[Feature] It’s harder to write honest game reviews than you think it is.
July 28th, 2012 Posted in Features, General Nintendo, Interviews, Posted by Austin
It’s an interesting thing to “work” (it’s hardly work- more of a hobby I suppose) in the video gaming industry. All of the things I had questions about five years ago- how people got free games, whether you ever get tired of free games (you do), whether people gouge review scores intentionally, and so on and so forth- have now been answered. And you know what the most striking thing that I’ve learned over the last four years is? How difficult it is to give a game a bad review score. You have no idea how much I struggle with it, or how much I’m willing to bet others struggle with it.
When you’re someone “on the outside”, you just sort of assume that if YOU were in a position to review games you would be brutally honest and never let anything sway your decisions into bias. But it’s not that simple. It’s really not.
I’m getting ahead of myself though, because what I really want to talk about are things I think a lot of gamers ponder: How honest are review scores? Do outlets ever fudge them to get favors from a publisher? Do publishers ever discriminate against certain outlets to avoid getting bad press? I don’t think I’ve seen anyone come out and just tell it as honestly as they can, so (hopefully!) I can do an okay job of just that.
What follows is some insight- as honest as I can put it- from my limited perspective (along with some helpful commentary from the other side, courtesy of our good friend Jools Watsham!), to hopefully answer some of those questions you’ve discussed on message boards or with friends, angrily coming to the conclusion that the reviewing system is biased and unreliable.
And guess what; it is! Sort of.
14 Responses to “[Feature] It’s harder to write honest game reviews than you think it is.”
By Windstar on Jul 27, 2012
I do tend to forget that people created games and that they don’t just drop from heaven. It does kind of make you sad when you recall some harsh stuff reviewers have said. I would probably be crying everday if I was a game developer enduring that
By Jesse on Jul 28, 2012
I’ve opened my eyes recently to the facts that you speak of and am quite happy to know that my suspicions were indeed correct! I stopped and realized this when I seen that every COD game, got nearly all 10′s from giant sites and little ones as well, when indeed, more of the recent COD games, were nearly 7′s and 8′s in my respective opinion. I have also noticed that a lot of companies bash Nintendo 3DS and give their games average scores if it’s not a Mario game. I wish that there was 1 reviewer that I could go to and be able to read a non biased review without fear of it being a botched review.
By Austin on Jul 28, 2012
@Jesse I wish I could be that guy, but there’s so much that goes into it. What would you even consider an unbiased review?
By TiggyPudding on Jul 28, 2012
You make a very good point. I tend to forget that people make games, and as a Reviewer I can imagine the last thing you wanna do is tell the developers who have probably worked on this game for a good year or so (and have given it you for free
) that it’s a pile of ****. But then on the other side of it, a bit of constructive critiscm isn’t a bad thing. (< This is where I think a lot of reviewers screw up. They just slag off games without much of a good reason.)
:O How could you?
Oh, and I love the Lasagnia analogy. Do I have to buy the peas as DLC though? :/
By RadioactivePuppy on Jul 28, 2012
So, what you’re saying is that developers are hurt by critique?
I hate to be “that guy”, but what about when criticisms are widely shared about a game’s mechanics, etc? Are we wrong for pointing these things out because games that get poor reviews don’t often get a chance at a sequel?
If a developer puts out something that lacks in quality, there’s no excuse to pull punches. But when a game is out there that has well-crafted elements but may not be your cup of tea, either, there’s no excuse to give it bad reviews.
That being said, yes, game reviews are a pretty mixed bag, just like reviews for ANYTHING. But that’s why opinion editorials are so much more helpful than numbers-based reviews. It’s hard to rate a game numerically as the massive library keeps expanding. The best thing we could do is at least acknowledge the fine points of whatever game we’re looking at, and evaluate its flaws, as well.
By Austin on Jul 28, 2012
@RadioactivePuppy: No no, please be “that guy”! “That guy” is the only guy who fosters discussion, you know?
That being said, okay, two things from me:
1) No, it is actually RIGHT to point out those flaws. I’m just trying to say that it sucks to do, and to give you some insight as to why you might see some reviews that don’t point out flaws as prominently.
2) Now this is my favorite thing: Define “well crafted elements”.
