Paid Reviewer vs Gamer Opinion

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

Paid Reviewer vs Gamer Opinion

View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest

Users viewing this topic: none

Printable Version

All Forums >> [General] >> General Discussion >> Paid Reviewer vs Gamer Opinion

Page: [1]

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

Paid Reviewer vs Gamer Opinion - 8/20/2003 11:56:59 PM

Les_the_Sarge_9_1

Posts: 4392
Joined: 12/29/2000
Status: offline

I might have posted this at Wargamer, but as we speak they seem to be having tech trouble (or I am at least). Besides my being a Mod there makes it sometimes hard to not be a Mod when I want to be (not to mention some think my being a Mod makes me special, wish it was true :) )

I have recently been taking the matter of reviewers vs just ordinary gaming schmucks willing to offer an opinion under some thought.

Ok lets face it, slagging a game on that game's home ground is always dumb even when your point is valid. Because the faithful likely don't want to hear it. That holds true with any group and an undesirable or unwelcome opinion though.

I have read some reviews, but I can be honest, I don't read many. I think it is an attention span problem. I rarely even read reviews for games I like let alone games I am not fond of.

I am not sure why I am this way though, I read exceedingly dry literature for relaxation normally.

Maybe it is an unconcious knee jerk reaction to reviews.

A current example I would offer is a review you can find at Wargamer currently for Blitzkrieg. It's a perfectly normal, typical example of a well enough written piece. Or at least it is written in the same manner most reviews normally are written for form and structure from a literary standpoint.
What bothers me about it, is its the game Blitzkrieg.

Contrast the review of the game with a post I myself made on the matter.
I wasn't attempting to write it as an exhausting review. I wasn't getting paid either though. Give me 100 bucks and I can assure you my post would have walked excrutiatingly thoroughly all over the game.
My post was dismissed as "classic Les" :) I guess my views have been distilled down to that eh. An offshoot of noteriety I suppose.

On the one hand you have a well written piece by a person that is assumed to have a full working copy of the game and willing to install it and fully play it. This along with giving a full over view of the game, and details of what manner of system will be required to run it.

On the other hand, there is my post which was brief with me saying I played it, and I didn't like it one bit. It didn't go into detail over the games inner workings or minutae. I also didn't spend time on system requirements. There were no imbedded images of the game (although that is a limitation of the post process).

But my manner of expressing my view point was recently confounded by an email I was sent (as a result of being staff at Wargamer, we all get what is sent to staff).
I read this one guys report (personal opinion) on a game I thought was really liked UV (I don't myself have it).
He tore into it like he was me hehe. And his condemnation was pretty thorough.

The game is a popular title, has no shortage of supporters, and appears to be selling well. He was not to impressed when all his condemnations were largely brushed off as being just anti social and unsupportive, even when he made apparently valid points which made sense.

My position here is further influenced by a thread I participated in here at Matrix Games recently for a game I do in fact have (TOAW).
The person made numerous slags of the game pointing to numerous details all well supported by a well written "review". The review went into brutal levels of detail with charts tables and was quite daunting
But the points were not valid if the rebutal from the actual designer is assumed to be worth anything (and coming from the game's designer should be considered about as reliable as it gets).
The rebutal was not well recieved though, and the person was just sufficiently convinced of their own view point to not care it would seem.

I am wondering at this time, is a thorough review something we should take more seriously due to it being a well written piece?
Reviews can be biased by being the paid for opinions of persons that are really no different or better than you or I.
They can also be factually flawed, as the one TOAW review was just an official rant in some ways of speaking.
I even fell for the review until an ordinary gamer pointed out a link where I could see the designer himself make mincemeat out of the review.

It is frustrating I must confess. I am an innately opinionated person :D
I make remarks on games, and I am often quite serious about them.

I am concerned, that my fellow gamers realise when I say I hate a game, I often likely really mean it.
But at the same time, we opinionated gamers can often be quite full of it.
I just want my fellow gamers to realise, reviews are not automatically any better.

So just keep in mind, just because the game has been given a good review might mean nothing.
Just because most people say a game is great, the truth might be it's just because most are not interested in hearing anything else.
Occasionally that one person saying a game is contrary to the popular opinion, might actually have a valid point.

