Adventure Gamers - Forums

rtrooney - 17 June 2022 03:57 PM

meteor - 17 June 2022 09:25 AM

The truth is, almost no one reads reviews these days.

I really hope you don’t mean that. It would be similar to participating in a book club and entering a discussion about a book you haven’t read.

Well, the truth is almost no one is in book clubs (forums) these days either.

That doesn’t mean they’re not discussing games. It’s just they’re doing it on live chats with friends, discord etc. Which is probably more “book club-like” than forums ever were.

I skim reviews, but I rarely read them. I don’t want any spoilers. No screenshots, no plot points, nothing. I’ll see one or two screens and deduce what style of game it probably is, and what the tone probably is. I’ll find a part where the reviewer talks about the puzzles and gameplay, and skip ahead when I get spooked by spoilers. Then I’ll read the pros and cons. I’m not worried about accidentally buying a stinker based on not having done my research; it’s more fun to discover games fresh than to play ones I’ve already read pages about. And discovering whether or not I enjoy a game is part of the fun itself, for me.
After playing a game, I’ll often seek out reviews to contrast my experience with what others thought.
Speaking of reading pages, that’s another thing: Most reviews are too darn long these days. I remember when maybe one or two blockbusters per year warranted a two page review on a website. Now they just go on forever. You could scroll continuously for 30 seconds and not get to the bottom of your average mainstream Last of Us 2 or Death Stranding review. Too much information. Reviewers have confused ‘reviews’ with ‘theses’ (thesises? Thesi?). I enjoy scholarly games articles *more* than the next guy, but keep your hummus out of the peanutbutter.

thank you BB, that is the word, reviews, in general, are ‘long’, also kinda vague or not straight to the points, I think its essential to think about how the reader perceives them, and how to help him not be in need to ‘scroll’ or ‘skim’

To quote Jimmy Cliff “I can see clearly now.”

The man in charge of all things AG, I assume it’s Ivo, aka Calimonk, reads this thread and says, “You know maintaining this review thing is a pain in the ass. Not only do I need to maintain editorial integrity of the reviews and the attendant scores, but I need to do it while trying to keep the site afloat.”

And after thinking about this further, he, quite logically says, “After reading in (this) thread about how nobody is reading the reviews, maybe we should just get rid of them, so I can devote all my energy to keeping the forum running.”

And, if he takes that action, which logic says he should do, if you believe Meteor’s thesis, all hell breaks loose! Where are the reviews? How come I don’t see game reviews anymore?

So, I can see clearly that if those such as Meteor believe that nobody reads the reviews, and those such as Bubba are trying to make the writing and scoring of reviews more relevant to today’s audience, there is a decision to be made.

Although I know what my decision would be, I’m glad I don’t have to make that decision.

Nobody believes nobody read the reviews. Are they long? Seems a millennial opinion, the fruit of our times, when everything is accelerated, all consumed in a rush.

I really hope people like VP o Baron_Blubba review games. I am confident they would do a great job based on what I have read here in the forums.

The review is the opinion of one person only. If anyone bases criteria for choosing to play or not a game in one review, well, go for it, but I think it’s not the wise decision.

Meteor: I had never heard of the recent game ‘Norco.’ I saw the review on the front page here, read some parts, skimmed others, and immediately purchased. If I was into and followed AAA games that get oodles of hype, I might not need reviews to make decisions. But AG’s reviews both inform me of new games’ existence and tell me about their quality (which I read which a grain of salt).