As far as I’m concerned, there are NO elements to a game that can be called objectively good or bad. The only ones you could label as “well crafted” are technical visuals, meaning number of pixels, smoothness of framerate, etc. Still, you can’t say that higher resolution games look better or have better graphics. You can only say they have a higher resolution or a better framerate.
So, challenge me: What is an example of a well crafted game that someone shouldn’t give a bad review just because it isn’t their cup of tea?
By thomas on Jul 28, 2012
Amount of bugs and glitches can be looked at objectively, but other than that, yup, reviews aren’t an objective thing.
The main thing that’s important for reviewers is to have a broad taste. That way, when a game fails to excite you, you’ll know it’s not just because it’s not your type of genre/game.
I really don’t see why it’s so difficult to point out flaws, though. I guess it depends on personality, if someone’s soft-hearted and can’t separate business relationships from your actual job, someone probably shouldn’t be a reviewer.
By RadioactivePuppy on Jul 28, 2012
Well, perhaps “well-crafted elements” is a term up for dispute. When mechanics for a game are mixed with level design that doesn’t facilitate them, it often leaves players at an impasse. Mutant Mudds has a very limiting moveset for the player to use, but coupled with it’s stellar level construction it creates a game that relies heavily on precision platforming. There’s plenty of times when a game has elements that altogether don’t fit well.
Critiquing an element of a game and saying it’s poor isn’t a bad thing and we shouldn’t treat it like it is because it’s going to hurt someone’s feelings. Sometimes, inane choices are made that ultimately hurt a game’s chances at being better than it could really be.
By perry o'parsons on Jul 28, 2012
you are forgetting one thing, the reviews arent for you nor are they for the developers. they are for us, the consumer, who put our trust into you to tell us how the game is before we lay down our hard earned money for it. and when you say a bad game is good just to kiss some ass, its a slap in the face to us. since youve admitted you cannot give an honest review, i suggest finding a new job/hobby, you are not cut out for this work. you would rather 100s of people blow 50 bucks than you step on a few toes. quit or man up you deceitful prick
By Austin on Jul 28, 2012
@thomas: I guess it’s not difficult per se, but imagine a friend of yours made you a big giant dinner that they spent hours on, but you absolutely hated it. You’re not about to tell them it sucked, are you? It’s a similar feeling with game reviews for me. To an extent I can be honest, but instead of calling “The Conduit” a “mediocre shooter”, I would probably say it’s “the best shooter on Wii, despite some flaws”. It’s all in the wording.
@RadioactivePuppy: Right, but some people would play Mutant Mudds and go “this level construction is mediocre and slow paced”, whereas you and I think it’s “stellar”. Aside from that though, yes, we shouldn’t treat pointing out flaws as a bad thing, since, hell, that’s what I’m supposed to be doing when reviewing something. Thanks for facilitating an honest discussion, my friend!
@perry o’parsons: I like that you actually created an account on this website just to call me a prick.
By perry o'parsons on Jul 30, 2012
is that all you got out of it? and btw pal, youre dinner party analogy is flawed. youre friend isnt trying to sell his food to millions of people and make a profit out of it. once again you forgot about the consumer, shows where your faiths are.
By Austin on Aug 1, 2012
It’s a bummer because you actually make some really good points, but instead of presenting them like an intelligent human being you just decide to sound like a douche.
By thomas on Aug 1, 2012
in fairness to him, the only "douchey" language he used was "deceitful prick"
By Austin on Aug 1, 2012
It would have been significantly more constructive to avoid the edgy, confrontational attitude and instead be honest and inquisitive. Questioning is better than accusing, even if it is through hypotheticals.
Regardless, I appreciate his post. He brings up a great point that I sometimes forget: People actually do read my reviews, and some of them might even be swayed to pick up- and spend money on- something they wouldn’t have otherwise because of what I wrote. If I want to do reviews, it IS sort of a responsibility to readers to not fudge the truth, because in the end it’s the developer’s fault if they put out a mediocre product, and I shouldn’t pass on the consequences to consumers.
So yea. He helped. But he was kind of a dick about it in assuming that I wasn’t willing to hear other arguments, or that I thought it was “okay” to fudge the truth or any number of things; that I would defend my point to the ends of the earth. I won’t. I wrote the article to foster discussion and either change or reinforce my current stances- not to lay down some set-in-stone position because I think I’m some flawless individual.
For the record, I did change my stance, and all of my reviews from here on out shall have significantly more effort put into them.