• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
  • Hey Guest. Check out the NeoGAF 2.2 Update Thread for details on our new Giphy integration and other new features.

Shawn Elliott's Video Game Symposium Begins, 1: Review Scores

LCfiner

Member
Feb 23, 2008
23,028
0
0
Montreal
Drinky Crow said:
hey, i'm just talkin'. i fully allow that they might blow my fuckin' mind and i'll be laying here all fetal and moaning "halo deuce" to the lot of you, but this a videogaming forum, not a symposium. i talk off the cuff; i don't prepare my remarks. fuck, i don't even spellcheck.

I think you misunderstood my post. I was saying that I was glad you brought up the topic as it would have a better chance of getting spoken about in a future part of the "symposium".

... I really feel weird using the word "symposium" I've gone nearly 30 years without ever once using that word and now I've used it a dozen times in one day.
 

FartOfWar

Banned
Oct 12, 2004
5,901
0
0
Quincy, MA
Drinky Crow said:
would you trust music reviews if half of them bashed hip-hop as random, disinteresting noise?

In fact the first question for the second section asks whether or not it's important for a writer to have a history of fandom with the genre of the game he or she is reviewing. I'm especially excited to hear what Harry has to say there, too, as in my mind it's almost another inquiry where hip hop music is concerned.
 

wolfmat

Confirmed Asshole
Apr 3, 2008
13,545
481
1,315
Hamburg, Germany
Flavius said:
Shows how out of touch I am, I suppose. For me, the byline is nearly everything. I seek out those reviewers/enthusiasts/whatever-the-hell-you-want-to-call-them whose body of work I respect. If the name's unrecognizable, I don't immediately dismiss it as shit, but I will seek out that person's other work to get a sense of their approach...skills, ethics, and whatnot.
You're really doing that? Honest question.

And why do you do that? Who cares who that is? Just read another review and balance things that way, it's waay faster and yields better results in the end.
 
D

Deleted member 22576

Unconfirmed Member
whenever i see or read the word symposium, i think of futurama


this is gonna take a long while to read, but im sure ill skim some of it
 

Drinky Crow

Banned
Jun 7, 2004
11,716
5
0
if they can consistently nail a game's strengths and flaws in 10h, i shan't dispute their credentials. until then, i'd like to expect more discipline from folks.
 

Drinky Crow

Banned
Jun 7, 2004
11,716
5
0
FartOfWar said:
I misunderstood. I somehow got the sense that you see one writer as all of his brothers' keepers.

i only do that when i lose track of an argument and get snarled up in semantic bullshit. i ain't gonna make that mistake twice!

that said, yeah, if you (the rhetorical "you") are so good, take it to the masses. show them how it's done, and get yer advocates to declare your learning from the mountain. i would LOVE to be able to trust the average game review and ignore forum impressions again -- it's just that much more efficient!
 

Flavius

Member
Aug 20, 2006
4,386
0
1,265
wmat said:
You're really doing that? Honest question.

And why do you do that? Who cares who that is? Just read another review and balance things that way, it's waay faster and yields better results in the end.

I suppose that all boils down to your intended/expected result.

I don't read reviews to assist in purchasing decisions, nor do I ascribe to the notion that that continues to be the norm. I simply want a thoughtful, occasionally surprising critique of a title I've either already played, or am interested in learning more about.

"Who cares who that is?"

You're honestly asking me that?
 

Flavius

Member
Aug 20, 2006
4,386
0
1,265
Drinky Crow said:
if they can consistently nail a game's strengths and flaws in 10h, i shan't dispute their credentials. until then, i'd like to expect more discipline from folks.

Are you talking hitting the nail on the head, or simply not putting a nail where it isn't necessary?
 

bistromathics

facing a bright new dawn
Feb 24, 2008
5,626
0
0
35
Wow, reading about 1/4 of this so far and some of the responses in the this thread (drinky), I am envious of people's writing ability. No offense to any of the participants of symposia, but I have read very little of their actual writing. I don't mean I just check the score, but rather that I don't read reviews - I'll usually know well before a game comes out if I am going to drop the money on it or not. I'd always planned on being an engineer of some sort and never thought that writing would hold much importance - but written communication is so fucking important (in any field, I imagine), and I seriously wish I put more effort into it during school.