That’s true, that too many reviews these days include too much information, whether that means too much information about the game itself or too much real world context or too much of the reviewer’s opinion on their interpretation of the game’s philosophy and characters. The latter can sometimes be very entertaining, and sometimes very laborious to read. Even when entertaining, though, I would prefer that to be a separate article about the game, rather than a review of the game. I think that games have become popular enough, accepted enough, that there is a place for opinion pieces about them that are not reviews, but broader and more conversational.
I think Kotaku and Polygon and sites of their ilk try it, but more often than not those pieces start with sentences like ‘Is it time to talk about the [insert social justice click-bait topic of the week] in X Game?’
Disclaimer: Social justice is great. Discussing elements of games like Smash Brothers or Tomb Raider or Monkey Island or Metal Gear Solid or Super Mario or God of War (see what I did there?) as ‘problematic’ or ‘possible problematic’ or ‘unfortunate’ is, well, a silly and cheap way to establish oneself as a serious entertainment journalist.

I would love to read some long form articles on Adventure Gamers, perhaps even written by members of this very forum, expounding their thoughts or opinions on any myriad of adventure game topics. Puzzle design, character design, good dialogue/conversation design, favorite/best use of cursor types, historical perspectives, childhood stories, series/company restrospectives, favorite designers and why and how different game designers games identifiably differ in different ways, the pros and cons of modern vs retro, the priority of importance of -for example- narrative vs gameplay (what is more important to creating a compelling game). Lessons learned from games, either in the game itself or in a meta way. On and on.
Forum conversation is great, but sometimes I just want an un-deraillable freight train of thought.

I would go into more detail but I’m not sure if I’d add anything useful. I do like reading all this stuff.

I’m more on board with, lets say, more holistic reviews and I don’t believe in separating art/entertainment from general culture, even of the war-like variety, but I do agree to some extent with the qualms expressed in this thread.

Here’s my two cents on the issue (of discussing social issues and such): the problem is not analysing these aspects of games, but the fact that most game journalists and reviewers are not very good at analysing games structural/technical fashion. It’s not that the views they’ve internalized in college/uni are wrong (though sometimes it’s obvious these ideas have just been internalized in a superficial manner), it’s that they’re used instead of a) describing the experience of playing the game or b) describing the structural design of the game and whether this is good or bad.

Baron_Blubba - 18 June 2022 11:07 AM

That’s true, that too many reviews these days include too much information, whether that means too much information about the game itself or too much real world context or too much of the reviewer’s opinion on their interpretation of the game’s philosophy and characters. The latter can sometimes be very entertaining, and sometimes very laborious to read.

Very true. It’s quite rare than you can escape past the third paragraph before the reviewer makes a comparison to another game. The comparison can cover the main characteristics, i.e., graphics, music, story continuity, voice acting, etc.. Or in may limit the comparison to one or two facets of the game.

Regardless, the comparison is often gratuitous. It really doesn’t matter if game X compares favorably, or unfavorably to game Y. Each must stand on their own merits. Case in point might be that game X doesn’t compare favorably to Game y. What if I didn’t like game y? How is that comparison useful? It isn’t!

rtrooney - 18 June 2022 06:49 PM

Baron_Blubba - 18 June 2022 11:07 AM

That’s true, that too many reviews these days include too much information, whether that means too much information about the game itself or too much real world context or too much of the reviewer’s opinion on their interpretation of the game’s philosophy and characters. The latter can sometimes be very entertaining, and sometimes very laborious to read.

Very true. It’s quite rare than you can escape past the third paragraph before the reviewer makes a comparison to another game. The comparison can cover the main characteristics, i.e., graphics, music, story continuity, voice acting, etc.. Or in may limit the comparison to one or two facets of the game.

Regardless, the comparison is often gratuitous. It really doesn’t matter if game X compares favorably, or unfavorably to game Y. Each must stand on their own merits. Case in point might be that game X doesn’t compare favorably to Game y. What if I didn’t like game y? How is that comparison useful? It isn’t!

Good and very practical point.

I think it’s mostly a convenient way to talk about the design of a game without.. trying to make sense of your experience and putting that understanding into words. It’s pointing at an apple and saying it’s like another apple.

Another problem: it assumes the reader knows the game on the other side of the comparison.

we just are beating around the bush, now

no one cares what we say here, and if anyone cared, their ego will prevail, I say leave your ego behind and everything else will come to you exactly when its needed