Reviewing approach



I'm beginning to think many reviewers and also readers of reviews feel the point of a review is to look for things to hate about a game. This is particularly inspired by my Elemental review and the sentiment surrounding the game all throughout the gaming community, but by our reviews at Neoseeker in general and the subsequent reactions to them by some folks (the rest of you are great and we dearly appreciate the love).

This is not a self-righteous 'I do things this way, everyone else does it this way -- they are dumb haw haw haw' post, it's just to shed a little...sanity on the situation.

I should preface this by saying I've never analyzed my reviews before and am expressing this as I go. It might seem like a terrible way to go about things, but it really works best for me in all aspects of life, and I think it works best for a lot of readers too, in the case of Neoseeker content.

When I review, what I take in and what I write is primarily determined by two things: capitivation and fun. They can be closely tied of course, and I use both terms loosely. The point is this: I don't look for reasons to slam a game, I let myself experience it and write impressions based on that experience. I do the same with film and music and just about everything really.

Of course, it's not that I won't criticize a game. Obviously that's necessary. But this is about organics. If after or while letting myself experience a game I find it difficult to get into, or just generally unenjoyable, I'll go over the reasons why without overanalyzing to death.

Risen comes to mind. This was a game that really blew me away. Just standing in the middle of a field was a thoroughly captivating experience. Of course I won't give a game a 9.5 because standing in a field feels awesome, but moments like that comprise a very captivating experience. I feel similarly about shooters, believe it or not -- you know, that 'one more round' saying, then three hours later you realize you're overdue for sleep.

In the case of Elemental, I really don't want to get into semantics, but I'll just say this: yes, there is room for improvement. But I stand by my review. And if you're the numerical type: that's pretty much what the 1.0 left over is for.

Responses (2)

0 thumbs!
^
Tridus Sep 4, 10
But there's things in the game that flat out don't work. Like multiplayer. It's listed on the box, and it *doesn't function*. Nobody can use it.

I've never heard of a 9/10 game that has a core thing like that flat out missing. It's what makes the review look out to lunch.
0 thumbs!
^
chautemoc Sep 5, 10
Yeah, it's a valid point, just depends on your view, I guess. I knew MP wasn't going to be included for awhile, and I know it's coming so I didn't count it. I think it's fair either way (to count it or not).
Add your comment:
Name *:  Members, please LOGIN
Email:  We use this to display your Gravatar.

Sign in with
Comment *:
(0.8621/d/web6)