On Game Reviewers and Reviews

It's hard not to put stock into video game reviews. You'd like to think you can watch a preview or clip of a game and justify a $60 purchase, but it's not like a movie where movie previews are carefully crafted to suck people into spending $9 at the theater.

Games are a different sort of beast. Games are interactive experiences, sometimes interactive works of art. They are multimedia in the truest sense of the word. You can't look at the box art, read the synopsis on the back and gain a fraction of the understanding you could get playing the game for 2-10 hours.

There are some exceptions (i.e. sports games, simulation games) where a review of the updates from the previous iterations will tell you all you need to know. But even then, there are tidbits left behind that only personal interaction with can complete or destroy the experience. Updated rosters might be great. But how greasy is the computer with tackles and one handed catches?

The reviewing system for video games, in it's many forms ranging from stars to nonsensical numerals, has seen quite few reforms. Some reviews are averages of three scores while others might not be an average of anything. Does a 9.5 on a sports game mean that I really should like Madden Football 20xx, or does it mean that only Madden Football fans will. Which brings me to my next point.

Reviewers themselves have become almost as important as the review, if not more. For movie people, it's the same thing as listening to Roeper, but not Ebert. I've gotten to the point that when I listen to the 1-Up Show podcast, I know that when James "Milky" Mielke is going to gush over the latest Ninja Gaiden, I have to remember that the game is ridiculously hard with it's combos and timing and that I won't find any pleasure in playing it.

What is different about game reviews today from years ago, and possibly any review system (cars, movies, computer hardware), is that the genres for games are so particular for gamers, that a sports gamer who hates first person shooting games like Halo or Medal of Honor, are going to realize that there are things that will never change about FPS games and a good review would never make them go buy it. That person is going to pay every bit of attention to a review about a football game though.

It's almost like we draw our gaming territory early on and we know that we can't be swayed by a review. We also know particulars about genres themselves. I don't touch WWII shooting games because I don't feel they have any characters that drive the story. I'm not a history buff, so they don't appeal to me.

Now I won't get started on the issues of reviews and corporate business relationships. This article does that plenty. And it's a great read. It's what made me write about this in the first place. It's a topic I never really thought about consciously.