These are consumer reviews, meant to inform people whether or not the game is worth a purchase. Frankly most cinematic/literary criticism doesn't do that job and is just pretentious.
Actually, I've had time to think this over, and frankly, sir, that's a load of bull. Most cinematic criticism comes in the form of consumer reviews, and that does nothing but tell people if a movie is worth watching. It just operates according to a critical standard that actually involves criticism, instead of a categorical statement of quality that pretends to something as ludicrous as an objective perspective.
I find your statement ridiculous and worrisome.
Games aren't the same as movies or books, so they shouldn't be reviewed the same. A review should be something that highlights strong points and issues of a game. The score should be a ballpark judgement of how those strong points and issues rate with a target audience. Someone should be able to read a review and see what things they want and what things they don't want that the game offers. Above all, a review should be complete. It should note all possible issues and benefits of owning the game.
The purpose of our reviews isn't to tell you what your opinion should be, but to let you decide for yourself based on a complete listing of a game's features, functions, and issues and add a ballpark score on top for those who like to have a little more guidance.
So yeah, that's how I'd like our reviews to work.
@ Signalstar please send me a sample. I'm looking for quality writing more than long-time members, although I do expect you to be fairly active as a reviewer. A couple a month isn't too much to ask though.