:(
 

wolfmat

Confirmed Asshole
Apr 3, 2008
13,545
481
1,315
Hamburg, Germany
Flavius said:
I suppose that all boils down to your intended/expected result.

I don't read reviews to assist in purchasing decisions, nor do I ascribe to the notion that that continues to be the norm. I simply want a thoughtful, occasionally surprising critique of a title I've either already played, or am interested in learning more about.
I do the same, but I can gather that thoughtful insight across different reviews, it's not like every review out there has to be perfect.
"Who cares who that is?"

You're honestly asking me that?
Well, maybe you do; I don't know who you are or how you approach reviews.

I don't care, for me, it's about the games first and foremost.

After 18 years or so of reading reviews, the names blitz by. I have yet to see a reviewer that blows me away with every single piece he writes. Until that happens, reviewers could as well be anonymous for me as long as they say something I can value.
 

Flavius

Member
Aug 20, 2006
4,386
0
1,265
wmat said:
I do the same, but I can gather that thoughtful insight across different reviews, it's not like every review out there has to be perfect.

Why fish? I suppose there's something to be said for exploration, but I don't feel the need to go out and seek a number of game reviews in order to do so. That's what the forums are for.

Well, maybe you do; I don't know who you are or how you approach reviews.

I don't care, for me, it's about the games first and foremost.

Then we're polar opposites, I'm afraid (nothing wrong with that).

For me, the reviewers approach is critical. Shit, that's the reason I can't stand much of the game review dreck on the internet and do everything possible to avoid it.
 

legend166

Member
Jan 31, 2007
19,429
0
0
Drinky Crow said:
man, i've been careful to qualify that not EVERY reviewer has these problems. you're looking at your body of work; i'm looking at the body of work out there across 40-50 reviewers at the major magazines and sites.

look. i can pick up game informer, or go to ign, and immediately find a review that gets a game completely and totally wrong. does that mean that its YOU that's spinning your share of the dross out there? of course not, but when you're a reader, the byline is secondary.

Fight and Heal.

Never forget.
 

firehawk12

Subete no aware
Sep 10, 2007
61,792
0
1,160
Toronto/Guelph
ItsInMyVeins said:
Oh, shit, I read "Jeff G" as Jeff Green. My bad.

The thing with consumer reports is that they're probably more likely to catch interest than an in depth analysis of a game, which of course impacts the sales of ads and so on.

The things you're asking for is what I think I get from reading, like earlier mentioned, the "Making of" (very old games) and "Time Extend" (last generation old games) parts of Edge magazine.

Jeff Gerstmann has said more than once that the idea of finding the next Pauline Kael of Games Journalism is a farce. He's definitely on the "consumer reports" side.

While those features in Edge are interesting in providing a developer perspective, there's something to be said about allowing an author to express their own voice.
Part of the problem is that the majority of reviewers in the games press are straight, white, middle class men so the diversity of opinion isn't there... but wouldn't it be interesting to hear a female response to Mirror's Edge?

There's almost a self-congratulatory wank fest when it comes to the representation of Faith in the game between the developers and the reviewers (she's flat chested so she's real!) but what if there's a woman out there who finds such a response patronizing?

Same with the borderline homophobia in GTA4. If there's a gay reviewer out there, shouldn't he be allowed to address that issue in a GTA4 review?

Or hell, what about get a WW2 veteran to review CoD5? Or someone Japanese?

Wouldn't it be obvious to have someone from Korea review Starcraft 2 to get a glimpse of the Korean perspective to the Starcraft phenomenon?

I think those are the types of reviews that are lacking in a space where it is consumer reports first and personal opinion second. Luckily, the internet allows people to run their own websites and get their own voices out there. Could you imagine gaygamer existing as a magazine in the 90s?
 

LCfiner

Member
Feb 23, 2008
23,028
0
0
Montreal
bistromathics said:
Wow, reading about 1/4 of this so far and some of the responses in the this thread (drinky), I am envious of people's writing ability. No offense to any of the participants of symposia, but I have read very little of their actual writing. I don't mean I just check the score, but rather that I don't read reviews - I'll usually know well before a game comes out if I am going to drop the money on it or not. I'd always planned on being an engineer of some sort and never thought that writing would hold much importance - but written communication is so fucking important (in any field, I imagine), and I seriously wish I put more effort into it during school.

