With the advent of all things internet - blogs, forums and other online social networks - have game reviews really become a thing of the past?
Their influence certainly seems to have withered.
Maybe it’s because we don’t need reviews as much? We can now download trailers, videos featuring gameplay footage, screenshots and other media that all help to give us a better glimpse of games that interest us. We also have access to much more opinion than ever before, through countless forums and blogs, and of course, we get views from our trusted friends in our online social networks (more on this in a second). The biggest change, though, is that we now have ‘free’ playable demos, so we can actually see for ourselves just how good or bad a game may be.
There’s another reason why game reviews may have lost some of the regard and influence they once held - slant. Many people comment on how they feel certain journalists/publishers have a particular lean towards one platform over another. I often see concern and speculation on forums as to which game site is on the payroll of which company. Is there any truth in it? Who knows, but it has to be said that game sites rarely do themselves any favours when they cease being impartial - or worse, consistently denigrate a particular platform to the extent that it becomes obvious.
So a number of things have happened. Reviewers/publishing houses have lost some of the respect they once had, and gamers have become somewhat more independent in their decision-making process.
We’re still listening as part of that process. It’s just that we’re now turning instead to those who we respect and feel are more impartial. People who we’ve met online, or know in person, or those familiar names who we see regularly posting on forums and blogs. There are even people we’ve grown to associate with certain games and aspects of a game.
See if this rings true for you.
In my online social network, I have around 20 gamers who I have got to know fairly well. Inevitably, I have formed an opinion about them and come to a conclusion of sorts, about their strengths, and on which aspect of gaming I value their opinion most. So, one person I know, I have down as someone extremely clued up about the technical side of things, another is an online gameplay fanatic, another is the opposite (local play) and another is a die hard fan of a particular genre. Now multiply this several times - and I have a wealth of respected, very clued up opinion at my fingertips that covers pretty much all types of games. Perhaps more importantly, the overall picture I get is far closer to my own opinion, because I have formed this ‘task force’ from previous experience (so fakes or plants need not apply). So instead of relying on just a review that I may or may not agree with, I have information coming to me from a number of different angles who have proven to be closer to what I actually think and so are more accurate in letting me know whether I will like a game or not.
I came across a good example today. Someone posted a link to a major review of our version of MotorStorm, and someone else commented: “Thanks for the link. I already have this preordered.” I too have it pre-ordered, and I will also be getting Resistance Fall of Man without a doubt, and I can honestly say I’ve not read a single review on either.
Yes, people are still reading reviews, but I’d argue that they now have considerably less influence on our buying habits than they once did - and the days when they were seen as the make or break of a title will very soon be a thing of the past.
By Azz Hassan, part of the team at www.gamesey.com
I understand your direction but I have to say I disagree. Users seem to be obsessed with the x/10 scores and I think sites like metacritic.com are the way forward bringing a great range of opinions together in one place. Trailers, screenshots and reviews have been around since the very early days of PC gaming and I don’t think that has changed much.
“So a number of things have happened. Reviewers/publishing houses have lost some of the respect they once had:”
In what respect have they ‘lost respect’? Many, if not most, magazines are expanding their subscriptions and service into the online sector with podcasting and media rich sites. I’d agree magazine sales have been hit with the rising popularity of blogs and sites like IGN but they certainly have not ‘lost respect’. If anything they have become more respected, especially by the bloggersphere. Sites like Kotaku publish Edge magazine’s review scores on a monthly basis for example.
Comment by Ben Furneaux — Mar 5, 2007 @ 5:49 pm
Most people don’t read game and movie reviews to aid purchase decisions. People read them for entertaining discussion and debate. I often don’t like reading the reviews until long after I’ve purchased it and have played it quite a bit.
And, yes, consumers are skeptical of reviewers and wary of bias and slant, but it’s always been that way. There was never some magical time in the past where game reviews were highly respected and revered.
Comment by ps3fan — Mar 5, 2007 @ 6:05 pm
“By Azz Hassan, part of the team at http://www.gamesey.com”
cmon its not april yet, your name isnt azz now is it? 4 real man..
Comment by whatdafunk — Mar 5, 2007 @ 6:21 pm
I do read reviews… allthough nowhere near as much as I used to. More than anything, its to see if there are any major flaws in the game rather than to get the writers opinion.
I can definatley see where you’re coming from though. I used to decide what games to buy by reviews and screenshots. Now I can download a demo and check it out for myself.
