Shadow Queen Style Giygas Style Togepi Style Boney Style Printer Icon Printer Friendly

Home Page > General : Reviewing Guide - The Red Blimp

Reviewing a Game

One of the great things about the internet is that anybody can give their opinion on anything. No longer must we suffer the snobbish critiques of the select few, for now everyone can tell the world what they think! Indeed, this has made it much easier to determine the general opinion a community has about something. It is also much easier to learn about products; in this case, games. If you want to know whether to import a game released only in Japan, you can find someone who will tell you what you want to know. Unfortunately, one of the terrible things about the internet is that anybody can give their opinion on anything. If you've ever been to GameFAQs looking for whether to buy a certain game, you may have spent a while dredging through a swamp of poorly written reviews that seem like excuses for the author to yell at the makers or to hail the game as the digital messiah.

Why has this happened? Why do reviews fluctuate so crazily in quality? Why are some reviews actually useful while other reviews stink like a mule's exrements? Well, prior to the internet and the 'anybody can do anything!' approach to reviewing, people who wanted to write had one place to look towards to: print. If they wanted to let the world know that this hair curler sucks monkey bedsheets, they had to write it in a newspaper or magazine (or later on, say it through television). If they wanted to write it (or say it), they had to be accepted onto the writing (or saying) team, and for that, they had to know how to write (or say)... and to do that, they had to go to journalism school. Of course, this takes time and effort... why bother learning about what consitutes good reporting and helpful criticism when there's screaming to be done?

If you're at this page, however, I'm assuming that you are interesting in finding out just what a good game review should be. I'm not a journalism major, but I've seen a fair amount of reviews and I have a good idea of what a helpful one should be.

The Purpose

You have to ask yourself this question before you review a game, because otherwise you will probably lose interest or end up writing some boring, pathetic... thing that nobody will want to read. The question is What is the purpose of this review? Why are you reviewing this game?

Typically, good reviews answer that question with, "To inform the reader about this game". That is the purpose of a review. It can come in different flavors; for example, you could say that you want to inform people who have played other games in this franchise about this game, or to inform people who don't have the opportunity to play this game. The type of review this guide focuses on is this: a review that informs the reader about the game, and helps them decide whether or not to purchase it.

Now, bad reviews answer the question like this: "I'm bored" or "I want to let people know what I think about it". What's so bad about this? Well, I hate to be blunt, but nobody cares. Although knowing the reviewer's opinion on something can definitely be helpful (and has often been a major point for me when deciding to purchase or not), a review that consists solely of what a reviewer thinks and doesn't inform the reader about anything is not very useful as a review.

Picking a game

First, start off by picking amongst the games you have played. I kid you not; there are reviews floating around the internet made by people who have not played the game. It's rather difficult to review a game when you haven't finished it - there is always the possibility that the ending is superb, and you can't really tell what a game is supposed to be like if you haven't finished it. I recall the day that Super Smash Bros.: Brawl was releashed in Japan. Within fifteen minutes, there were some 'quick reviews' on GameFAQs. Now, I've never been very good at playing fighting games, but yikes. Fifteen minutes for a game that you've only ever played now? That's ridiculous. As such, it follows that until you finish playing a game, you are not in a position to review it.

Now, while finishing a game should be the minimum to being able to review it, it would really help if some of the other aspects of the game were explored, too. Is there anything else to do once you've finished the game? How are the sidequests? Are there even sidequests? what else can you do during the main story? The better you know this game, the better you'll be able to help your readers. For games with multiplayer, it also helps to know how fun it is to play that, and if you want to go in deeper, you could even investigate any competitive gaming that could be going on.

So, if you've played a game and more than the bare bones of it, you should be ready to review. As you head to your writing document, you may be shocked to find that you don't know exactly what to review. This is a problem resulting from a lack of planning. Yes, you should plan your reviews. Most reviews use categories to rate a game; for example, it has a little blurb of what the reviewer thinks at the top, then a 'Story', 'Graphics', 'Music', 'Gameplay', and maybe a 'Multiplayer' or 'Replay Value' category if the reviewer feels like it. At the end, the reviewer gives scores for each category, finishing off with giving the game a '1 to 10' score, 1 being the worst and 10 being perfect.

This is not a good way to write your review.