:(

off topic but... yeah, I'm an engineer and I spend a shitload of time writing bigass emails. As do most of my colleagues.

so, get practicin' wit dem wurds!!


also, Shawn E should keep pushing to get Jeff Green in on this action.


edit: Firehawk. I think the stuff you're looking for in game writing (as I am) is something that shouldn't be part of the review that gets posted the day the game comes out. I think those reviews should remain as consume reports, numbers and all. But the expansion of game critique would address all the things you bring out. that's what I'm hoping changes in the next few years. coming back to a game soon after it comes out and digging a bit deeper into it.
 

Flavius

Member
Aug 20, 2006
4,386
0
1,265
Maybe this'll help you...

Drinky Crow said:
like i said -- trollishly, shokku! -- in another thread on another forum, they're ignoring the obvious pink elephant in the room: that nobody trusts videogame reviewers, given the gross inconsistency of their standards. oh, maybe we kinda sorta trust the regular byline (most likely one or more of the folks in the symposium), but we as readers inevitably turn to suspicions of bias and politics because we can't fathom why else the greater body of writers are so fucking AWFUL at reviewing, well, everything about our hobby.

I'd suspect at least a portion of the impetus for this symposium is that issue of trust. I'd also suspect it has much to do with what Shoe and Crispin put together over on the Sore Thumbs Blog. How the fuck is it being ignored?


why should i listen to a body of critics/reviewers/commentators who can't collectively get the basics right?

What are the basics and who defines them? This is the stream of consciousness bullshit that I was alluding to earlier. Half a thought's about as good as no thought at all.

these accusations of bias or crookedness -- they're just the attempts by many readers to articulate a generalized mistrust.

That's a blanket generalization if I ever heard one. We've had websites covered in fucking Kane & Lynch, pulling low review scores and replacing them with higher ones, people getting canned after shitting on games, etc. I don't see the generalized mistrust.

i can open an issue of gameinformer or play or egm and find at LEAST two reviews of games where they got it fucking wrong (regardless of whether or not i liked or hated the games), and it's in three areas: an inability to dissect aaa games, the lack of desire to understand slow burn franchises, and a lack of experience with edge subgenres. the pattern match isn't pr (or the lack thereof); it isn't payola; it isn't the format requirements; it is one simple thing: reviewers, by and large, are lazy. they will not -- or cannot -- put the time or energy into thoroughly exploring every game they play, and until they address this deficiency meaningfully, they will continue to consistently earn our mistrust, rendering symposia like this largely moot outside of their own cloister. and as much as shawn and tom and n'gai and robert and stephen would like to act at some remove from the fray (and as much as they're smart enough to deserve better), they're getting tarred with the same brush, because at this point they haven't started to address the core issue of trust.

Yadda, yadda, bullshit, bullshit. This is you defining your expectations of what a game review should be. To me, what you're describing sounds fucking boring.

My point being, if you're going to make some off the cuff remarks that you're not bothering to edit, how about at least taking the time to articulate whatever the fuck it is you're trying to say? You're all over the place.
 

wolfmat

Confirmed Asshole
Apr 3, 2008
13,545
481
1,315
Hamburg, Germany
Flavius said:
Why fish? I suppose there's something to be said for exploration, but I don't feel the need to go out and seek a number of game reviews in order to do so. That's what the forums are for.
I don't really fish; I visit the outlets I'd visit anyway, see the review of that game I find interesting, read the review. I go to the next outlet, hey, there's another one of those reviews, must be my lucky day, I read that as well.

After reading each, I reflect and play with what the reviewers say, put that in relation to what I saw in videos, sometimes put in in relation to what I experienced playing the game in question.

So it's not really fishing per se.
Then we're polar opposites, I'm afraid (nothing wrong with that).

For me, the reviewers approach is critical. Shit, that's the reason I can't stand much of the game review dreck on the internet and do everything possible to avoid it.
I generally don't put much weight into the reviewers' approach because you're bound to be misguided in a lot of cases. I filter out the core critique and keep it in mind, later re-evaluate it with forum posts, my own experience, other reviews.

