Foxtastical
Member
Isn't playing a game for 3 hours, realizing you don't really enjoy it and then stop playing it, a form of criticism? I don't want to go much further (games being interactive and not necessarily about story, movies are about story, etc), but I think having a "guide" to reviewing video games is a bad idea (you have to beat it before reviewing it!). Let people play games how they want to, let them review them how they want to as long as they're being fair and honest to their audience and readers. We're all different, but we do find agreement with certain types of critics.luka said:If I was reviewing it I obviously wouldn't come out and say I hated it but I would extrapolate on why I view those aspects as problematic. I would have at least played it to completion and got a feel for everything it offers - I personally didn't play more than 3 hours. If I did despise it to the point that I would rather just get it over with and play something else I would be entirely the wrong person to be reviewing the game in the first place. If I had to I would at least look at every aspect and judge it fairly. Fairness is the key thing. I was a little overdramatic with my example but there is no denying that there is a LOT of excessive vitriol directed by a handful of reviewers that don't even make the effort. I expect reviewers to be honest and opinionated, but I also want them to at least take the time to form one properly. It's what they're paid for after all. I mean, almost all of the negative reviews didn't even seem to know about the autotransition feature when they complained about the alien's 'awkward' movement.
EDIT: When I said I'd "probably give it an A" that's assuming I took the time to play it all the way through beforehand.
The whole beating a game before reviewing thing, though, I really don't feel like debating about. I've had it a million times before, and it's late night. Maybe later.