Good article though Azz. I’m guessing the “online gaming fanatic” is me?
Comment by Tom Eccles — Mar 5, 2007 @ 6:40 pm
It’s an interesting point of view and with the invention of the interweb print reviews have had to take on a different role as they are less immediate that those found on the ‘net.
I personally take great stock in the reviews on what ever format they come in. Reviews are about informing us the gaming public what’s worth our hard earned cash. Knowing that certain games are over hyped and good to avoid such as Sonic the Hedgehog on the XBox 360.
Comment by Kropotkin — Mar 5, 2007 @ 7:25 pm
I disagree.
I read many reviews, and frankly, I base my decision on how the game is reviewed.
Take Crackdown for example. Halo 3 Beta or not, I did not have any plans to buy it. However, the awesome reviews it received, convinced me otherwise.
Again, it’s the exact same with fl0w. (The PS3 is not out in Europe yet, obviously) I would not have considered buying the ‘game’ until I saw the reviews.
Comment by Gavin Fitzgerald — Mar 5, 2007 @ 7:28 pm
Have to admit i am reading a lot less magazines these days. Eurogamer is so up to date plus they also review games too. They seem to be well constructed and you can trust them to tell you if they dont like a game.
Comment by stevieb — Mar 5, 2007 @ 8:16 pm
Uh oh…sounds like someone is getting their undies in a bunch because they didn’t like the Motorstorm reviews…
…maybe if it wasn’t such a half-baked final product and Sony gave it the love and time that project deserved it would have A) actually looked like its target render and B) would had likely garnered scores that would make it a must-have title.
Seriously–as a gamer, I was looking forward to Motorstorm. It deserved a lot more time and attention than what it got, and I’m hoping maybe someone at Sony will wise up (for once) and green light a sequel that will actually live up to the promises.
Comment by Matt — Mar 5, 2007 @ 8:27 pm
Reviews from websites and magazines are still important - even more important than before for the reason you mentioned.
In fact, while I may agree that many websites’ reviews are simply like a collection of random thoughts or a randomly assembled staff, thus offering nothing more than what you could read by browsing blogs and forums, other websites have a strong editorial line, and offer a global, organized view on videogames.
When websites forget about the importance of creating a coherent editorial line, through the help of Editors in Chief and Senior Editors that guide the staff, their content lose its value. But when the opposite is true, it means these websites become an invaluable resource - especially when the review scene is dominated by two or three networks.
Comment by Misha — Mar 5, 2007 @ 10:03 pm
Good piece Azz, especially what you say about forming your own review team as it were by using those people you have got to know and trust.
I find most reviews quite pointless as they’re very rarely done from an objective view point and unless my likes are exactly the same as the reviewers we’ll ultimately share a different opinion of the game.
Comment by Sean1504 — Mar 5, 2007 @ 11:41 pm
This is not about some review Azz didn’t like… in fact, is about all the reviews we didn’t like. I think everybody agrees in playing a game is infinitely better than any review you can find. I think too that everybody agrees that having a friend first played a game you want to know about is better than see some reviews in magazines and websites.
Really, these days with all the downloadable demos and trailers, the easy it is to rent any game, the amount of friends online or offline that play games and you know their tastes, there’s hardly any place to reviews anymore.
Ah, yes. Forgot about the fanboy stuff and system bragging of every time. That’s where reviews are VERY neccessary. If you don’t care about bitching and visit only adult forums with adult people, reviews are very secondary.
And the scores, the 8.6, 9.5, and the such. It’s so old. Why is it I almost never agree? A bit of thinking for you: the real score a game deserve you can only put it a year after playing it. That’s the only way to say with a cool mind if you liked it or not.
Comment by Omaesan — Mar 6, 2007 @ 12:10 am
I do agree and that has been by train of thought ever since I started using my own money to buy games. I seriously don’t see how people can base their decision on a stranger’s OPINIONS. They have their own tastes and I have mine.
The only time I read reviews is when I have already played the game, then I check all the things that I agree with him/her on; there’s rarely a time when I agree with them on more than half of the issues, so I really don’t see any point on letting them decide on what I do with my money.