The idea that one could write The One Review every single time isn't realistic anyway, as I see it.

So I don't rely on personalities. Although it's quite comforting to go that route as a reader, it's also not very helpful if you want to gather as much input as possible. Thus I don't discriminate anyone, I just ignore who they are and look at what they've done today.

Why one would do anything more than that is beyond me. But that's just my view of things, and I definitely don't have the final say on that matter.

On the other hand, as soon as you go away from reviews and read other material, like technical articles, historical reflections, whatever in the field of games, personalities suddenly become much more important. But that's besides the point.
 
Apr 4, 2008
1,529
0
0
firehawk12 said:
Part of the problem is that the majority of reviewers in the games press are straight, white, middle class men so the diversity of opinion isn't there...

Do you really believe this?
 

bistromathics

facing a bright new dawn
Feb 24, 2008
5,626
0
0
35
LCfiner said:
off topic but... yeah, I'm an engineer and I spend a shitload of time writing bigass emails. As do most of my colleagues.

so, get practicin' wit dem wurds!!

I am too, and I think it is too late to spend the time needed. Believe it or not, I have actually been using GAF for the past few months to try and improve my communication skills. Not the best environment for sure, but the time it takes me to mentally prep my thoughts and get them out in writing has already decreased quite a bit.

And wow at N'Gai; that guy is way better at it than I gave him credit for. The only text of his I read prior to this was the RE5 trailer stuff, which was really just a web-drama in disguise >_>
 

Flavius

Member
Aug 20, 2006
4,386
0
1,265
wmat said:
I don't really fish; I visit the outlets I'd visit anyway, see the review of that game I find interesting, read the review. I go to the next outlet, hey, there's another one of those reviews, must be my lucky day, I read that as well.

After reading each, I reflect and play with what the reviewers say, put that in relation to what I saw in videos, sometimes put in in relation to what I experienced playing the game in question.

So it's not really fishing per se.

I generally don't put much weight into the reviewers' approach because you're bound to be misguided in a lot of cases. I filter out the core critique and keep it in mind, later re-evaluate it with forum posts, my own experience, other reviews.

The idea that one could write The One Review every single time isn't realistic anyway, as I see it.

So I don't rely on personalities. Although it's quite comforting to go that route as a reader, it's also not very helpful if you want to gather as much input as possible. Thus I don't discriminate anyone, I just ignore who they are and look at what they've done today.

Why one would do anything more than that is beyond me. But that's just my view of things, and I definitely don't have the final say on that matter.

On the other hand, as soon as you go away from reviews and read other material, like technical articles, historical reflections, whatever in the field of games, personalities suddenly become much more important. But that's besides the point.

wat :lol
 

LCfiner

Member
Feb 23, 2008
23,028
0
0
Montreal
bistromathics said:
I am too, and I think it is too late to spend the time needed. Believe it or not, I have actually been using GAF for the past few months to try and improve my communication skills. Not the best environment for sure, but the time it takes me to mentally prep my thoughts and get them out in writing has already decreased quite a bit.

And wow at N'Gai; that guy is way better at it than I gave him credit for. The only text of his I read prior to this was the RE5 trailer stuff, which was really just a web-drama in disguise >_>


If you're preparing thoughts before posting on GAF then you're doing it wrong :D



just kiddin'.


As for N'Gai, I really like some of the stuff on his blog. His conversations with Stephen Totillo are usually very good reads that go in-depth with a single game.

He doesn't update the blog as often now as he used to (tsk, tsk) but it's still worth bookmarking.
 

firehawk12

Subete no aware
Sep 10, 2007
61,792
0
1,160
Toronto/Guelph
LCfiner said:
edit: Firehawk. I think the stuff you're looking for in game writing (as I am) is something that shouldn't be part of the review that gets posted the day the game comes out. I think those reviews should remain as consume reports, numbers and all. But the expansion of game critique would address all the things you bring out. that's what I'm hoping changes in the next few years. coming back to a game soon after it comes out and digging a bit deeper into it.

Yeah. The guy who runs Banana Pepper Martinis thinks there should be two tiers of reviews and I'm perfectly happy with that.

