Alternate opinions
I may have broached this subject already, but hey...
I almost never read reviews. Either I'm not interested in the reviewed game, or I want to avoid spoilers (which inevitably come in one way or another), so pretty much the only thing that gives me info about a game are the grade it gets and the "Pros and Cons" box. Which is fine but which also, more than a detailed review, is subject to... well, subjectivity. Which is why I would love to have alternate opinions about the game. I can imagine a few forms that these could use: - what did other staff members think, in a Idle Thumbs fashion, where every staff member can add a comment about the game. - other staff grades + short comment (like: What Emily thought about Fahrenheit) - what do forum members think about the game, with forum polls each time a new game is reviewed, and the result of the poll (in stars, for example) indicated below the actual official grade. ... What do you guys think? |
I really like the system that's used at idlethumbs. I always read the AGs review before buying a game, and that's usually enough to get an idea of whether I'll like the game or not, but there's always a part of subjectivity in reviews (though, in the recent years, I've found that reviewers really tried to point out what was subjective in their review, so that the reader can see whether he'd have the same subjective reaction or not), and I just know that there are some reviewers whose tastes match mine more than others'.
Once again, I'm pretty happy with the great quality of the reviews we've been getting recently, but a short note of confirmation / disagreement by another staff member I know I usually agree with is something I'd enjoy reading. |
What about what they do at TV.com where users can leave there own score and comments.
Mini reviews and the like. |
The trouble with getting other members of staff to comment on each game is that it requires other members of staff to have played the game. So we already need at least twice the number of review copies. And, of course, they would need to all receive advance copies when one does, or the comments wouldn't be ready on time.
And do you really want superfluous comments at the end of Myst reviews saying things like "Well, I hate Myst-like games, so I was never going to enjoy this one"? As for user scores, we all seem to have highly polarised views of games such as Still Life or Myst or Syberia. Which would probably wreck the averages. User reviews, meanwhile, would have to be edited/moderated, unless you want a whole lot of chaff mixed in with the wheat. I like the idea, but I'm not sure it would work in practice... :) |
Incidentally, Ninth, I'm sad that you think that AG reviews are chock full of spoilers. My experience of writing the odd review is that anything spoiler-esque is very quickly altered at the editing stage...
|
Quote:
More to the point, I wouldn't mind waiting for a few weeks for the second opinions, as I never rush to buy games anyway. And there are several much older games that I've only acquired recently. But I understand that it may be a problem for some people. Quote:
And take the recent review of ATTWN, for instance. The review feels rather positive, and yet the score is not that great, so I'm not really sure what to think about that game. A few additional opinions, just saying whether, the flaws and qualities of the game being what they are, the game 'worked' for them, is something I'd be interested in. Of course, there are the forums; but there tends to be far more spoilers there. |
I need to clarify two things:
First of all, spoilers can come in varied forms. A screenshot is a spoiler, in my book. Knowing too much about a game is a spoiler too. So I didn't use this term in a negative light at all; it just meant that I want to preserve as much mystery as I can without actually ignoring what kind of game I will buy. Second: I never say that staff comments should be compulsory. It's just that when they happen to play a game that they haven't reviewed themselves, they could be allowed to add a comment. Also, Lucien, I'm not sure about user comments. I go to a site where do this, and even though the comments are supposedly filtered, many comments are just stupid and/or carrying misinformation. That can easily get out of hand. A simple forum poll is much more restrained. |
We've discussed ideas like these before, and while we haven't ruled them out, we're just in no position to implement them any time soon. And before anyone says how simple it would be, I'll remind them that ideas are ALWAYS simple on paper. ;)
To address the alternate opinion idea, I just want to say that two opinions equal twice the subjectivity, not some kind of magically balancing objectivity. And as has been noted, we try to address issues of subjectivity in the reviews, which is rarely present in second opinions. Then there are credibility factors - our reviewers must COMPLETE a game before writing a review. I'd wager money that many second opinions you read are not based on finished games. Is that fair? I lost count of how many people raved about what a fantastic demo Fahrenheit had, or how great it was for the first few hours. I'd sure be leery of a second opinion based solely on that. No, we don't JUST play games we get for free, but we can hardly demand staff buy games to offer a second opinion. And a second opinion either comes with the review, or it's worthless. The fact is, there just aren't that many of us, and sometimes finding ONE reviewer is hard enough, let alone a couple others. EDIT (after Ninth's new post): No, the second opinions couldn't just be sporadic (in practice). That'd be incredibly sloppy. The other suggestions are even more problematic, so I won't address them unless someone really feels slighted. :D I'm... intrigued by the comments here, though. I'm seeing requests for summarized opinions for essentially the very reasons we write the reviews. Namely, to clarify potentially misleading information based solely on one person's score with pros and cons. |
