One definition of a review is “...a report or essay giving a critical estimate of a work or performance...” How do you as a reviewer accomplish this? If you are reviewing a house, you would for example, examine the location, space and house condition. By setting criteria on what you based your review on, you can compare your a review of one house with another. This is one of the most crucial aspects of a review, to make a valid comparison.
While a review is arguably an opinion of the reviewer, it is however has to be based how the work or performance fares against a set of criteria. One cannot simply rate a house that is located in amazing location, large living area and in perfect condition, lower scores because the reviewer does not like to live a posh neighborhood.
With games, respected site like IGN for example has the following criteria, Presentation, Graphic, Sound, Gameplay and Lasting Appeal.
Let’s examine Metal Gear Solid 4.
Presentation. A quote from IGN itself, “...A story worthy of a feature length film, with action that keeps you engaged from the second you hit the start button 'til the final credits roll....” While a reviewer may prefer sci-fi theme to real-world theme, a reviewer should always set aside this preference while reviewing a game. The presentation in MGS4 is arguably better to games like Mass Effect and Uncharted, both which received 9 from IGN itself. Some may prefer the presentation of Mass Effect to MGS4, however one simply cannot score MGS4 presentation lower to Mass Effect or Uncharted.
Graphic. Graphic in MGS4 is simply solid. The game has high quality textures, amazing details and superb animations. It is by far the best graphic ever in Playstation, only Uncharted is coming really close to it (9.5). Let’s compare this to Mass Effect, IGN rated Mass Effect graphic as 8.5. The graphic in Mass Effect is good, however with of course noticeable issues. By just using these two reviews, one simply cannot score MGS4 graphic lower than 9-9.5. At 8.5 the reviewer will basically argue that MGS4 graphic is the same as Mass Effect, which of course ludicrous.
Sound. It is simply masterpiece. The voice over is simply outstanding. The soundtrack is moving. Again comparable to Mass Effect, GTA4 and Uncharted, which all received a score of 9.5-10. Based on this, MGS4 score in sound should at least equal or higher compare to those games, 9.5-10.
Gameplay. MGS4 allow you to play stealthily or you can always blazing your way through with a choice of at least two dozen weapons. CQC in game is unique as well complex. There are multiple ways you can clear an area. By comparison, Mass Effect with its score of 9 in gameplay, has incredibly fun and deep combat system. One cannot simply rated MGS4 gameplay lower than Mass Effect score.
Lasting Appeal. MGS4 offers plenty of Easter Eggs, high replayability and most importantly a free MGO. MGO offers player unlimited replayability in multiplayer gaming. Mass Effect which has high replayability however with no multiplayer received a score of 9 from IGN.
Based on those criteria alone, a reviewer would have to present a very strong argument to score MGS4 lower than those games. Just adding the scores, MGS4 should have at least received a combined score of around 9-9.5 at the minimum; any lower than that then the review is no longer a review but simply an unfounded opinion.
The friendly folks over at Razer recently sent us their full size Kishi Ultra mobile gaming controller, and this thing didn't disappoint.
VGChartz's Mark Nielsen: "Upon finally finishing Devil May Cry 5 recently - after it spent several years on my “I’ll play that soon” list - I considered giving it a fittingly-named Late Look article. However, considering that this was indeed the final piece I was missing in the DMC puzzle, I decided to instead take this opportunity to take a look back at the entirety of this genre-defining series and rank the entries. What also made this a particularly tempting notion was that while most high-profile series have developed fairly evenly over time, with a few bumps on the road, the history of Devil May Cry has, at least in my eyes, been an absolute roller coaster, with everything from total disasters to action game gold."
3,1,4,5 to me, never played 2. 5 gameplay is amazing but level design was really disappointing to me, just a bunch of plain arenas, the story felt like a worse written rehash of the 3rd and the charater models looked weird ( specially the ladies ). Another problem with 5 was that there was not enough content for 3 charaters so I could never really familiarize with any of them
2.
Dmc.
4.
5.
1.
3.
God DMC2 was an awful game.
And in case this isn't obvious it goes worst to best
Order changes depending on your focus. I tend to focus on gameplay/fun factor, so...
5, 3, 1, 4, 2.
I really didn't like 4 but commend Dante's weapon diversity. The retreading of old ground was pretty unacceptable to me.
But even then... Still more enjoyable than 2 for me
TSA go hands on with the beta for Inazuma Eleven: Victory Road, but how is the game transitioning to the post-stylus era?
You present an interesting opinion on the nature of reviews as an entity but by using frequent comparisons to Mass Effect you could be interpreted as a disenfranchised fanboy (by another fanboy; they smell their own). Interesting ideas though.
One thing though, I would question the ability of anyone to ever remain 100% objective. No person and no entity is ever going to be able to remove all subjective bias from anything. It is my opinion that for reviews to be truly useful then the reviewer should be honest about their own bias and opinion when reviewing as they are then simply reviewing for themselves and others can choose if they do or do not agree.
There is a style of academic writing called auto-ethnography which I use frequently; it seeks to counter the fallacy that an individual can be objective by instead placing the writer at the centre of the text and using their thoughts, feelings, experiences and bias as the driving force behind the piece.
It sounds a little fanboyish but IGN, Gamespot, Eurogamer and everyone else has bias; each writer also has bias and they should embrace it rather than pretend to hide it. In that sense, the experience of a game, the emotional level it evokes and the very feeling of a review would be more relevant than simply the metacritic pleasing use of a score out of 10. Read a few reviews; they all say the same thing going from graphics to gameplay etc so after the first 2 or 3 have been released the rest are redundant as they are for all intents and purposes carbon copies; by embracing their differences every review would be different and justify their existence because of it.
should be product reviews,not an opinion review on a game if I like it or not
some prefere,for example burnout over gran turismo but others like gt more than burnout,reviews shouldn't be like that
a review should be a product review, completely unbaised without
"I like type A more than type B"
exellent artical by the way.