Jason West and Vince Zampella have been fronting questions at QuakeCon over the weekend and one of the topics that came up were reviewers.
According to Zampella there is nothing more frustrating than reviewers who don’t complete games and he feels that all games should be completed before the reviewer puts virtual pen to paper.
I only half agree.
If a game is less than 10 hours there really is no reason not to complete the title before putting up the review but when it gets longer than that things become a little murkier, especially for part time reviewers.
Take for example Red Dead Redemption which has a huge single player storyline with a very feature packed multiplayer component on top of that. I feel that in the single player campaign once you have played 10 hours you have pretty much experienced all the game that is needed before writing the review. That is unless you are finding the game truly awe inspiring or truly gag inducing.
As a reviewer you have a responsibility to justify the score you have given a game and if you give it a 9.5+ then you really need to be sure the game is worthy of that score and you can’t do that without playing all aspects of it.
However if the game is truly terrible it then becomes more about how terrible a game is, it’s not fair to a bad title to give it a 2 without truly going indepth into it… however giving a game a 4,3,2 or 1 really makes no difference. The game is obviously terrible.
But you also need to be wary of games with quality piled on towards the end, like Braid for example. If you stop playing Braid 10 minutes before the end the game is possibly going to lose at least a point possible a point and a half.
What do you feel, should a reviewer be able to review a title they haven’t finished? Should they tell you if this is the case?
Alongside this, should games be allowed to receive scores of 10 and 0?
Last Updated: August 16, 2010
darthdad
August 16, 2010 at 11:43
Yes. :pouty:
Geoffrey Tim
August 16, 2010 at 11:45
Absolutely – if its a game with any sort of narrative or evolving gameplay mechanics. You don;t need to finish Pac-man to know what you’re in for.
A game with any sort of story though? Absolutely, otherwise it wuld be akin to a film critic getting up half-way through a film and then still submitting a review.
Bobby Kotick
August 16, 2010 at 11:45
It depends, it would have been nice if reviewers had actually finished the short single player of Modern Warfare 2 and gave us a more realistic review of that pile of manure (instead of calling it the best thing since sliced bread). It’s ironic that West and Zampella would comment on this, because the shortcomings of their game (single player and multiplayer) were discovered post-review, as gamers were playing MW2.
Did all the positive reviews help sell MW2? Most definitely…
WeRRieS ZA
August 16, 2010 at 12:16
Reviews suck! They always end up spoiling a good game! NAG I will never forgive that lame review on Dark Sector 5/10 or something, what an epic game! I do however digg lazygamer reviews and they know what we want to buy and what not.
I do agree that they need to finish a game! That’s what it’s all about, beating the game!
Lupus
August 16, 2010 at 12:27
Depends entirely on the game, if it is a horrible, horrible game from the outset then no.
Nick de Bruyne
August 16, 2010 at 12:43
When I received my review copy of Fallout 3 for Lazygamer, I began the review playthrough on Saturday at around 1pm, and played the game literally non-stop until a thunderstorm forced me to switch my console off at 3am (14 hours later).
I then woke up on sunday and managed to somehow plug another 12 hours into the game, totaling 26 hours and allowing me to still write a full detailed review and also try and hit the preferred deadline.
As fun as it may sound to play games all weekend, as of the time I started playing, I spent 26 of around 36 hours of the weekend playing Fallout. I felt that by that point I had experienced enough to properly review the game, and the readers would get a review during the first few days of the games release.
Sure we are part time reviewers, but even at full time, to get a review for a game like Fallout to come out before the game is a month old would barely be possible if a full playthrough was required.
Then you get games like GI Joe. I played it for 20 mins, took it out, said in my review that I stopped playing it after 20 mins, and why. I didn’t need to see any more to know that it was a pile of crap.
Bobby Kotick
August 16, 2010 at 13:22
NAG has gone downhill over the last few years. Their reviews make very little sense any more, since everything scores above 50, even terrible games. It baffles my mind when a reviewer considers something to be below-average chicken scratch, yet gives it a 60% rating.
It’s just a pity that Walt’s mag never took off (Gear and now Gamecca).
