Video Game Reviews Are Broken, Please Fix

Kotaku reports:

"There are some of you out there who love the way writers and publishers handle video game reviews. This article is not for you. As far as the author and his sympathizers are concerned, you are the saps stuck as janitors cleaning dirty toilets in The Matrix, the suckers who sit around drinking Diet Coke convinced that it tastes like real Coke, the unfortunate few who were never able to see the rhinos and race cars in those Magic Eye images."

[gamesblow]

yaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaawn!! Kotaku's part of the problem. Guess they didn't get the memo.

[kenjix]

It's about time someone started to point out how jacked up these review sites are. I only go by consumer reviews now.

[dhammalama]

There is an ever growing force of fanboys preparing to throw off even those consumer generated ratings. well, maybe, maybe not, but I hate fanboys so I'll blame crap like that on them.

[squallsoft]

i agree with the article 100%. reviews are BS

[Drano]

Can anyone say "Gamespot"?

Jump Beyond.

[OC_MurphysLaw]

It's really about the only way it could ever become even remotely a reliable source across the board..but sadly just like movie reviews...it will never happen..and it will always be subjective and biased to the reviewers preference...

[Tsalagi]

I gave up a long time ago trying to rely on what game reviewers say. Now i rather download a demo or rent a game to see if i like it.

[Douchebaggery]

Reviews should be taken for what they are some dudes opinion, just because your name is Patrick Klepec (1up) or Hillary Goldstein (IGN) doesn't mean that your opinion is worth more than my friend telling me how much fun Skate is.

The number system sucks cuz most of the time people just look at the score without even ready the review and then pass judgment on whether a game is good or not.

[crck]

When Tools of Destruction scores the same as a Naruto game at Garbagespot something is definitely wrong.

[Douchebaggery]

Gamespot is not one mind different people review different game so the point you're trying to make is weak

[crck]

Gamespot is not a collection of personal blogs. It is part of a publicly traded company and their reviewers are employees of that company. They should have strict guidelines about how to review games and reach a consensus among their staff before putting out a review score. That score should represent the company's view. They should try to be as close to 1 mind as possible.

[sandip787]

i dont know how i feel about this, reviews can make some people pass judgement on games they have never played, but then again reviewing is all about opinion. thats why its so hard to review music, because everyone has their own tastes. its a sticky situation if you ask me

[snittolo]

Fix the god damn review system, a lot of people have or are loosing faith in it.

[CadDad]

Instead of pouring through a ton of fun scale//eye-candy//art style elements that are subjective in nature the focus of the game review should be a checklist of sorts on the criteria for what makes a game complete. Ask themselves 50 questions broken down into 5 categories of 10 questions. A check off on "passing" grades for that question results in a +1 to the score. Any and all gamers can go look at the checksheet to see just where the game is lacking and decide if it's something that matters to them.

For instance: Have a section on graphics.
Q1: Does the game follow a consistent art style?
Q2: Does the game's graphics cause frustration? (hard to see items, loss of framerate, texture tearing, etc)
Q3: Does the game's graphics take advantage of the hardware it's designed for?
Q4: Do the game's cut-scenes add or take away from the over-all experience?
Q5: Are the character animations fluid?

Etc....

Now imagine a checklist type review where the reviewer can elaborate as they feel necessary, but also not get into areas such as art styles, and plot, since those are so subjective it's fuel for the fanboy fire.

Personally I would love to be able to see the same checklist for each game, and be able to really tell where a game is technically broken and where it's something I can live with.

I'm tired of reviews telling me something they didn't like about the game that's subjective, review the game for what it is, not for what you want it to be.

/bookover

-CadDad

[n00dl3s]

there's tons of reviews that carry the stench of payola. Halo 3 for example, it got a plethra of perfect scores. A week or two later were tons of articles on problems here and there. The online multiplayer system is terrible, the gameplay is still the same old linear halo, and quite a few people hated on the graphics (which i think is bullshit the graphics are fine). It's a great game, it really is, very well polished and stuff. However it's no perfect game. Why did it recieve perfect scores across the board then?

The worst part is that it was the same people that gave it perfect scores that were "mentioning" the flaws somewhat later. Halo isn't the only one either. It happens constantly. Bioshock recieves multiple "perfect scores". Bioshock is an amazing single player game, but doesn't have multiplayer at all. Which means if they are grading games quantitatively means it isn't perfect because the replay value isn't there. (not to say that bioshock needed multiplayer)

I'm just saying that while they may not necessarily be walking up with a huge check saying "give our game a good review", i'd be willing to bet that they butter up the reviewers pretty hard in some way. maybe cocaine, cause i certainly wonder if some of the bastards were high when they wrote certain reviews. (*cough* the couple of morons that gave perfect dark zero any kind of praise *cough*)

I agree with going to a symbolic system. Bioschock could've gotten 5/5 stars, halo 4/5 stars, etc. They would've been shown to be the great games they are without anyone having to mention the term "perfection".

