By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Gaming - So how should we fix the broken review system? (VGC Brainstorming Battle!)

Munkeh111 on 06 May 2008
rocketpig said:
- Rate the game for what it is. Some games have no story, some are focused on it. Judge accordingly. This applies to graphical capabilities, game difficulty, almost everything.
- Ditch the numbering system.
- If a game is story-based, rate the story like you would a book or movie.
- Ditch breaking down each category into a numerical system that makes no sense to anything other than a tweaked out ferret.
- If a game is geared toward children or casuals, judge it as such. After all, Pixar has made a killing by creating movies that work for everyone (similar to Mario platformers, really). Don't play SSBB and review it like you would GTA IV.

Most importantly:

- Stop reviewing games like they're 14 years old. These people are journalists, fer Christssakes. Many of them have college degrees. At one point or another, they have been forced to read or watch quality entertainment. Use that knowledge.

In short, stop pandering. That's about the best way I can put it.

 By no story do you mean it only has an excuse for a story, or like a sports game?



Around the Network
psrock on 06 May 2008
The Ghost of RubangB said:

 

 

I think reviewers need to explain exactly what their criteria are on their front page before you see any numbers at all, so that readers can at least hope to expect some consistency throughout the various reviews, so we don't see different games getting rewarded and punished for the same thing, or games getting the same exact review but different numbers at the end.

The graphics/sound/controls review system made sense in the 80s and 90s when graphics/sounds/controls were advancing in huge leaps and bounds, but I feel it is now obsolete.

Nowadays graphics and sound are almost always good enough, and should only be discussed when they particularly hold a game back or particularly push a game forward.  Now we just throw 10s at shiny bloomy HD games and throw 7s at Wii games.  Wii games are getting punished for not being HD, as if Wii gamers give a shit about HD.  Wii gamers bought Wiis for something new and are getting told their games are crap based on things they knowingly opted out of.

Handheld games have it the worst, as the DS, the PSP, and the GBA seem to be punished with bad scores across the board, simply for being handheld games.  Reviewers seem to hate the concept of gaming on the go.  I can grab a portable gaming device (tm) out of my pocket and play everything from Tetris to Nintendogs to God of War in short bursts on a bus or train, or my personal favorite, local wireless gaming in long lines.  Even though  the portability and local wireless gaming are advantages that console gaming is not capable of, reviewers seem to look at all handheld games as the inferior little bitch siblings of console games.  Handheld gamers bought handheld games for portable gaming and are being told their games are crap based on things they knowingly opted out of.

 

These are just a few ideas.  Anybody have any others?

 

 


graphic is important, the only reason you say it's not is because your console of choice is behind graphicly, i cant wait to hear you guys jumping for joy when a hd wii comes out. I cant wait.



 Next Gen 

11/20/09 04:25 makingmusic476 Warning Other (Your avatar is borderline NSFW. Please keep it for as long as possible.)
The Ghost of RubangB on 06 May 2008

I think it would be great to have some sort of Roger/Ebert combo just do 2 thumbs up, 2 down, or 1 up and 1 down. You could get to know the 2 reviewers and their tastes and start to trust them or at least understand their criteria.

It would be great to take a 13 year old boy and a 30 year old woman, and make them play every game ever and discuss them in this type of setting. This way the games that really stick out are the ones that can capture both their imaginations.

Maybe I should have a bunch of kids and force them into working for my review site in the future, haha.



twitter.com/evaneldeneller

Sunday Fundays

rocketpig on 06 May 2008
Press_the_Button said:
1. Review systems are flawed because they are subjective. I reviewer A hates Wii games cos they aren't HD then he's going to hand out lower marks for a game compared to someone who loves the Wii for example.

2. Graphics and Sound are still important things to mark on as they contribute to the enjoyment of the game whether that be a DS, Wii or PS3 game.

3. Control mechanism isn't something that gets marked on enough in my opinion -The Wii could score higher here than many multi button PS3 or 360 games which may balance out the lower graphics marks handed out if the game is compared to PS3 and 360 games.

