Submitted by zdkapl 706d ago | opinion piece

Why Are Game Reviews So Complex Nowadays?

Why don't game reviews today tell you whether the game is fun or not. Instead they tell you about the games graphics engine and sound design. Why is that? Nintendo Gamer Thoughts takes a look. (3DS, Industry, Nintendo DS, PC, PS Vita, PS3, PSP, Wii, Wii U, Xbox 360)

Saturne3  +   706d ago
The awnser is: nerds
TongkatAli  +   706d ago
More like stupidity and horrible taste. I hate when someone with awful taste try to force a "fact". For example God Hand one of the legendary games ever made, yes the graphics are bad, that is a fact. Does that matter ?

NOOOOOOOOO!!! Beause its not meant to be the most prettiest game, but some reviews decided to knock down a huge amount points and its a PS2 GAME. Reviewers are so ignorant it makes my head numb, some of the mainstream pays attention to the stupidest things it. Use your common sense people!!! Listen to people who buy the game not a no taste mainstream kiss ass. Also if you don't like brawlers, don't buy God Hand if you do its a sin to not play it.
#1.1 (Edited 706d ago ) | Agree(1) | Disagree(1) | Report | Reply
MeatAbstract  +   706d ago
Hmmm. Remember when Greg Miller at IGN did his review for Dead Space 2 and everyone tore him to pieces because it was written too simplistic? I'd say that's the problem. It's not enough to simply have a lot of gaming experience and an open mind, now you need to be a pseudo-intellect and find deeper meaning in things that don't have a deeper meaning.
#2 (Edited 706d ago ) | Agree(7) | Disagree(0) | Report | Reply
SeraphimBlade  +   706d ago
Well, different things are fun for different people. And you need to back up WHY it's fun. You also need to describe what separates it from other games, since some genres are so bloated. Just "fun" doesn't cut it anymore. People have specific tastes.

I can tell people all I want that The Darkness II is a "fun" shooter, but "shooter = CoD" for a lot of people. I have to explain how the mechanics allow and require a lot of creativity in shootouts, and how the story is well-paced and does a great job screwing with your head.
StrawHatPatriot  +   706d ago
Because games are more complex, and developers are marketing their game differently than in the past. Like sports games nowadays can legitimately mimic their real-life counterparts because of current-gen hardware, compared to the Genesis and SNES days, where you couldn't legitimately mimic a sport on 16-bit system and just had to make it more fun and game-ish than realistic.

For example, the Madden. Saying it's fun isn't a enough for some NFL fans who are expecting a game that's "true to the NFL", yet still lacks basic things (momentum, proper acceleration and deceleration, all the penalties, good challenge system) that not only sports games made by the same company have, but also games made on the PS2 and Xbox had. This borrowed from a forum:

"Over 8 years I've watched as the same issues show up year in year out. The line play has been abysmal, player movement is laughable. Animations that were used in games 12 years ago are rampant in Madden. Penalties and the proper rules have yet to show up in Madden. Playoff seeding was incorrect. There are still no real time injuries. The injury system still doesn't even have the real NFL statuses such as doubtful, probable, etc. Online franchise mode (and offline now for that matter) is still riddled with bugs such as accelerated clock, non-working sliders, no transaction logs, inability to roll back games or assign a winner. The challenge system works only SOME of the time, with other times not even allowing you to challenge a challengeable play. The commentary is still very subpar with few player names used and constantly saying incorrect things like "it's man coverage" when you called zone. Ball physics are still horrendous. Referees don't throw the flags on the field. Sidelines are not interactive. The web site supplied with online CCMs don't even show standings and stats and don't even allow you to do basic things like set a depth chart or make team moves. Route based passing still does not exist and players will warp to the ball because they are tethered to it."
knifefight  +   706d ago
"Why don't game reviews today tell you whether the game is fun or not."
There's much more to a game than fun:

Plus, just doing that would be way too simple.

If you've got an audience that craves that sort of review, then write that.

But different sites/magazines have different audiences who tend to like different things. I don't see the problem in writing for your demographic/audience's preferences.
#5 (Edited 706d ago ) | Agree(2) | Disagree(0) | Report | Reply
schlanz  +   706d ago
Engaging > Fun
admiralvic  +   706d ago
There are several reasons for that. One of the biggest being, who wants to click on a site and read a single sentence or two that sums up the game? If thats all you want, then you might as well just read the closing paragraph, since thats all it really should be. However, I also think the article writer is missing the point of a review.

While I can tell you Dokuro is a fantastic game with some rather interesting puzzles, the same won't apply to everyone. If you actually take the time to explain the mechanics, elements, visuals and other things, you will have an better idea of whither or not the game will suit you. To many people, having a clear under standing of why you feel one way or another is more important than giving a broad general statement that might apply to a very small group of people.
isarai  +   706d ago
Because games are complex nowadays, and with the growth of the industry people have grown to define their taste in games and prefer certain aspects, I want to know how good the story is separately critiqued from the gameplay,and same goes for graphics, campaign, mechanics, and so forth. Someone just praising a game because it's "fun" or bashing a game cause it "sucks" doesn't tell me anything as a potential consumer but the fact that this person likes the game.

When you talk about a game to someone who hasn't played it yet, it takes a few minutes to really create a clear idea of what makes the game great or not in the other persons head. This is what a review is supposed to do, which is why they are complex.
Kingthrash360  +   706d ago
I just posted a post about this very subject. I want ratings to be detailed but I say the most important thing about gameing is if its fun or not . All other stuff is just extra. Graphics, sound, story, and frames per second shouldn't be counted over how fun a game is. I mean look at retro city rampage a lot of people like it because its fun. Give me Fun and entertainment and I walk away happy
FinalomegaS  +   706d ago
just don't get the story pic... pikachu on drugs...

Add comment

You need to be registered to add comments. Register here or login
New stories

TGS 2014: Bravely Second Is One of 3DS’s Best-Looking Games

18m ago - IGN's Mitch Dyer and Brian Altano spent some time in the world of Bravely Second, the sequel to I... | 3DS

(WGB) Flockers Review – Like Lemmings, But Woolier

33m ago - Baden of WGB writes: "Do you remember Lemmings? The goal was to guide a torrent of seemingly suic... | PC

(WGB) Planetary Annihilation Review – Death Star? I’m In

38m ago - Baden of WGB: "After a successful Kickstarter and significant amount of time in Steam’s Early Acc... | PC

Market Hype and Why it Sucks

38m ago - The Brilliantly Epic team gathers to discuss this years pressing problem concerning market hype,... | Industry

Warriors Orochi 3 Ultimate (XB1) Review

Now - Ken mows down massive armies in the latest Musou game. | Promoted post

Xzibit and "Pimp My Ride" Proud To Be a Part of Final Fantasy XV

38m ago - While he may have accidentally leaked the ending where Noctis and the gang finally make it to the... | Culture