The problem is that the "major" press isn't interested in publishing those types of reviews because there isn't a reader base for them. I fully understand why a magazine isn't going to waste pages - they are running at the bare minimum these days anyway - but there's no reason why the major online sites can't run more "high brow" reviews after the fact.
 

Drinky Crow

Banned
Jun 7, 2004
11,716
5
0
Flavius said:
Maybe this'll help you...



I'd suspect at least a portion of the impetus for this symposium is that issue of trust. I'd also suspect it has much to do with what Shoe and Crispin put together over on the Sore Thumbs Blog. How the fuck is it being ignored?




What are the basics and who defines them? This is the stream of consciousness bullshit that I was alluding to earlier. Half a thought's about as good as no thought at all.



That's a blanket generalization if I ever heard one. We've had websites covered in fucking Kane & Lynch, pulling low review scores and replacing them with higher ones, people getting canned after shitting on games, etc. I don't see the generalized mistrust.



Yadda, yadda, bullshit, bullshit. This is you defining your expectations of what a game review should be. To me, what you're describing sounds fucking boring.

My point being, if you're going to make some off the cuff remarks that you're not bothering to edit, how about at least taking the time to articulate whatever the fuck it is you're trying to say? You're all over the place.

don't see the mistrust? are you reading this thread?

the basic points of inquiry are obvious: 1) who is the audience for this game; 2) what is the game ultimately trying to achieve; 3) how does the execution support this goal or goals; and 4) does it succeed or fail. boring? this doesn't parameterize to a four paragraph essay or some other rigid format, and if you think it it does, you should get out of the biz post-haste. if the average reviewer applied these simple questions to gta4 or twilight princess, you'd see a lot less glowing reviews and a little more insight. it doesn't in ANY way subtract from the reviewer adding color or personality or whatever it is you kids adore to their insights.

as for shoe and crispin's blog(s), the posts I read dealt with the poor grammar of the average review. i couldn't give a shit about that -- bitching about spelling and grammar are still just blaming symptoms, not root causes.

lastly, if you can't understand me, consider a ged program. they're cheap and let you attend in the evenings!
 

Dragona Akehi

Retired
Jun 5, 2004
15,259
0
0
It's always nice to see Castellan emerge from the Drinky cocoon once in awhile. He and Frag have eloquently explained my problem with game reviews. The current system of things is nothing close to a critiquing of the medium; most of the time the reviewers simply grade well what they like/have been hyping and put everything else in the rubbish bin.

Frag's comments regarding wargames rings especially true. When excellent niche games are being panned (such as, in my experience Etrian Odyssey or Baten Kaitos II) by mainstream press, it become harder and harder to even pay attention to them. Were they literature or films, critics would have explored them for what they are, despite not having the flash of the blockbuster movie.

Currently, gaming press is grading according to the blockbuster "experience", and ignoring the smaller things. One thing I've always found amusing is that in other industries, (as mentioned, literature and film), oft times the blockbusters are panned despite raking in millions and it is the so called B-List games that become critical darlings.

I'm not saying that all reviewers are bad and are incapable of being critics. However, with the relative youth of the industry combined with the publishers calling the shots, it's going to be difficult for there to be a true critic of videogames.

Right now, the real, if not rough-around-the-edges and unheard critics are indeed in the gaming forums, where as Frag said: I can find out whether a game I'm interested in is good or not by looking at the impressions from forum posters I've come to trust.
 

Drinky Crow

Banned
Jun 7, 2004
11,716
5
0
well, credit where credit's due: kieron gillen identified that issue right off the bat. it's just that everyone else would rather complain about scoring systems or pr pressures.

when you PAY for your copy of dynasty warriors xviii empires plus overdrive edition now featuring xu shu's third lieutenant's son rendered as a bishie, you kinda try to actually, y'know, PLAY it once or twice, and you also are invested enough to overlook the superficial gripes -- "ONLY ONE NEW CHARACTER?!?!?! NOOOOOO" -- to get to the meat of what's REALLY changed.

on the other hand, impressions come with agendas, too. i'm as guilty as anyone of writing up impressions JUST to make sure a niche title gets a little forum advertisement, and if you don't think that colors what i write, well, hurrrrrrrrr
 

Dragona Akehi

Retired
Jun 5, 2004
15,259
0
0
Drinky Crow said:
well, credit where credit's due: kieron gillen identified that issue right off the bat. it's just that everyone else would rather complain about scoring systems or bitterly complain about pr shenanigans.

