Is the video-game review system outdated? Do some review scores make no sense to you what-so-ever? Don't worry, you're not the only one who feels this way...
Kotaku have listed four ways in which they think the video-game review system can be fixed.
go to source for full article.
There are some of you out there who love the way writers and publishers handle video game reviews. This article is not for you. As far as the author and his sympathisers are concerned, you are the saps stuck as janitors cleaning dirty toilets in The Matrix, the suckers who sit around drinking Diet Coke convinced that it tastes like real Coke, the unfortunate few who were never able to see the rhinos and race cars in those Magic Eye images.
But after reading countless video game reviews over the years, and more recently editing Frankenreviews for both games and gadgets, it's become more and more obvious that the video game review system is dated, limiting and even, at times, unintentionally condescending.
But there's a ton of talent in the game review industry, really. So where are we going wrong?
Chapter I: If there's no such thing as a perfect game, then what's with the numbers? If there is no such thing as a perfect game, when why the hell are you scoring out of 100? It's not just PC Gamer that thinks this way—most publications, even those who do give out "perfect" scores, do so begrudgingly. It's as if the developer has somehow cheated and broken their system.
Chapter II: But it's as much the readers' faults as the writers'. Not so fast, smug reader. Never forget that you too are completely worthless and wrong, because the public is putting way too much emphasis on these review numbers.
There are reviews that go to the hundredth decimal place, scoring games like 9.45. In such cases, reviewers are essentially scoring out of a thousand. So what separates a 9.45 from a 9.44 or a 9.34. And on that matter, what separates an 82 from an 87? Maybe Yoshi's tongue snapped too quickly back into his mouth. If that were only tweaked, man, Miyamoto could have cleaned up with at least an 88.349.
The more numbers a reviewer uses, the more they are trying to authenticate their own bullshit
Chapter III: We should be reviewing art when we're really reviewing products. The fundamental problem with game reviews is that they're analysing products, not pieces of art.
Games are viewed as consumable goods meant to entertain for X hours at X amount per X dollars. There's an interest in durability (replay value, multiplayer), functionality (controls, camera), interface (HUD, menus), sex appeal (graphics) and accessibility (difficulty level).
We've turned Mario into an MP3 player.
Chapter IV: This is all useless, the author is tired/will receive hate mail. Now for the obnoxious backpedaling. We really do direly need the video game review industry because there is just too much volume for gamers to get prioritise alone, even with word of mouth, message boards, etc. We need people and organisations that can plow through multitudes of games to pick out the gems and crap on the...crap.
Submit a Story
Register
Get Started
Webmaster Tools
Comments with -10 or lower "thumbs" are removed from display.
Its also a shame that some Critics and Reviewers review games that they never played before. How the can you do that without actually testing it out, of course im actually talking about what ^^ConkerASkyJockey06 stated above.
The rest just seemed to be going on about how the number scoring system is largely redundant, which it is. The issue is that the "worth" of a game's components comes down to the opinion of the person reviewing it. Something that appeals greatly to them might not mean much to someone else, which is why reading the material is always going to be worth more than checking some number and basing a decision off that.
Like when Gamespot rated a baseball game higher than Manhunt 2. You know something is wrong there.
FISSION MAILED