Game Reviews

>>384743807
>10/10
>for PC and PS4

Im hooked, what was it ?

You're supposed to read the article and see how the author motivates his score. A good writer will make the work's strengths and weaknesses come across even to people who might not share his tastes. The problem with video game reviews isn't about the numbers for me really, it's about most of the writers being bad at their job and talking about irrelevant shit or expressing opinions that doesn't match the overall score, making their point muddled. That and the indirect "bribing" with ads etc

>>384743807
F, D, C, B, A, A+, A+ with happy face sticker

>>384743807
A 3 point system is what most people should use and that's probably why 7/10 is a standard score for even shit games. Reading reviews to see if it has content you like is pretty key too, as >>384744041 said

Is it worth a playthrough, yes or no. That's all I really want to know.

>>384744041
So if say someone started doing in depth analysis of the game and maintained a neutral position as best they could, pointing out any and all flaws regardless of there enjoyment, would they be a better reviewer than your average journalist?

>>384744007
Ah, fuck it, I found it

Its The Witness ...fuck this gay shit

Recommended or not recommended, because that's all it really means anyway. 7 or below generally means it's not worth your time, 8 or above means it is.

FROM 1 TO 5 STARS
NO HALF STARS BULLSHIT EITHER. 1 TO 5 AND THAT'S IT.

File: based sessler.png (186KB, 1376x1529px) Image search: [Google]

186KB, 1376x1529px

Remove the fucking numbers.
Only brainlets need a tl;dr score system to know if a game is good or not.

>>384743807
Read the review.

>>384744619
Yes, to a degree. You still have to keep in mind that all forms of entertainment are at least partly subjective, so you can't just analyse it like a research paper. If a game is flawed in some ways, it could still warrant a good review if it really appeals to a certain group of people, but in that case it should be clear why that is. But in general I think video game reviewers often say things are "excellent" or "poorly implemented" or something like that without even trying to narrow down what they're actually talking about.

>>384744920
this just remove them altogether. a good review should tell you the reviewer's stance on the game without needing a score

>>384743807
give actual reasons for each thought that went into the score, that way people can read and if they dont like or dont care about some factors they can mentally adjust

Rating scale
Must Play
Highly Recommended
Worth Trying or Play Only if you like {Genre}
Don't play

File: yeah.jpg (19KB, 360x520px) Image search: [Google]

19KB, 360x520px

>>384743807

Sure.

The better alternative is a summarized list of, and elaboration on the attributes and qualities of the game, paying particular attention what makes it stand out, if anything. What genre does it fall into; what gameplay mechanics can you expect? What visual, musical and auditory aesthetics does it commit to? Is it relatively hard, or easy? Is it story-driven, or not? Is it fast-paced or leisurely?

You can subsequently express your opinion on whether you enjoyed it for those attributes and for what reason.

This way you can objectively indicate what sort of experience the player is in for, allowing them to draw their own conclusions on whether or not they want to get the game, while subjectively offering how that experience aligned with your sensibilities and creating your own identity as a game reviewer. There's no need for a score.

The problem with scores is that every reviewer is going to interpret what each number means differently. Some of them will say a 7 is average while some might say its good.

File: adam.jpg (29KB, 636x609px) Image search: [Google]

29KB, 636x609px

>>384744920
IS THERE ANYONE WHO CAN EVEN REMOTELY CONTROL OUR BOY ADAM SESSLER

Thumbs up and thumbs down with text summing up what kind of game is it.

I miss the days of magazine reviews when multiple reviewers would sometimes tackle a game and give multiple opinions.

I feel like too many online review sites farm out these reviews to people that are less then qualified to speak about the game, and don't even finish it a good chunk of the time.

You have to read the review, then look at the note. For lazy people who don't want to read the review, I'd add maybe two little stickers to the note.

One for saying that it's indeed good shit, and one for saying that it is taseless.

Sometimes you come across games that you objectively can't give a good score. Like for saying Earth Defense Force, these games are a broken mess of ugly pixels, and completely repetitive missions. But fuck these games are fun as hell. They don't deserve more than a 4/10 at best in all honesty, but they deserve that little sticky saying that despite all the garbage you can have fun with it.

On the other hand, games like Watch Dogs 2, that are not bad at all on a lot of points might deserve a solid 6-7/10. But guess what, they are bland as fuck. They also should get a little sticky saing that when'll play it, you'll feel nothing.

>>384744920
This so fucking much. There should be no score system at all.

>>384743807
Recommend or not recommend.

>>384743807
What would an objective review even be?

Yes. You give a verdict that reflects whether or not it's worth playing.

Tons of stuff in games is not quantifiable. It's not like with cars, where you can quantify things like Horsepower, price, and other features.