Agreed, though the latter two are definitely things to complain about. The fact that publishers essentially hold all the cards thanks to being both judge and defendant makes for a very uncomfortable position for those who wish to push the journalistic integrity of the industry forward.

when you PAY for your copy of dynasty warriors xviii empires plus overdrive edition now featuring xu shu's third lieutenant's son rendered as a bishie, you kinda try to actually, y'know, PLAY it once or twice.

Well said. :p

on the other hand, impressions come with agendas, too. i'm as guilty as anyone of writing up impressions JUST to make sure a niche title gets a little forum advertisement, and if you don't think that colors what i write, well, hurrrrrrrrr

When you aren't getting paid, there's less problems with personal agendas. Everyone likes to trumpet their pet favourites, I'm no exception. However, that goes hand-in-hand with the part I mentioned about trusting certain people's opinions. If the majority of the people I tend to trust on forums agree that such and such is an excellent game, the flaws that might differ from person to person do not weigh heavily upon me.
 

Flavius

Member
Aug 20, 2006
4,386
0
1,265
Drinky Crow said:
lastly, if you can't understand me, consider a ged program. they're cheap and let you attend in the evenings!

I'm not finding you difficult to understand. The confusion's internal on your part. You're the typical 12 year old internet kiddie engaging in verbal masturbation on the forums, complete with ADHD-fueled typing digits and a bookmark to freedictionary.com.

You define a game review as though it's obvious, and seem content to let the title speak for itself.

The basic points of inquiry that you mention are obvious, and like I said, pretty damned boring. Whether you want to define that as a template, format, whatever the fuck is irrelevant.

As for the Sore Thumbs blog, you're referring to what? One of the last posts? Guess you missed the prior dozen or so. Isn't this the same shit you're accusing critics of doing?
 

Stumpokapow

listen to the mad man
May 21, 2006
17,232
4
0
Roger Ebert offers some insight which basically supports what Drinky and Dragona just said:

When you ask a friend if "Hellboy" is any good, you're not asking if it's any good compared to "Mystic River," you're asking if it's any good compared to "The Punisher." And my answer would be, on a scale of one to four, if "Superman" (1978) is four, then "Hellboy" is three and "The Punisher" is two. In the same way, if "American Beauty" gets four stars, then "The United States of Leland" clocks in at about two.

The best reviews define the intended or optimal audience of/for the game, clearly identify the concerns and desires of that audience with regards to the game and deal with those. If the reviewer can't do these things, they can't write a review.

If a reviewer does do this, things will work out. Drinky seems concerned that Musou games get a bum rap, and he's right. They do. I don't like them personally, but it's clear that there's an audience for them and I have no idea why reviewers aren't writing for that audience. You don't give a score that compares Dynasty Warriors to Halo, you begin your review by describing the basics of the game in a way that makes it clear it's not intended for the same audience as Halo at all. When you move on to the critical portion of the review, your criticism should be tailored to the concerns of the audience described or alluded to in the first part of your review.

It's not rocket science, and yet so many people fuck it up.

Unlike Drinky, I do think scoring systems are a major reason why these failures happen. I think having a rigorous scoring system, particularly a 10-point or 100-point scoring system, contributes directly to what Drinky calls an inability of most reviewers to "an inability to dissect aaa games". The problem is that reviews are, by form and editorial guidance and by tradition, designed to serve as a half-hearted support for the "real meat"--the little number at the end. Once it becomes obvious that a game is AAA/blockbuster, reviewers feel constrained by the top end of the spectrum and I think that's a problem.

Of course, Drinky is right in that no matter what the format, the root cause of all the failure is reviewers not doing their job, I'm just saying having a scoreless, thumbs, or four-star system would go a long way to make sure that when reviewers begin to do their job, they aren't held back by an obligation to score in a certain way.

