How many times have you read a review and disagreed with what was said? If you play video games a fair amount, the chances are that it has happened at least once. Now, you may say to yourself, “That review was poor.” It may have been, but why did you think so? Was it poorly written? Did the score not match the words? Think hard, because more than likely the review wasn’t bad.
Then you might say, “The review score was lower (or higher) than I think it should have been.” That sentence is a common sentiment heard by nearly every writer many times on every single game that they have reviewed. Now bear with me for a minute, as I am about to give you a rundown on what a writer is thinking when putting their OPINIONS onto paper when writing a review.
Most of the ‘core’ gaming crowd visits blogs for their news and reviews (such as Joystiq, Kotaku, etc.). Blogs handle the writing of a review in a more modern way. Games used to be viewed strictly as products, so they would be reviewed as such. Think of a car review; you will see the review reveal specs on the car, and maybe a few sentences running down what makes this year’s iteration better or worse. But, video games are not only products, they are also experiences.
Cost doesn’t matter (to a point), length doesn’t matter (also, to a point). A game should be judged by the reviewer as an experience, and the words and the score should be representative of what that writer thought the game was worth, not in dollars, but in life minutes. (Keep in mind that not all reviewers do this, but if you are going to a blog then there is a strong possibility that they operate in this style).
Much of this you may already know. You may be reading this with spite thinking that I am talking to you like an idiot. Trust me, that is not the intent. Even if you think you know what goes into a review done by a good writer, you are probably misinformed at least a little bit. I have been getting paid to write for a little over four years and I have also been a fan of video games since my formative years. That said, neither of those things qualified me to understand what goes into a game review until I did one for the first time 16 months ago.
Let me clue in those of you who might be unaware:
Any reviewer worth his salt (most of them, there are many great game critics out there) will play the game to completion. If the game is 10 hours long, he will be taking notes, generally with pencil and paper, for the majority of their time spent playing. Losing thoughts is one of the worst things that can happen, as it is probably a point the writer wanted to make. After this time spent playing and taking notes, the writer will take probably three to four hours thinking about the game, judging the experience that they had. The writing itself, depending on the number of edits it needs, could only take two to five hours.
Truly, a five to 15 hour game can take as long or sometimes longer to write than to play. That doesn’t sound too bad though, right? This person gets to play a game (usually for free, and usually before release) and all he has to do is write about it? So what if he has to spend a couple hours writing about the game? Simple, yes? Not so quick.
Reviewing is a sizable responsibility in video games, as the price paid for a poor review is quite high. If a writer gives a poor review — meaning, they did not give it the proper time and thought while writing it — jobs may be lost in PR, development or publishing, or consumers may spend money on something that the reviewer isn’t actually sure about. These thoughts are also constantly pumping through the writer’s head. Try as they might, they are still human and they know that even though they are writing about what is supposed to be a fun experience, their words sometimes have significant ramifications.
What does this matter to you, the reader? I mean, these folks get paid to do this job. They should be used to it by now. You’re not wrong. That is why so many reviews are written on a weekly basis and most of them are well done. The words and score generally represent what the writer thought of the game, and very rarely would a writer change what they wrote even if they saw the review a year later. At the time, they played the game and had a reaction to it, and whether positive or negative that reaction was genuine.
I’m not saying that all reviews and critics are amazing, far from it. There are some writers and outlets that aren’t quite up to snuff. Just like every quarterback isn’t Tom Brady or Aaron Rodgers, not every writer is Erik Wolpaw or Chet Faliszek. If and when mistakes happen, they will generally be corrected with a (hopefully public) update.
So the critics have a job, yes? There is one other person that has a job when it comes to a review: The Reader. Although, your job is much simpler than the writer’s. You have to read the review and understand a few things: it is the reviewer’s OPINION, and unless you somehow snagged an early copy of the game in question, you probably haven’t played it yet. Just because outlet A and B agree on a game, that doesn’t make outlet C’s review wrong. It just makes it their review.
Most readers open a review with their mind already made up and are only looking for validation. Don’t fall prey to this, even if it is a trait that we as humans have to overcome as a species. You are better than that. Just remember that a review is one person’s opinion and it doesn’t mean anything other than what they thought of the game.
No Comments