MWEB GameZone writes: "With gamers' eyes completely focused on the integrity of journalism and what they write, what makes an "ethical" and informative game review?"
Wow great read, this article hit home hard today. I think all the general aspects of a game should be cover. Graphics and sound, gameplay and controls, story, multi/single player, performance and more. However, i do not think personal agendas should be pushed by any means.
I disagree. I think pushing a personal agenda is perfectly fine if you're open about the fact. And what is a review if not the personal opinion of the reviewer?
Exactly, for some reason people think a review is an unbiased factual thing. but it's actually a very personal encounter IMHO. I dislike reviews which read like a fact sheet. I want to know if the game had the power to move the player, if I will connect to it, how immersive it is etc etc
Having a review with a personal angle is just another way to review a game. It's not even a new way. Wikipedia even has entry on this called New Games Journalism which was written a few years ago. Go Google it. The other thing to remember is that reviews of that nature haven't suddenly made the more traditional type disappear. If you don't like Arthur Gies or Earnest Cavelli or Jim Sterling or Angry Joe or Keza McDonald or whoever, then find a reviewer you do like. The internet is packed with video game review sites. Pick one or two you like. Simple. Game reviews,like games, don't all have to be the same. There's enough room for all points of view.
Concept, Level design, Controls, Game Design, art style,story, character, and audio compliment the concept. Does the game run with minimal to no problems. Nothing about a game review should be personal it should always be unbiased and technical. If controls are bad they are bad, if the level design is counter intuitive to the player than it's bad, if you can't walk more than 5 steps without a game breaking bug there is something wrong. Most bloggers don't have the sense of such things or even the basic knowledge of game and level design. A review of anything is supposed to be as informative as possible, you are suppose to inform the reader so they can make their own discussion about the purchase instead of manipulating them in or out of a purchase.
Except what you're talking about is boiling a game down to just its component parts without looking at the greater whole. There are lots of games that, on individual execution, do very well, but fall flat from the perspective of actually being fun. How often do we see games that are just tacking on features, without any thought for whether or not they actually work together to make a coherent and fun experience? Watch Dogs is a great example, nothing is glaringly bad or wrong (aside from car physics) but the game itself offers little to make for a great experience. From a technical standpoint it should get great reviews, but from the perspective of a fun and memorable experience it just isn't that.
"How often do we see games that are just tacking on features, without any thought for whether or not they actually work together to make a coherent and fun experience?" And that all goes into Game Design. If any of the technical standpoints is weak it makes the whole game weak. If nothing works together than the game is not going to be fun. But even if you aren't interested in the concept but the controls are tight, the level design is intuitive, and everything comes together than you can still have fun with the game. I don't Call of Duty but the controls are nice and with friends I can have some fun before the horrible level design sinks in. As what you were saying with WatchDogs, from a technical standpoint it should get great reviews but the game design and concept don't work well together and it doesn't become fun.
well obviously you find the tiniest little thing that you irrationally consider to be misogynist/racist, focus on that the entire time, and knock 4 points off of your review score because of that one tiny, insignificant thing...
To me reviews should be about the game and the game only. I don't care about reviewers personal agendas. Reviews are made to help us, consumers, decide if we should buy a game or not. That means that they have to be as objective as possible and concentrate on the merits of the game alone. That's not going to happen if a reviewer is trying to throw their own personal beliefs at my face. I find it extremely unprofessional when a reviewer says that "game A should have this and it shouldn't have that" and then docks points because of it. It's the quickest way to ensure that you're not going to get hits from me ever again.
N4G is a community of gamers posting and discussing the latest game news. It’s part of NewsBoiler, a network of social news sites covering today’s pop culture.