fun and appeal are subjective qualities. The same that L.Schofield is actually implying that he will make up his own mind about.
And I agree with him. You don't need to explain to me how fun the game is to me, because that's not of any value. As your idea of fun may not correlate with mine because the aspects of a game, genre, mechanic etc that you value, I may not do so, and vice versa.
Reviews written around the idea of telling me "how fun" a game is aren't that useful to me. They may be for others, but not to me. I'd rather get the explicit facts about the game and it's design, whilst also not minding hearing a reviewer's qualitative analysis of the more intangible aspects, like the narrative quality and characterisation.
Somethiing like:
"Game A is an RPG with fairly complex but not confusing gameplay systems (similar to games such as X, Y, Z etc), stunning graphics but with a meandering story that doesn't really go anywhere. The performance on X platform suffers in certain sections of hgh activity (e.g. large battles and boss fights), however the imagine quality is impressive, sporting a full 1080p resolution and AA technique that seems to all but eleminate aliasing. The overall game design also impresses, with a massive persistent open world, filled with quest-giving NPCs and lots of intersting side-content to engage outside of the main quest. Environments are varied, as are the types of enemies and settings encourtered throughout the gameworld. The world also hides numerous secrets, unlocked through special quests which reward with unique loot items that add a real sense of accomplishment to their obtaining. Despite the overall story being a disappointment, the characters have some interesting dialogue and the settings, background lore and great atmosphere in each of the twelve individual world areas give more than enough to maintain a player's interest."
This combined with some video footage of the game would be easily enough for me to make my mind up about a game. This is essentially all i'm looking for.
D
Deleted member 11852
Guest
I'd really like one of the folks who want an objective fact only review to have a stab to writing such a full review of an actual game. Something like GTA V or The Last of Us - something I've played and loved - so I can an idea of what such a review would look like.
Who is up for the challenge?
Who is up for the challenge?
L. Scofield
Veteran
-Game length could simply be how long it took the reviewer to beat the game.
-Graphics fidelity could be an analysis of techniques being used, artifacts as well. That of course would require that reviewers learn about tech instead of repeating buzzwords over and over again like they do now.
-They can explain the mechanics and situations they encountered in the game. I can decide if it looks fun or not to me.
-They can learn about art (actual art, not modern crap) and give a rundown of its elements. Or simply draw comparisons to other media that have the same or a similar atmosphere so I can draw my own conclusions.
Prophecy2k
Veteran
Dsoup, I'm game. Let me have a stab at it tongiht and let you know ;-)
D
Deleted member 11852
Guest
Good man!
For DriveClub, see what I tried to do here:
Opinion
http://www.techingames.net/UserReviews/Details/1
And compare with this:
Fact
http://www.techingames.net/Games/Details/5?selectedTab=Overview
RancidLunchmeat
Veteran
NVM
I understand his main perspective, and mostly agree with it. I'm not a fan of political indoctrination in reviews either and think those types of pieces are best left for editorials. I don't mind a blurb here and there that a reader may find some of the content objectionable in a review, band leave it up t to me as the reader to decide. If a reviewer is somehow able to separate his/her personal views of the content and provide a description of the gameplay, including if they enjoyed it or not, and any overarching issues that could hinder the experience. However if the review is going to be about the objectionable content and why it's so bad then I disregard it entirely.
Similar threads
