Game Reviews: Critique, Subjectivity and the 10 Point Scale
July 4, 2008
I have already put forth my own frustrations with game reviews but I would like to add a little more as I feel that there is still a substantial amount of work that still needs to be done on fixing the current make up of video game assessment.
The Reviewing Vs Critiquing Framework
For a long time this has been (and no surprises here, still remains) the crux of my argument for improving game reviews. The word ‘review’ doesn’t really work in this context as I am comparing ‘reviews’ to critique and the final product will still classified as a review. So lets give it a name like ‘Check Box Review’.
Check box reviews are reviews where a game is judged based on a preconceived set of builds that determine where the game falls on the scale of good or bad. There is a “standardized” set of these prerequisites which are often clearly labeled in the reviews such as graphics, gameplay and sound .
More importantly are other controls which are not spoken of but still greatly affect the outcome of a review’s text. This is the company’s/reviewer’s perception as to what formula and framework make a perfect game. This is a little tough to explain, what I am referring are the opinions that speak to you as:
“I’m a reviewer and for this I know what a great game should consist of and these variables are what I am going to measure my games on”.
Basically, as the quotation says, the reviewer is the person whom defines what video games are and he reviews based on that judgment. Unfortunately the reviewer is wrong as he should have no role in defining the experience, the experience defines itself. So when we add the already familiar variables (gameplay, sound etc.) in with this pre-purposed idea as to what exactly defines a video game then the result is this broken set of rules for analyzing games with the narrowest of perspectives.
(more…)
Tags: critique, review
Posted in Industry Issues | Comments (0)
Fanboys and How to Deal With Them
July 1, 2008
There has been some interesting discussion around regarding fanboys and how best we deal with them. Of all the commentaries that I’ve read, I find Leigh Alexander’s conclusions to be particularly standout. Her idea is basically that subjectivity is natural. When we repeatedly see something that exempts a positive or neutral feeling towards us, we ally ourselves with that and form an affinity with it. She used the brilliant example of a news reporter and a stalker.
In video games, the same is true, you play a good game for a while and you begin to form a relationship with the characters within the environment.
The concept of people forming these relationships through repeated meetings leads to them becoming fans and enthusiasts of what it is they are playing. Seems pretty justified huh? Now let us turn to our culture and look at how we deal with fans and fanboys.
No matter where you stand, being a fanboy often leads to tension within a community. Game reviewers get crucified for showing subjectivity, forums turn into literary battlefields, you don’t need the examples.
If we break this situation down into its core products, in essence we are fighting our friends and our brothers because they obey their natural instincts to like what they play. Why does it have to be this way though? Why must we be so aggressive towards our peers? Don’t we all play games, read about gaming and interact with other gamers just to have fun?
As suggested in the aforementioned article, the only way in which we can beat this ‘epidemic’ is to accept it. Being a fan, a fanboy is natural and there is nothing wrong with it so why all the hate then? Once we accept fanboyism then we can end the tireless bickering that rages on our message boards and comment streams. And when this ends, what is left is a friendlier environment for us all and who doesn’t want that?
- Link MeTags: fanboys
Posted in Industry Issues | Comments (2)
Implications with Classification of Hardcore and Casual
June 29, 2008
Language is particularly interesting in that it is a vehicle for natural selection; language allows us to classify objects into groups. This simple convenience makes comprehending the environment we live in a much easier task. Unfortunately such a process is usually held in our subconscious and as such we are unaware of how dangerous it can be if we take control ourselves to simplify complex issues with this form of categorization. What this means is that every time we categorize something, (particularly new, foreign and/or complex) we run the risk of allowing this simple convenience to short sight crucial properties and implications as to what it is we are defining. Being in our subconscious, we don’t realize our own shortsightedness which turns simple, necessary categorization into flawed error.
This concept can be applied to language within our own sub-culture (video games). Several pieces of language fall victims to such short sightedness, simply put, we need a re-thinking of such vocabulary. But before I get to that lets take a step back and put this language under the microscope.
(more…)
Tags: casual, hardcore
Posted in Industry Issues | Comments (2)
Next Page »
Loading ...