[Cat]

i guess the folks at Kotaku read this: http://www.n4g.com/NewsCom-...

way to be current, lol.

as i said there, people can rate games according to their opinions, and we can buy them (or not) according to ours.

[rockem13]

Quit whining cuz your favorite game didn't get a 10/10. Theres nothing wrong with the review system. Just fanboys who attack sites and reviewers for daring to review games truthfully.

[LeShin]

But that's the point NO game should get a 10/10 as NO game is perfect! Name me ONE game that has absolutely no flaws and I'll eat my console lol.
A perfect game would need to have/be, for example:

The best graphics/art design for at least it's generation

Flawless AI which practically mimics real human behaviour lol

The best multiplayer....EVER (since most people now put so much emphasis that a game should have online multiplayer.....I couldn't care less since I survived other generations of consoles with....SHOCK HORROR no online multiplayer!)

The best controls so that even a one armed 95 year old monkey could pick up and play without ever having to refer to a manual.

The best sound from the heavens as if a orchestra/band was in your living room playing live!

Voice acting of Shakespearean quality!

Lasts the perfect length of time.......whatever that is!

Brilliant replay value which will motivate you to play it......FOREVER!

The presentation of a billion dollar production.

...and lastly, my opinion of a perfect game, would be a game which transcends genres. A game which no matter what sort of game you like playing, it wouldn't matter, you'd be motivated to run and purchase it regardless...........which I think is impossible!

So, like I said, pick any game you want and if I can't pick out at least ONE flaw (the definition of perfection), i'll eat my console.

[TruthbeTold]

Just kidding of course, but that game is going to be great. :D

[lonestarmt]

the whole system is flawed. With video games, its even easier to catch baised reviewers. One game is great, but has no multiplayer so the critic says not enough staying power and takes of points, another has no multiplayer either but doesn't even mention it the review and gives the game a perfect score?? cough cough bioshock. Now Bioshock is a great game, but why the double standard. They need to have some sort of unified scoring system which everyone has to go by, and so if one doesn't have multiplayer then it loosins soo many points depending on how long the game is. Like final fantasy shouldn't loose points because it doesn't have multiplayer. Warhawk lost points because it didn't have single player. Well no mmorgp does, and they don't loose points. I don't know what its going to take to cut through the BS, maybe three reviewers, one thats the fan of genre and the system reviewing the game, then have another one with a second opinion, then a third from someone who isn't a fan of the genre. That way if it gets three great scores even from the fan who doens't like the genre then you know its good, and if the two gave it good scores, and then third doesn't then you know its great, just not for everyone outside of the genre. I know you won't see 9.5 all the time then, but at least it will help the cusomers pick better.

[Seraphim]

I have to agree the system is broken, but don't quite agree with some of their comments either... Although a 4 star system, or something that made it so 9.0 was the highest grade a game would get could, and probably would be a perfect fit...

On the remark about the perfect 10 though. Obviously no game will be perfect and that's something most of us, as gamers, should and do know. The rare occasion I rate a game a 10 is because it's an excellent game, easily worth a 9-9.5 but based simply on the fact it's a true and rare gem, and an instant classic I'll tag it with a personal 10. There are few games that meet this mark with me but they do exist. But in general they make an excellent point by saying no game is perfect and we should adopt a new method for scoring games...

As much the readers fault. Indeed it is. The score should not be looked at entirely. It's about the review and what the reviewer said about the game that should hold weight. Personally I don't base my decision to buy a game off reviews but A LOT of consumers do. And all to often they look at the score and not into the game. More often than not the score doesn't even resemble the review. I've read countless reviews that leave me scratching my head wondering the game scored so low when the review raved about the game and said how good it was.

[KidMakeshift]

Since that's basically how they review anyways, which is incorrect and misleading. The 10 point grading scale is suppose to be more specific but has become completely imbalanced by reviewers. A 5 is average, not bad. If 5 is bad than what is 4,3,2,1? This is basically how they score: 9-10 A, 8-9 B, 7-8 C, 6-7 D, 5-6 F.

So, if you're interested in a game then rent it. Base your opinion on actual experience with the game. I don't know why we make these bullshit publications the middleman of every purchase we make. Screw the ass hats like Shane Bettehausen who think their opinion is fact.

