This data collection doesn't tell us much that wasn't visible at a glance on the metacritic lists: much less Wii games are critically acclaimed.
Of course one could argue that this statistic reveals as much about the game reviewers community as it does about the quality of Wii titles.
The main fault I see with the reviewers community is that it is not diverse enough.
- Basically you have your 30-something western hardcore gamer reviewer (usually male, white, english-speaking, high-school or college level education) with minor variations.
- Then there are the slightly more pretentious fringe reviewers as in Edge, who like to embellish their prose and give the form if not always the substance of a deeper analysis of themes and narrative qualities.
- At last you have a very minor percentage of "specialist" reviewers such as RPGgamers.
One could wonder: are any of these qualified to discuss and review Nintendogs or Wii Sports? Or even MK:Wii?
Where are the pedagogists reviewing games for various kid age ranges, and explaining to the interested parents if Animal Crossing is a good or bad experience to play together with their children? Or if a Hanna Montana game can be distressing or educational? Or if the Raving Rabbids are just creepy or a healthy relief for a 5 yrs old?
Where are the user-fueled communities of reviews by families, for families, judging party games on the base of how much fun it was for an audience made of little kids at a birthday party?
When I read the review of a Pixar movie, I usually find that the movie is put in the right context: the reviewer tries to judge it on the base of its target audience. On top of that, there's all kind of nice analysis that can be done for the adults who enjoy it, but the baseline is how good it is for kids.
Are game reviewers generally still unable to do the same, and cater for personas different from themselves?
Existing User Log In
New User Registration
Register for a free account to gain full access to the VGChartz Network and join our thriving community.
