Game critiquing seems to be a trickier subject than I first anticipated. Just like with movie or books, a person will read reviews from other people that have, in this case played the videogame, to see if the item in question is worth spending money on. That seems like a simple enough concept. However not everyone agrees with how the critiques go about their reviews, thus causing the problems.
Some game critics simply give you a quick synopsis of the overall game so you can decide on or own if it sounds good or not. These reviews are fairly simple and usually just expand what would be on the back of the game’s case. While other critics give you a review of the game. They play it, keep track of what they did and did not like, then they either post it on a blog or send it to the magazine they’re writing for. Depending on the critic he/she will probably focus on some aspects of the game over others. This can cause some problems because it may over look important pros or cons to the game.
It’s understandable that not everyone is going to agree with what the review says, after all everyone has and is entitled to their own opinion. What boggles my mind is that some readers will go out of their way to complain about what they have just read. The readers should be well aware when they begin to read that it is an article based on someone else’s point of view, and that it may not parallel their own. I suppose I understand to a point because when I read a game review and don’t agree with the writer I think ‘How dare they say that! That game was awesome!’, but I never saw the point of posting a blog on how the person was wrong. Generally once I think about the review for a couple minutes I realize that the person is entitled to their own opinion and maybe there is some truth to what they say. Then again this could be due to years of my older siblings criticizing the various things I liked growing up.
Another problem that seems to exist is the current method of scoring videogames in reviews. I’m sure most people are well aware that there is the basic scale of 1 through 10. Many people find this system to be flawed. To some avail they’re right. Not everyone’s idea of a rate 5 game is the same. After all who decides what average is? Once again however I can’t agree with these people. Reviews after all are an attempt to tell the masses what critic thought of something and generally they want a basic grade for the game. Thus the 1 through 10 scale is in use. The reader doesn’t have to take this score at face value, but they should consider that this is for the overall game. This means: graphics, plot, character(s), overall development, game play, camera angles, etc. So even if this game was “epically awesome” the fact that the camera angles totally sucked and made you die 25% of the time might lower the grade. Another thing the reader has to keep in mind is that the writer may be limited to a certain amount of space or words so they may not be able to say everything about the game that they want to.
In conclusion I think that people need to stop trashing every little thing they read and take into account all the work that goes on behind the scenes just so they, the readers, can read a game review.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I have to say I disagree with your take on numbered reviews. I don't think its possible to ballpark the experience in regards to one person and the next. The weighted number scale is impotent and I'll explain why. For example, I read a review on a movie posted by Roger Ebert, I completely disagree with him, I scratch my head and go he's wrong, oh well. Then I read up on some of his other writings on movies in general and find out that he is an elitist prick! Zounds! This explains it, his frame of reference and criteria he is looking for is completely different from mine, thus, I never agree with him.
ReplyDeleteThis problem can be applied to numbered reviews. The reviewer has a different agenda than the reader, any reader - as all people will have different criteria and lists of importance.
You can infer how this will miss the mark with those that aren't into the same things or have the same mindset and will light some fires with people that like the same things. It's all completely impotent, but thankfully I don't think they'll be around much longer if Sony can keep offering free downloadable demos... so there's that at least.
I think readers will often be tempted to say "well, they don't agree with me so they're wrong and they suck". The problem is -like you said- from different perspectives. Where a reviewer might come from a background mainly in FPS, he can still make the review of an RPG as balanced as possible.
ReplyDeleteThe scale is a rough estimate guide, in my opinion. It's still useful when used with other guides and reviews that use the same system. For instance, on Gamefaqs.com you can read the reviews for any given game based on the audience who has bought it. You're sure to have a few numbers that are totally out of the norm, but overall you'll see roughly the same score throughout. Even on the most recent game, Batman: Arkham Asylum, most of the reviewers gave it around an 8 or 9. That doesn't mean that everyone will like it, but it makes it clear that most of the people who played it found it enjoyable. Some people thought it was a perfect 10, while others may think it deserved a 4, but you take the overall picture and consider what most of the response was.
You are right it is hard to take in someone criticism on a subject when you feel totally and completely different on the subject. It is strange that we have to put so much faith in these reviews and there are so many conflicting set of views. You might read one review on a topic and they hate it: then turn around and read another review on the same topic by someone else who loved it. It is a hard thing to contemplate. Are we suppose to find a person who is neutral on the subject and see what they have to say, or do we lose the passion in the writing? Who knows..
ReplyDelete