[segasage]

jsut like a job they do what they do.

some might not agree with their reviews and some might.

some hang on to one review when the game got good scores all around and some can actually sleep on it.

the problem that I have seen has been with Ps3 fanboys that think every PS3 gamer deserves a 90% from everywhere, and of course MS pays all the reviewers in the world.

reviews are still somewhat a professional opinion. fanboys that tthink their opinion is fact only because they do not get paid and retort to calling a reviewer names.

It's not the reviews that are broken but when fanboys get their little precious hearts BROKEN over one score, they continue to whine months after one review. It's going on with R&C and did as well with LAIR until everyone gave up on that game.

It got what it deserved.

[lonestarmt]

so its all the sony fans fault eh? haha Sony fans are the loudest, because frankly they are justified sometimes. Lair was not a great game, but it wasn't that hard to control the dragon. The reviewers made it seem like it was impossible, but only after a few hours its very fluid. Heavenly sword was a great, and I mean great game, just it felt a little short, and if only it was a little longer it would have gotten even better reviews, but it got a lot of stuff for it being too much like god of war, yet halo 3 is almost exactly like halo 2, yet no one took off for it. Rachet and clank is just like the first one, yet no one cared. And the rachet and clank reviews proved it. Look at what NY post said, look at gamerankings. Its a great game. Yet the two sites that all sony fans think are biased are really the only ones that gave it lower than what it deserves a 9. GS even said that it had too much variety? They said it was too much of the same thing, yet it had too much variety, it had a indenity crisis, yet it was just like all the others??? Come on, you have to be a plain hate all things sony not to find that one of the worst reviews ever. I don't think anyone is paid off, but its obvious some reviewers don't want to admit ps3 has great games.

[KeiZka]

he maybe wouldn't see things the way he sees, if sony fans were a bit more discrete... People supporting PS3 fanatically do seem to be the most vocal party around here.

[Genki]

Ratings as they stand are indeed arbitrary, and they've become little more than a corporate tool that's used to dangle games from strings.

Although he makes good points about movies, the same things essentially apply, but it's not nearly as bad as what's going on in the gaming industry. That's another topic entirely though.

I will say that the quote in chapter II is just spot on. Ask yourselves how many times you see people quote scores, ratings, and aggregates of those WITHOUT EVER speaking about the pros and cons of the game itself?

Nobody even reads reviews anymore, it seems as if they jump to the end, latch onto the score, and that's good enough for them. Nevermind the few merits of the game that may be promising to you, just grab that 6 or 7 and run away with your oh so prudent conclusion.

That's another thing, is that 10s are thrown around entirely too much these days. It's gotten to the point where nobody will bat an eye at a game unless it scores at least a 9. A 7 or an 8 is largely considered mediocre these days. WTF? This just goes in conjunction with the idea that people just don't read reviews anymore, they just look for the score and that's all that matters.

Personally, I think the 4 star system is a pretty good idea based on how they put it, but were it up to me, it would be even simpler. A game is either "Recommended", a "Toss-up", or "Not recommended". Heck, thumbs up and down could serve the same purpose. People need to start reading reviews for the information they provide. Going by a score or rating alone is entirely too arbitrary a means to come to a conclusion. Not only do you shortchange yourself, but you stand to hurt the community by spreading your nonsensical, unsubstantiated bullcrap.

When it all comes down to it though, it's us, the community that have ruined this for ourselves. By being ignorant, intentionally shielding ourselves from information, not accepting anything below a certain numerical threshold(ridiculous), and by spreading this tripe, we've damned ourselves. This sort of stuff provokes the crappy jounralism to just continue, because oddly enough, it's the only thing that generates hits these days. A high score for a hugely hyped game, or a good score for a highly anticipated one.

The fanboys all throw hiss-fits, send the community into disarray, and then whatta-ya-know...Website/publi cation Y is getting massive hits just because everyone wants to see what all the fuss is about.

It's an endless cycle that we keep allowing ourselves to get sucked into. Read reviews, not scores.

[bootsielon]

Who cares about movie reviews? Well, translate it to videogames... it's exactly the same. Or almost.

I only trust myself unless a game truly stinks (like 2.5 average or so). I for one love all the latest mortal kombats, enter the matrix, lair, armored core 4 and chromehounds, and they've all gotten mediocre scores on Metacritic. It seems that Videogame reviewers are getting their noses up their asses as of late, as if people looked at every game with a critical eye. That's why Wii Sports, which is not my cup of tea by the way, and every other Wiitardedness (sorry, pent up anger, I hate the Wii, don't like it) is selling so much; people don't give a sh1t about mindless details about how the anti-aliasing mixed up with bugs and lack of storytelling bullcrap.