4. The two main marking criteria in my opinion should be whether a game is fun to play by it's intended audience and whether it represents value for money.

5. Whatever criteria that are adopted however will never escape the subjectiveness aspect and will therefore never be perfect.


1. If a reviewer is that stuck on HD or loves the Wii that much, he/she should find a new job because they suck at objectively looking at a situation.

2. Graphics and sound are only important in games that focus on that sort of thing, much like movies.

3. I agree. Controls should be factored into these reviews and we should get a firm understanding whether they work in each particular case.

4. Fair enough, but much like other entertainment forms, games can be more than just "fun". If there is a well-constructed message in there, some of us would welcome it in favor of "fun".

5. Nothing is perfect. We're simply asking for something that isn't completely broken. 




Or check out my new webcomic: http://selfcentent.com/

SaviorX on 06 May 2008

Handheld games do get dumped on the most unfortunately. However, Wii games getting downgraded because of their inability to match their HD counterparts happens constantly. Reviews focus on graphics more than gameplay, in which the latter is more important. The SOLE reason I never bought DBZ: Budokai Tenkaichi on the Wii was because NO ONE explained its gameplay aspects at all. Just 16:9 Widescreen 480p support like I care. Handheld games get the OK from me graphics wise as long as I can clearly make everything out. Kingdom Hearts: Chain of Memories got like a 7.6 somewhere, even though A-plus effort was obviously put into it. IT had FMVs for Pete's Sake! STOP reviewing games like HD is the best and only alternative.

NEWS FLASH! It isn't.......



Leatherhat on July 6th, 2012 3pm. Vita sales:"3 mil for COD 2 mil for AC. Maybe more. "  thehusbo on July 6th, 2012 5pm. Vita sales:"5 mil for COD 2.2 mil for AC."

Around the Network
rocketpig on 06 May 2008
Munkeh111 said:
rocketpig said:
- Rate the game for what it is. Some games have no story, some are focused on it. Judge accordingly. This applies to graphical capabilities, game difficulty, almost everything.
- Ditch the numbering system.
- If a game is story-based, rate the story like you would a book or movie.
- Ditch breaking down each category into a numerical system that makes no sense to anything other than a tweaked out ferret.
- If a game is geared toward children or casuals, judge it as such. After all, Pixar has made a killing by creating movies that work for everyone (similar to Mario platformers, really). Don't play SSBB and review it like you would GTA IV.

Most importantly:

- Stop reviewing games like they're 14 years old. These people are journalists, fer Christssakes. Many of them have college degrees. At one point or another, they have been forced to read or watch quality entertainment. Use that knowledge.

In short, stop pandering. That's about the best way I can put it.

By no story do you mean it only has an excuse for a story, or like a sports game?


It depends. Mario platformers don't need a story focus because that's not what's important to the game. Sports games obviously don't need a story, nor do racers (though it would be interesting to see one try sometime).

If the title is going for other things over story, that's fine. The thing is that most of those games are few and far between. Most modern games make some attempt to tell a story. Unfortunately, most fail at this miserably. 




Or check out my new webcomic: http://selfcentent.com/

Mummelmann on 06 May 2008

To be fair rubang; I don't think every single Wii game score is unjust or faulty, many of the games are utter crap. (Also, see 85% of the PS2's library to see what I mean. The games were/are horrid, and got low scores accordingly).



psrock on 06 May 2008

I want examples.

Because i remember last year i was yelling about great ps3 games that looked good that got pretty low scores, aka Rachet and Uncharted. These games are amzing looking, but they still diddnt get an advantage over Nintendo games in reviews. And frankly Most Nintendo made games get great reviews anyway, because they are good.



