BraLoD said:
When I used to write reviews in the forums here back in the day I used scores to simply symbolize the review but I broke it down in 5 parts (gameplay, story, graphics, music and difficulty) which where assigned adjectives to them (bad, good, etc). I think there is a lot more than just how fun it is, I think lots of things affect different games in different ways, but at least a balanced mix should be present on all reviews. Things matters more or less to each games, so its a case to case scenario. It's a pretty strange thing, trying to mix objective and subjective things into a hard cold number, it's definitely not an easy job to do and doing just one (full objective or full subjective) certainly doesn't represent the game properly in many ways. I think its fun to talk about it and that's why I make this threads, but in the end your own opinion is always the one that should matter the most. |
I miss the gamepower style review, put some categories that most games should have and grade based on those technically and sure if you want to put some subjectivity on the "fun factor" by all means =]
duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"
http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363
Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"
http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994
Azzanation: "PS5 wouldn't sold out at launch without scalpers."