You can't quantify
>Gameplay
>Music
>Sound
>Graphics
>Story
>Experience

This are things that are totally subjective.

>>384743807
Make people care more about the individual rather than the symbol

I enjoy any reviewer who does bullshit scores or just whatever they feel works for the day.

Yes/no

>>384743807
In a capitalist free market, the only meaningful measure of value is a monetary one. Therefore I propose that instead of scores, reviewers list the maximum price they would be willing to pay for the game. Maybe have a maximum value of >$100 for games so good they're a must have in the author's opinion.

>>384745773
No tranny can tame him

>>384743807
>when taste is subjective
but quality much less so

File: df453tb.png (108KB, 297x333px) Image search: [Google]

108KB, 297x333px

>>384743807
>taste is subjective

nu-/v/ at it again

>>384743807
First, not putting out a review on day one based on a review copy. On day on, the most you do is give a "first impressions" with no score. Your proper Review would come out one week/one month/however long later AFTER the retail release that everyone else gets to play. No early review copies for you, you buy your own damn copy just like everyone else.

In this setup, you as a reviewer could tap into the let's players scene and stream yourself playing the game so that people can see how good/shit you are at the game, also seeing the game for themselves instead of just taking you at your word. The streaming would be a revenue source which would also help out the current cancerous field that is games reviewing since they just rush through the game and shit out a "9/10 it's okay - IGN".

Second, a "Value Score" for lack of a better term. A score that is measured based on the game's original retail price, and your score is the amount you'd really be willing to pay for a game. If a game is $60 on day one, your score would be $x out of 60. A 60/60 isn't a "perfect" score or anything, just a statement that you personally would be willing to put down that amount of money for the game. And if the game has one of those Day One Season Passes, you could set the max at 120 and give the game a 60/120 because fuck Season Passes.

The Value Score would also be helped by the fact of the first thing. You did in fact buy the game yourself and you took your time to play it through up to the point you wrote the review, a better means of cementing your opinion on the game and it's VALUE.

Something like that.

>>384743807
Honestly, I like the way Projared does his scores. He always gives "An Analogy/10", basically using the "score" as an easy to understand summary of his thoughts.

>>384743807
You can't really give objective numerical values to an otherwise subjective game. The most you can do is highlight the positives and negatives of the game, and either formally recommend or not recommend it and let the viewer draw their own conclusions.

For example
>Cut content
>Repetitive scripted events
>Obnoxious content pacing
>Terrible difficulty-curve/pacing

Wanna guess what game this is?
It's Dragon's Dogma

But you would never know because subjectively it's a fun game.

I used to do reviews on my old blog before turning it into more in-depth exploration of various topics for my own sake to understand them better. What I'd do is have a brief summary after the review, with a four tier rating scale:

>Bad
>Average
>Good
>Great

And an occasional *Favorite tag as well, that was independent of the rating. For example I gave ME1 an Average, ME2 a Good, and ME3 a Bad, but only ME1 had a Favorite because the game had too many massive flaws and bugs to score it highly, but it was a personal favorite of mine, and still is.

>>384743807
Unless you have specific criteria that involves right or wrong answers, your review score shouldn't have any decimal points.

You remeber before when games were scored by each of it's own merits? Like:

Graphics: 4/10
Story: 8.5/10
Music: 8/10
Gameplay: 9/10

>>384743807
Buy
Rent
Avoid

>>384743807
Rate it based on it's current value.
Like must have even at full price, wait until it's on sale, or not even worth your time.

File: rope dog.jpg (43KB, 576x521px) Image search: [Google]

43KB, 576x521px

>>384743807
Not every game can be a 10, Metacritic's scoring system is broken. So if I give a game a 6.9 because it was a pretty decent and significantly above average game, that gets translated as a 69, and if that was a test score, then I'd hate myself

>>384744678
LOL!

I got that game in a humble bundle and decided to give it a spin one day. Played it for about an hour solving puzzles and listening to pretentious audio clips that say very little over a seemingly endless period if time. All this while solving increasingly more autistic but uninteresting puzzles. I honestly cannot believe anyone likes this game.

>>384743807
Game reviews shouldn't have scores for graphics or music or things like that.
Since minecraft can get a 9 for graphics while looking like indie shit. While GTA would also get a 9 but would of had much more work put it.

File: 590959.jpg (9KB, 320x180px) Image search: [Google]

9KB, 320x180px

>>384743807

Is it a buy?

>>384743807
We did this in 2010 with a site called Dead Pixels. Anyone on /v/ could write a full article review with a bullet list at the end called the breakdown. It's purpose was to be pro-consumer ethics and report things like DRM (type, etc), things that could be deal breakers to a reasonable person, and other important info.

The site died because no one in /v/ knew how to be an editor for the shittily written articles.