FartOfWar said:
I'm glad PC land is sort of its own world. I like to think that somewhere out there gamers exist who want reviews that make them think about the games that they play and why they enjoy them. What's this reading reviews just to see if the score matches your expectations shit? What's the point? So you can say, welp, we agree? If a review is well written, thoughtful, representative of an informed perspective, it shouldn't matter that the reviewer is not acting as your ventriloquist's dummy.
AltogetherAndrews and I apparently expect significantly different experiences from first-person shooters. I don't care what he thinks about the scores I assign Orange Box games, but I very much want him to read what I've written and understand why I (and others like Randy Pitchford and Ken Levine) appreciate them to the extent that I do. And I'd like for him to better understand his own perspective and the expectations that inform it by contrasting them with mine. This is not threatening. In my mind it's the stuff of legitimate criticism (as opposed to consumer reporting).
To be fair, my initial post on the matter was formulated as a question, albeit one that perhaps failed to relay much of a genuine request for additional information but rather showed a gut reaction based on my personal opinion of what its score should be was the world shaped more in my image. And you know, scores serve as just that, as attraction devices for personal reaction from fans, "haters" and observers, and I honestly don't believe they have much value beyond that. I would like for reviews to be written and presented in such a way that they are interesting, but most of all informative of what the product being reviewed is actually all about. It doesn't necessarily have to mean more words, just something that is structured in such a way that I can come away from reading reviews having a fair idea of what the value of the game is, for me and for others.
I'll be sure to read your review later tonight (or morning, really), and if this thread is still open I'll chime in. As said, it may be that we just plain don't see eye to eye on what makes a game a worthwhile thing, but we'll see. In any event, I appreciate the patience.
traveler said:
Edit: Fart brings up a good point- where does the line between reviews and criticism (the two ARE different) lie and does it merit examining? For instance, do people even want criticism in their gaming mags or just reviews to look at from a buyer's guide perspective? Like he said, I didn't need any reviews to convince me to purchase the Orange Box, yet I read them anyway, if only to better understand and put into words how I felt about the games and compare/contrast that with others to see if experiences were similar or different.
I read them for fun, and perhaps just to get another take on it. Sometimes there's a quality to a game that I've actually missed, and a good review, a rare thing indeed, might be able to pinpoint that. And then I read some reviews written by known buttholes just because I need some easy agitation to go with my morning coffee. There's the odd review where I'm actually looking for information on whether a game is worth a purchase or not, but the aforementioned poor standards in reviews makes that a rare occurrence.