I like the idea in theory. I'm not going to argue with an opportunity to worm my opinions into other people's reviews. :D I like how Idle Thumbs does it in their articles (though those second opinions are anything but subjective, most of the time ;)). But the timing and logististics would make it hard to do. Best case scenario, we want to get a review out as close to the game's release as possible. It's not that AG staff are cheap bastards who only play games we get for free... but since the games we buy for ourselves are games we're approaching as players and not as staff, a lot of us are going to wait for the review before we buy. ;)
The forum is the ideal place for people to say if they agreed or disagreed with the review and offer their own summary. Then you run into the problem of potential spoilers, or, as Ninth pointed out, misinformation. (I think you're more likely to get misinformation in the main Adventure forum than in response to a review, though. Just seems like someone who takes the time to read the review and formulate a response to it is already putting more thought into their posts than someone who just posts stupid things without thinking them through.) |
If something like the aforementioned 'second opinion' review ever does come to fruition, let me be the first to offer my services to write a second review of ATTWN... I promise to be completely 100% objective... :devil: Oh yes! Streams of bloody tears will flow!
|
Quote:
Quote:
I ran into a bunch of reviews I couldn't disagree more with, that either said a game suck without pointing out the qualities, or that it's great, without pointing out the flaws. For example, I've seen many reviews of Fahrenheit that don't mention the Simon thing, which is in my opinion its greatest flaw. Even a professional reviewer is only a man, and alternate views help put his perspective into... perspective. It's easy to be blind to the failings of a game that one loves. Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
But in any case, and even though I use such sites for movies, for example, I like the idea of something that would retain an Adventure Gamers' touch. :) |
Quote:
Actually, I'm only half joking. I never ever impose my own opinion of a game on a reviewer, and no one will ever see my input to an article, but I do represent a second perspective that will challenge anything that's too subjective (having made a point of playing the game or at least a demo whenever possible). Which is why hopefully our reviews present a very balanced perspective despite the "lone reviewer" reality. Of course, this only matters to people who read the reviews. :P But I still wanted to point that out. Quote:
For that matter, I don't see our reviews as telling people whether or not to buy a game, except in extreme cases, for good or bad. What they do is provide people with enough information to decide for themselves whether it's for them. That's the goal. So I'm not actually sure that having more "opinions" is really furthering that goal, or moving away from it. We don't want to do people's thinking for them, just give them the information they need. ;) Anyway, I'm just debating this as an exchange of views, because as I said, this is an idea that definitely has merit, and has been considered. It's just on a long list of other good ideas that may or may not be realized some day. Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
Quote:
Seriously, though, I've had the "duh?" reaction to some reviews, not in this site (not that I can remember, in any case), but in other very popular sites, and in some cases I found myself suffering for those poor souls who will buy, say, Rhem 2, expecting a very colourful and lively game. These people won't frequent forum, usually, and it might be useful to them to know what seasoned and "educated" (you get the idea) adventure gamers think. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
Also, in my very limited experience, people (me) tend to skip this kind of links. Gradings, on the other hand, I never skip. It's silly, but it's a silliness share by many, I'd guess. |
I've never minded the forum poll idea at all. Four Fat Chicks handles this well. But it's strictly a link, never something that's reflected on the review page itself, and I think that's as far as I'd want to go with it. The Underdogs system... I dunno. I'm on the fence about it, and would have to think about it some more. Like I said, when you get enough votes, it might make some sense. The trouble is not getting enough, and risking it becoming more harmful than helpful. And then there's also the risk of people jerking around with the system just for kicks. Giving a 0 to all Myst clones, for example. So... yeah. Can the public be trusted? :devil:
|
I also think implmenting a Idle-Thumbs-like system would be very helpful. I like getting a second and third quick opinion on a review very much. Unfortunately, it would probably add more work on the part of the editors. But I have heard of rumors about the EIC at AG having a lot of free time and being able to easily work on things like this.
:D |
All times are GMT -8. The time now is 11:22 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Design & Logo Copyright ©1998 - 2017, Adventure Gamers®.
All posts by users and Adventure Gamers staff members are property of their original author and don't necessarily represent the opinion or editorial stance of Adventure Gamers.