The entire idea of dividing the game into categories that must stand apart from each other and then giving the game a number score is tacky. A game is a whole; it does not come with seperate 'graphics', 'story', 'music', 'gameplay' components. 'Graphics' and 'music' are extremely lame categories, mainly because there are very, very few cases in which both are so horrendous that they hinder the gameplay. Graphics and music could be bundled into some sort of 'environment' category which describes how well they do at helping the story and gameplay, but I would suggest shying away from any sort of categorizing game parts. You don't buy a game for its graphics and music, and until recently, storylines were just add-ons and not serious parts of the game. No, the most important part of a game is gameplay. Some games will, however, have a very strong story (EarthBound, for example), which will justify any weaker gameplay. As such, these should be the two main points of the review.

Gameplay

Gameplay will be, for most games, at the core. This is the thing that defines games, the interactivity that makes them seperate from movies. Gameplay is the most important thing in a game. A trite storyline (or even lack of storyline) will be ignored if the game is fun (see: Pac-man, Super Mario Bros.). The subject of how to treat gameplay is rather difficult, as simply describing the controls doesn't get the feeling across to the reader. The reviewer will have to describe how you play (not the control). For example, rather than describing Pac-man as a game in which you 'press the directional pad in various directions to collect dots while not running into enemies in order to increase a number on-screen', describe as a game in which you 'navigate a maze to eat all the pellets before running into ghosts while raising your score'. You don't have to describe why running into the ghosts is bad (leave that for the storyline), but leave the reader with an idea of what they will be seeing rather than physically doing. Follow up with your opinion. Is the game fun and entertaining, boring, tedious, weirdly addictive? Are there any other parts of gameplay that should be noted (for example, in Pac-Man you can collect 'power pellets' to eat the ghosts, which will give you points, and you can also occasionally find fruits that raise your score)? You should give your opinion as well; a game may have a good idea but actually play out badly, or have a silly idea and play out well. In these situations, it helps to clarify by saying "although this sounds silly, it is actually rather fun and I enjoy playing this game" or "it looks great, but is disappointing. I can't bear playing this game". Of course, sometimes the game looks good and IS good, or looks bad because is bad.

Now, many game reviews include a seperate category called 'control'. I consider this unnecessary and simply include it with gameplay. Isn't 'control' a part of gameplay (and a rather important part of gameplay at that)? Gameplay with bad control is bad gameplay (although the inverse isn't always true). You should expect games to function as they should; if a game is glitchy or bad camera placement, count these as poor design.

Storyline

Storyline is a tricky thing, mainly because sometimes it matters and sometimes it doesn't. Take a look at Pokemon; it has had the same core storyline game after game (stop evil team, collect badges, beat the league!) and remains one of Nintendo's best-selling series while being fun (of course, some people get tired with the same thing game after game, but this is something that will be covered later). The Mario series gets by with relatively little storyline by being ridiculously fun. These games may try to have some storyline (the teams in the Pokemon games have been more and more ambitious with each game), but they are not the focus of the games, and so it would be ridiculous to focus on the storyline. Even in these games, it is important to mention the storyline because this is often a deciding factor in purchases; just try not to give too much importance to something people won't care about.

Now, there are games that are more ambitious with their storylines, and here is where you can whip out your amazing plot-reviewing skills and rip it to shreds. People will come to these games expecting a good storyline alongside good gameplay (or maybe even instead of good gameplay). A good example of this is the EarthBound series; it is renowned for having a captivating plot. The gameplay is... there, but it's not one of the shining spots of the game (though it has more original elements and fun with each incarnation). If the storyline is going to be a major focus of the gameplay, then it shouldn't be annoying. We should look forward to knowing more about the storyline, or at least feel satisfied when it's over. Now, don't spoil anything. If you spoil the ending to a game, or even a twist, then you ruin the whole point of having such a thrilling storyline: finding things out for yourself! This doesn't mean that the story can't be pleasing; I found out more or less everything about Mother 3 before playing it, but that didn't make it any less fun and it didn't make each progression of the storyline any less interesting. You should still avoid spoiling the game (even if it's a well-known spoiler), out of courtesy and respect for the reviewer.

Environment

This leaves what I had previously grouped into the 'environment' category: graphics and music. I always skip over these parts in reviews because they are so unhelpful. I can tell how a game's graphics are from looking at a screenshot or a video; likewise, I can watch a video and pay attention to the sound to judge for myself how annoying the grunts are or how likable the music is. Now, if you must include this into your review, do as follows: judge how well the graphics help the gameplay and storyline. Graphics are the means; not that many people buy a game for the graphics. Now, if a game's graphics are a strong point, you should mention it. Small things like this help people decide what to think about a game, and maybe someone will be more inclined to like a game if the graphics go above and beyond what was expected. If the graphics add to the mood, you should mention this, especially as it applies to the storyline later on. However, if you're about to mark the graphics as a bad thing, think about it - do the graphics actually distract you while playing the game? Is your experience of playing this game soured by the graphics? Are the graphics so horrendous that your eyes actually hurt? These are the times when you should rip on graphics. Graphics that don't totally use the system's capabilities are not a bad thing. Graphics that impede your merrymaking are.