Comment by Ghostedge — Mar 6, 2007 @ 7:14 am
“There’s another reason why game reviews may have lost some of the regard and influence they once held - slant. Many people comment on how they feel certain journalists/publishers have a particular lean towards one platform over another. I often see concern and speculation on forums as to which game site is on the payroll of which company. Is there any truth in it? Who knows, but it has to be said that game sites rarely do themselves any favours when they cease being impartial - or worse, consistently denigrate a particular platform to the extent that it becomes obvious.”
What does this have to do with GAMES reviews?
Lots of titles now are crossplatform. Are you saying gamers don’t trust journalists because they’re suggesting one version of a title over another?
For games that are not crossplatform, are you saying journalists consistently rate games on one or more platforms lowly, and those on others highly?
I’m not sure that makes much sense either. A large number of magazines and websites are platform-specific. Only a specific few cover more than one platform, such as EGM. Are you saying EGM is somehow slanted towards one particular platform, either Windows, Xbox, Sony or Nintendo? Because if so, I honestly haven’t noticed.
Comment by Narcogen — Mar 6, 2007 @ 7:54 am
Sorry but I don’t agree. There is a way to make reviews objective, it’s just that people won’t use that. A good review is important, especially to slam lazy publisher: I remember I got a review copy of .hack//Infection a few years ago. The game was abysmal and poorly translated (as in facts, not personal opinions), so I gave it 3/10. ANd the site had a very good traffic so the review had some impact.
How it works? I use the scientific method and a scientific approach to review a game. I can get overly excited, angry, etc. but those impressions don’t make an impact on the judgement because I have to deal with facts and not with my own personal opinion. For example, a weird bug or a plot hole in the story may not have harmed the play session, but they’re still a flaw that has to be recognized. It’s also important to check which details are important and which are not. It’s not easy to write a piece like this. Some reviews may sound harsh like that, but this way you’re far more sure that what is written is something that is closer to reality more than opinion.
Comment by ximpa — Mar 6, 2007 @ 9:17 am
Matt - I wouldn’t call an average of 85/100 a bad score for MotorStorm. (What’s more interesting is that it’s only slightly higher than the reviews for the Japanese version, which didn’t even have multiplayer (???).
Bottom line is - scores don’t matter much. Look at the top selling games - some of them get lousey reviews.
Comment by maikii — Mar 6, 2007 @ 10:02 am
Scores matter if you use them right - something that isn’t happening recently.
Comment by ximpa — Mar 6, 2007 @ 10:18 am
That’s a point. Now the vast majority of gamers never reads game related press. 15 or 20 years ago, maybe. Not anymore.
Comment by Omaesan — Mar 6, 2007 @ 11:02 am
I have to admit I do have a cardre of online friends who are more influential as to what games I buy. Yet, even I begin to question the efficacy of such a system because other factors enter into the equation when “friends” are your guide. I play many games online, and i notice that some games I would not have bought I am buying merely to play with people online…I hate the games…but I buy and play them to be part of the group. That sort of herd mentality eventually will break down for me because while these people are fun to play with, nice people, great friends they don’t know beans about choosing the next game to buy. Yet, not playing with them would be unthinkable because most other people online are jerks. Do I want to play with nice people playing the wrong game, or a bunch of people I don’t know playing a better game. That is likely a question we are all asking ourselves too.
If you want and example of this look at XBL where the community moves form one game to the next like prey animals on the savanna. My herd, your herd, their herd all come together on XBL to become this mega herd of gamers. Somehow when we look at this new form of providing information where blogs, social networks, and forums matter more we have have to admit we are adding a clutter to our decision making process. It is easy to say we will just listen to the smart people in our network of buddies, but that not how social groups work. Social groups reach consensus they don’t reach valid conclusions. Social groups don’t arrive ad decision based on just facts they reach decisions by who is the most persuasive and who the fastest talker more often then not.
Comment by Lincoln — Mar 6, 2007 @ 1:36 pm
I agree with the gist of the post, but I would like to clarify how “slant” biases the review process. This does not refer to platform fanboys, but the hype that some reviewers can generate for a game.
Take Grand Theft Auto San Andreas for example. Of course the preceding two GTA titles were blockbusters, and rightfully so. But while these titles garnered all the praise, the DRIVER series was criticized as being a copy, and an also ran.
The fact is DRIV3R had better graphics, and better physics. Other games that are hyped and/or have a high advertising budget seem to get better reviews than they deserve. BLACK comes to mind as a highly hyped game that received good reviews and was really substandard.
…
Comment by Scott Piraino — Mar 11, 2007 @ 7:38 am
RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI
Leave a comment