RSA-Ace
August 16, 2010 at 13:48
Also a yes from me. There are certain games that you know when you can stop playing but if you can you should definitely finish it.
lans
August 16, 2010 at 14:05
GEAR did not take off because they articles were two short and they focused on consoles too much, PC game magazines are few and far between most fo them overpriced packed with useless subscription, time trial apps. If Walt focused more on pc than console initially i think the magazine would of held up as he could advertise all the pc parts. Kind off like be like techsmart but more gaming orientated and longer reviews even if they review fewer games
N4g is doing what it needs to do to survive,if they review scores badly how are they gonna get free early copies, invitationals to try out developers new games and etc.. by being lenient, i think they’re saving the games industry, because not evr1 wants to play halo or god of war all the time , sometimes ppl just want a hypre free no one knows game
lans
August 16, 2010 at 14:11
THIS IS WAY GAMING JOURNALISM IS VERY UNPROFESSIONAL.
IF U DONT FINSH THE GAME NO REVIEW PERIOD!
JOURNALISM IS A PROFESSIONAL INDUSTRY AND ARTICLES ARE THROUGHLY THOUGHT AND COVERED END-END
GAMES JOURNALISM IS MORE OPINIONATED AND IS SUSCEPTIBLE TO JADED REVIEWERS WHOS EVER GROWING EXPECTATIONS CAN NEVER BE MET! WHO SHOULD HAVE QUIT GAMING LONG AGO!
this is precisely why gaming journalism is seen so cheaply as its a easy come, easy go, the only magazines that actually can call themselves journalists, are edge magazine and official playstation and unofficial playstation magazines. Even though i hate edge, they’re professionalism of writing a comprehensive review is unrivalled in the whole industry.
Nick de Bruyne
August 16, 2010 at 14:27
You guys do know that G.E.A.R magazine is still going, and is packaged with the PC Format, right?
Nick de Bruyne
August 16, 2010 at 14:32
So lans, what you are saying is that we should start charging our readers and that everyone here is willing to start paying for the content to ensure that we can hire full-time reviewers and writers?
D4RKL1NG
August 16, 2010 at 14:42
Wait,is school out already?
lans
August 16, 2010 at 16:20
its called Competitive Advantage From Business 101, if people want it then charge!
i would pay for multiplayer if it was made easy, i would pay money if starcraft 2, came without drm. If there is a market then yes!1
ign has ign insider, and you have to pay for indepth walkthroughs and very exclusive video content which is usually leaked on youtube unfortunately etc etc
lans
August 16, 2010 at 16:22
hardy har har?
bokka1
August 16, 2010 at 16:54
I am sure lans will be able to review GT5 without even playing it.
lans
August 16, 2010 at 17:12
:pouty: bokka unlike you ppl i am impatient and actively follow gt so most of the information i know ill know before you scrubs because i am part of gtplanet, and these guys are serious about gt.
for example tommorow gtplanet readers and inside sim racer team will have an exclusive interview with yamachi tommorow at 6pm at gamescom, about gt5. they hope to get solid details and will be shown a near final build of the game, they will try to confirm rain and snow in the game amongst a host of other new features. i like gt and south africa gaming press in general is light years behind in gaming coverage, its all very light superficial copy paste information, by the time lazygamer get the same information ive seen it will be wednesday best case scenario but typically, lazygamer reports on gt stuff about 3-2weeks late, and im not gonna listen to uninformed idiots blabber the same misinformation over and over and over and over again! makes me sic :sick:
Nick de Bruyne
August 16, 2010 at 17:22
So tell me dear lans, why haven’t you used our submit button up top to write us some well-informed and current news on GT5? The option is right there.
You see, unlike you, we have to read ALL of the news, and sort through what is and is not relevant or important at the time, and we also try to get all the other news out in the In Other News posts, so we cannot simply just follow GT5 all day long and post every little piece of info that gets released for just one game.
Go ahead, use the button, show us your worth.
Bobby Kotick
August 16, 2010 at 18:12
Yes, but it started off as a standalone magazine, and it’s no longer under the helm of Walt.
Bobby Kotick weighs in
August 16, 2010 at 18:14
I’m hoping gamemecca pulls throw though. It’s a cool format he has.
MyDogSmellsFunny
August 16, 2010 at 21:44
I’m curious, if IanF is so obsessed with tracking gt’s development what happens when its finally released? Do you carry on with life again? Maybe meet a Ms Ians and fret over gt 6 together?:-)
lans
August 17, 2010 at 10:06
ok, but dont try make me ur bitch im nobodys bitch!
Jacob Bobby Kotick Zuma
August 17, 2010 at 12:32
I don’t think it’s possible to expose him to sunlight any more. He might disintegrate, given that he has spent the last few years in his basement, digesting GT news.