 Next Gen 

11/20/09 04:25 makingmusic476 Warning Other (Your avatar is borderline NSFW. Please keep it for as long as possible.)
sparkit34 on 06 May 2008

I would like reviewers to take into consideration the target group of the game.
A game that a 6 year old enjoys will be different to a game that a 28 year old enjoys. The game my mom would like is different to the game my best friend would like.

Right now most reviewers take the perpective of the hardcore gamer, as most of them are hardcore gamers. Maybe it would be interesting to see the final review score being based on the average score of a large random group of players for which the game is targeted. Let Moms review More Brain Training, young kids review Nintendogs and Pokemon, and grandma's review Wii sports. It might also be interesting to see how these groups review games not targeted to them. I would love to see my gran take on GTA and see how she would rate it.



Member of the Pikmin Fan Club

The Ghost of RubangB on 06 May 2008
psrock said:
The Ghost of RubangB said:

 

 

I think reviewers need to explain exactly what their criteria are on their front page before you see any numbers at all, so that readers can at least hope to expect some consistency throughout the various reviews, so we don't see different games getting rewarded and punished for the same thing, or games getting the same exact review but different numbers at the end.

The graphics/sound/controls review system made sense in the 80s and 90s when graphics/sounds/controls were advancing in huge leaps and bounds, but I feel it is now obsolete.

Nowadays graphics and sound are almost always good enough, and should only be discussed when they particularly hold a game back or particularly push a game forward. Now we just throw 10s at shiny bloomy HD games and throw 7s at Wii games. Wii games are getting punished for not being HD, as if Wii gamers give a shit about HD. Wii gamers bought Wiis for something new and are getting told their games are crap based on things they knowingly opted out of.

Handheld games have it the worst, as the DS, the PSP, and the GBA seem to be punished with bad scores across the board, simply for being handheld games. Reviewers seem to hate the concept of gaming on the go. I can grab a portable gaming device (tm) out of my pocket and play everything from Tetris to Nintendogs to God of War in short bursts on a bus or train, or my personal favorite, local wireless gaming in long lines. Even though the portability and local wireless gaming are advantages that console gaming is not capable of, reviewers seem to look at all handheld games as the inferior little bitch siblings of console games. Handheld gamers bought handheld games for portable gaming and are being told their games are crap based on things they knowingly opted out of.

 

These are just a few ideas. Anybody have any others?

 

 


graphic is important, the only reason you say it's not is because your console of choice is behind graphicly, i cant wait to hear you guys jumping for joy when a hd wii comes out. I cant wait.


 Whoa whoa whoa, hold your horses.  Are you throwing that graphics argument at your dream stereotype of a rabid Nintendo fanboy who changes their arguments every generation?  Or are you throwing that graphics argument at The Ghost of Rubang B?  Because if you're talking to me... let me introduce you to a screenshot from Ancient Domains of Mystery, one of my top 5 favorite games of all time:

 

 

 
 
 

 

You see that light green?  That's grass.  Those dark green &'s are forests.  There are mountains to the north and east and a beautiful river flowing through the valley, just west of the two villages near the corner.  By the looks of it, I'd say this adventurer is approaching the fire tower.  I wish him the best of luck.  I've been playing this game on and off for about 10 years now.  It was made by one man alone, and has more depth than whatever new $20 million piece of shit FMV-fest of an RPG we're all supposed to be creaming ourselves over.

 

It's called my imagination, and it's been good enough for me since I was about 3.  I have never given a shit about graphics and the only reason anybody does is because reviewers throw numbers around like crazy based on it so we have fuel to argue with.  Games get shinier every year, and if I really cared I'd upgrade my PC.

 

That said, yes graphics can help or hurt a game, but they don't need to be a part of every review.  Does anybody give a shit that the 360 version of Hexic is... HEXIC HD?  You're rotating hexagons for fuck's sake.  Or Super Street Fighter II Turbo HD Remix?  Adding HD to titles is like adding X-TREME to my Doritos.  They don't play different or taste different.  It's just upping the pixels and changing the packaging.

 



twitter.com/evaneldeneller

Sunday Fundays