Flavius said:
I'm not finding you difficult to understand. The confusion's internal on your part. You're the typical 12 year old internet kiddie engaging in verbal masturbation on the forums, complete with ADHD-fueled typing digits and a bookmark to freedictionary.com.

wow. that's pretty much the worst reading of drinky i've ever seen a random make.
 

Drinky Crow

Banned
Jun 7, 2004
11,716
5
0
Flavius said:
I'm not finding you difficult to understand. The confusion's internal on your part. You're the typical 12 year old internet kiddie engaging in verbal masturbation on the forums, complete with ADHD-fueled typing digits and a bookmark to freedictionary.com.

You define a game review as though it's obvious, and seem content to let the title speak for itself.

The basic's point of inquiry that you mention are obvious, and like I said, pretty damned boring. Whether you want to define that as a template, format, whatever the fuck is irrelevant.

i'm assuming that i'm talking to professionals like fartofwar, where i don't hafta spell everything out. if it's so obvious, why are you asking me to explain it? and what about it is boring? it's an idea, not a fuckin' prescription!
 

Flavius

Member
Aug 20, 2006
4,386
0
1,265
What, did I piss on middle management's shoes or something?

I'm interested in what he has to say, but I think he's doing a rather poor job of articulating his points and asked him to clarify. Is that so wrong?
 
Jun 11, 2005
7,644
0
1,550
Flavius said:
What, did I piss on middle management's shoes or something?

I'm interested in what he has to say, but I think he's doing a rather poor job of articulating his points and asked him to clarify. Is that so wrong?


Congratulations on your promotion to middle management stump.
 

Flavius

Member
Aug 20, 2006
4,386
0
1,265
Drinky Crow said:
i'm assuming that i'm talking to professionals like fartofwar, where i don't hafta spell everything out. if it's so obvious, why are you asking me to explain it? and what about it is boring? it's an idea, not a fuckin' prescription!

Relevance, for one.

If you aren't going to offer up an original thought, at least expand upon it's application.

There are a number of critics out there doing precisely what you are describing.

What's your idea?
 

Flavius

Member
Aug 20, 2006
4,386
0
1,265
pancakesandsex said:
Congratulations on your promotion to middle management stump.

Nah, we're being artsy.

I'll just play the DuChamp readymade instead and pretend you're all a bunch of pretentious wankers who don't know any better.
 

Drinky Crow

Banned
Jun 7, 2004
11,716
5
0
Flavius said:
Relevance, for one.

If you aren't going to offer up an original thought, at least expand upon it's application.

There are a number of critics out there doing precisely what you are describing.

What's your idea?

i don't think i could expand any more and not blow your little mind. and where have i claimed originality? first you claim i make no sense, then you claim i'm boring, and now you say i'm unoriginal and redundant? get a compress on that embolism, basil!

and note: "a number of." not "the majority of."

aaaaaaand i gave you the "idea," original or contrived or whatever, in conveniently enumerated form above.

aaaaaaaaaaaaaaand get that ged. srsly. a twelve year old kid shouldn't hafta tell you that!
 

GhaleonQ

Member
Aug 24, 2006
11,572
18
1,260
Milwaukee/Wisconsin Rapids/Hanover
(Drinky Crow seems to have jumped the gun with his criticism.)

Hm, well, I think that this is the least controversial of the subjects and the one least open to forum feedback (not a criticism). Maybe I'm wrong, but this seems like a good warm-up question, since it's the most arbitrary and most likely to inspire group hugs among games writers.

Future topics leave room for high-minded dictation. One of the things that I love about Shawn, Robert Ashley, Miguel Lopez (Gamespy guy, in case I have the name wrong), and Dan Hsu is that they elevate discussion while preventing it from becoming a consequence-free salon. I know that Shawn's trying to play a constructive role in the symposium, but I'd urge him (or anyone, really) to prevent Croal-ing. That is, don't let participants pontificate on mediocre artistic accomplishments because A GAME DID THEM! Don't let them champion bad academics, dwelling on miniscule, specialized subjects or sections of games (or the use of "lenses"). Don't encourage total relativism in critical evaluation.

If permitted, the conversation will grow increasingly self-congratulatory and disinterested with truth until Shawn renames the whole thing The New Yorker Conference.
 