Where does this leave music? Music is also a tricky subject to cover; many people don't pay much attention to music because you could just, after all, mute the game (while of course, you can't 'mute' the graphics). However, if you ever have to mute the game because the music is that bad and distracting, then you should mention this. The main purpose of music in games was to help the game's mood, and that is what it should do. If the music is so good that it serves both as good background music and something you'd like to listen in your spare time, then you should mention that; once again, good music can tip the scale for a reader on the edge about a game. Overall, music is not that important in a game... unless, of course, it is. The most obvious exception to this is games in which significant portions of the game involve music - specifically, the music in-game. For example, Mother 3's battle system can be played without music, but it's much more fun with the music. You can play Guitar Hero or Dance Dance Revolution with a song you despise (or with the music off) and still do a good job, but it's more fun with good music. As such, music should be important in your review if the game features music promimently.

Replay Value

The last category in which games are usually graded is 'replay value'. Replay value is the reasons you have to play the game again, whether starting over, or continuing after a game is finished. You shouldn't be too specific with this if it's of the latter type; it could be spoilerific. Try to just give general ideas; for example, 'sidequests', 'minigames', 'post-game plot', etc. For stuff you can do when starting a game over, you can be more specific. For example, if there is a collection 'plot' in a game (collect 8 [x] in each world to get [y]), you can mention that. Now, most replay value stuff is the same (sidequests is unfortunately vague), so here you can give your opinion. Are these things fun? Are they at least worth the while in-game? Let them know!

Finish up

You should finish up with a 'conclusion'. Conclude: should you buy this game? Once again, give your opinion. Be subjective here! There's not much else to say here.

This is an important note: you should probably think in advance about whether you are writing your review for people who have never played the games before, or for people who have already played the other games in the series. It is completely useless for someone who has never played Pokemon to be told not to buy Ruby and Sapphire because "It's the same thing as the other games." Well, they don't know how the other games are. Should they buy one of those games instead? If you have never played another Pokemon game before, does this mean that it's ok to buy Ruby and Sapphire? This is something you should tackle in your conclusion: how this game would be to someone who is new to that series, and how this game would be to someone who has played the other games in that series. If the game you are playing is a stand-alone game, then this isn't something you have to worry about.

Proofreading!

Now, once you write your review, you should go through it and check it for errors. Read through it slowly, revising any odd-sounding sentences. If a sentence doesn't seem to fit into a paragraph, think about how you could reword it or where else you could put it. This is important to establish a connection with your readers; why should they trust you if you can't even write properly? On this note, also try not to come off as a jerk. This is probably one of the most annoying things I've ever seen on reviews: smart-alecks making 'intelligent' references to the game that reviewers won't catch, and generally being unhelpful wastes of time. Really, don't needlessly insult a game or its makers; it will not help your readers and is not funny. (If you actually are funny, feel free to put some quips into your review. The key word here is 'funny'; not sarcastic, not rude, funny. Funny lines make the reader like your review more and if you're funny enough, they may even read your reviews because they like you, not because they're interested in the game.)

So, you've finished your review. If necessary, you've given it a number score. All the written part is there. Is there anything else you can do? Well, if the place where your review will be put allows for it, you could use pictures or links to videos to show the reader what you find wrong with the game. This will be particularly useful for demonstrating flaws with the graphics; if it's annoying that leaves randomly go through your character's head, you can show your reader, and then of course talk about how it affects the game. This isn't necessary, but it's a nice touch and I quite like it when a reviewer does it.

Review a review

Once you're done with everything, take the plunge and put your review up. Don't be afraid to ask people to actually review your review; criticism is important in improving yourself. It may seem odd to ask someone to review a review, but it is helpful. If you are writing a review for a friend, ask them how the review helped them. If you are reviewing for a place that has a commenting system, check any comments left, or look at the '[x] people have foudn this review helpful' thing on sites like Amazon. Learn from your reviews; if someone says that they don't get a clear idea of how the gameplay is, ask them how you could make the gameplay clearer. Keep on writing reviews, and over time, you'll improve. Eventually, you may be able to say with pride that yes, you do write good reviews.