Flavius

Member
Aug 20, 2006
4,386
0
1,265
Drinky Crow said:
i don't think i could expand any more and not blow your little mind. and where have i claimed originality? first you claim i make no sense, then you claim i'm boring, and now you say i'm unoriginal and redundant? get a compress on that embolism, basil!

and note: "a number of." not "the majority of."

aaaaaaand i gave you the "idea," original or contrived or whatever, in conveniently enumerated form above.

aaaaaaaaaaaaaaand get that ged. srsly. a twelve year old kid shouldn't hafta tell you that!

I'll work on getting that GED if you promise to work on shoveling some of that shit you're spewing somewhere else. You're getting your panties in a bunch in regards to the content of the conversation, yet have jack and shit to add when it comes to fixing your perceived lack of focus/savagery/self-reflection, etc.

Are we going to dance this dance all night, sugartits?
 

Drinky Crow

Banned
Jun 7, 2004
11,716
5
0
perhaps you should hold a symposium on me, then -- you can be the shawn elliot of tearful drinky crow victims!
 

FartOfWar

Banned
Oct 12, 2004
5,901
0
0
Quincy, MA
GhaleonQ said:
(Drinky Crow seems to have jumped the gun with his criticism.)

Hm, well, I think that this is the least controversial of the subjects and the one least open to forum feedback (not a criticism). Maybe I'm wrong, but this seems like a good warm-up question, since it's the most arbitrary and most likely to inspire group hugs among games writers.

Future topics leave room for high-minded dictation. One of the things that I love about Shawn, Robert Ashley, Miguel Lopez (Gamespy guy, in case I have the name wrong), and Dan Hsu is that they elevate discussion while preventing it from becoming a consequence-free salon. I know that Shawn's trying to play a constructive role in the symposium, but I'd urge him (or anyone, really) to prevent Croal-ing. That is, don't let participants pontificate on mediocre artistic accomplishments because A GAME DID THEM! Don't let them champion bad academics, dwelling on miniscule, specialized subjects or sections of games (or the use of "lenses"). Don't encourage total relativism in critical evaluation.

If permitted, the conversation will grow increasingly self-congratulatory and disinterested with truth until Shawn renames the whole thing The New Yorker Conference.

Miguel is great. I'm glad to see someone noticing. thanks for the feedback, too.
 

Flavius

Member
Aug 20, 2006
4,386
0
1,265
LCfiner said:
The Drinky Crow effect is in full force here. :lol

Flavious, deep breaths! :lol we're just talking about games, man.

It may not be coming through in my replies, but I'm enjoying myself.

Not attempting to troll. for what it's worth.
 

HK-47

Oh, bitch bitch bitch.
Oct 24, 2007
49,169
0
1,010
Dragona Akehi said:
It's always nice to see Castellan emerge from the Drinky cocoon once in awhile. He and Frag have eloquently explained my problem with game reviews. The current system of things is nothing close to a critiquing of the medium; most of the time the reviewers simply grade well what they like/have been hyping and put everything else in the rubbish bin.

Frag's comments regarding wargames rings especially true. When excellent niche games are being panned (such as, in my experience Etrian Odyssey or Baten Kaitos II) by mainstream press, it become harder and harder to even pay attention to them. Were they literature or films, critics would have explored them for what they are, despite not having the flash of the blockbuster movie.

Currently, gaming press is grading according to the blockbuster "experience", and ignoring the smaller things. One thing I've always found amusing is that in other industries, (as mentioned, literature and film), oft times the blockbusters are panned despite raking in millions and it is the so called B-List games that become critical darlings.

I'm not saying that all reviewers are bad and are incapable of being critics. However, with the relative youth of the industry combined with the publishers calling the shots, it's going to be difficult for there to be a true critic of videogames.

Right now, the real, if not rough-around-the-edges and unheard critics are indeed in the gaming forums, where as Frag said: I can find out whether a game I'm interested in is good or not by looking at the impressions from forum posters I've come to trust.

A great recent example is The Last Remnant. Completely different views between the forum and critical press that couldnt seem to look past the technical issues. Not that they arent a point of argument but there was an extreme overemphasis on them to the point where the gameplay was buried,