_____________________________

I LIKE that my life bothers them,
Why should I be the only one bothered by it eh.

Post #: 1

- 8/21/2003 2:11:40 AM

Paratrooper

Posts: 272
Joined: 6/15/2003
From: descending on Stockholm
Status: offline

Just because a guy gets paid to write a review on a game doesn't mean he's less of player than you. Quite the contrary, he more than likely plays MORE games than you! In fact if he's a good reviewer he probably spends more than eight hours a day playing games.

Darn, wish I was a gamer review. :(

I like reading game reviews. Before I even buy a PC wargame I always check out the review at [url]www.wargamer.com[/url] to see if its any good or not.

_____________________________

Oi maamme, Suomi, synnyinmaa!

(in reply to Les_the_Sarge_9_1)

Post #: 2

- 8/21/2003 3:22:50 AM

Les_the_Sarge_9_1

Posts: 4392
Joined: 12/29/2000
Status: offline

I might have erred on the paid reviewer statement, might have seen a remark connected with paid submissions and made the connection by mistake to reviews.

Either way, the point is more that a formal review is not always more or less meritrious. And the quantity and or sum of time spent on games by a reviewer while handy in comparing, still is not a complete basis in and of itself to summing up a game in all cases.

A person posting a simple post can have played more games or played more often just as easily in the final analysis.

_____________________________

I LIKE that my life bothers them,
Why should I be the only one bothered by it eh.

(in reply to Les_the_Sarge_9_1)

Post #: 3

- 8/21/2003 3:42:10 AM

Fallschirmjager

Posts: 6793
Joined: 3/18/2002
From: Chattanooga, Tennessee
Status: offline

I find 95% of game reviews from good sites to be very accurate

_____________________________

(in reply to Les_the_Sarge_9_1)

Post #: 4

- 8/21/2003 3:46:57 AM

Blunderbuss

Posts: 178
Joined: 6/22/2003
From: Consett, NE England
Status: offline

I would be suspicious of reviews by paid writers that are short (e.g. in newspapers), and just say something like "This is a great game with stunning graphics". I would suspect that they haven't played the game at all, and just read the blurb off the packaging.

I don't buy gaming magazines any more (finally stopped after 19 years!). If there is a game I'm thinking of buying, I read the main review at [url]www.gamefaqs.com[/url] or get inspiration from these forums. Between the two I can get enough info. to make a decision.

Most game types don't appeal to me any more. It's mostly strategy and the occasional shooter, and they are nearly all games that have been heavily discounted, either because of age or they didn't sell very well (Strategic Command and RON are the only exceptions so far). Personally, I do not need the services of paid reviewers any more. I've become a niche market consumer.

(in reply to Les_the_Sarge_9_1)

Post #: 5

- 8/21/2003 9:21:59 AM

jvitous

Posts: 8
Joined: 2/1/2002
From: Berwyn, IL
Status: offline

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Paratrooper
[B]Just because a guy gets paid to write a review on a game doesn't mean he's less of player than you. Quite the contrary, he more than likely plays MORE games than you! In fact if he's a good reviewer he probably spends more than eight hours a day playing games.

Darn, wish I was a gamer review. :(
[/B][/QUOTE]

I assume you mean "game reviewer," and you might reconsider this wish.

I started writing reviews six years ago, some of them paid for a magazine and several websites (but not for The Wargamer - we don't pay reviewers).

I can very efficiently figure out what is wrong with a game. I can very efficiently determine what is right about a game. I know when the developer is being innovative, because I see a high percentage of games that come out.

I can no longer consider gaming a "fun" hobby. Even if I find a game that seems enjoyable to play, I haven't the time because there is a never ending parade of games that are "work." I have stacks of games still in the box that I bought to play for fun; but there is never time for this.

That's not to say there isn't satisfaction in it...otherwise, there would be no point to doing it at all. But before I became involved as a reviewer, my nights and weekends were spent relaxing with an enjoyable game. Now it is "working" on a game, which even if good isn't necessarily an enjoyable experience. As one plays the game, one is maintaining a constant vigil for problems, inconsistencies, and other issues.

[QUOTE][B]I like reading game reviews. Before I even buy a PC wargame I always check out the review at [url]www.wargamer.com[/url] to see if its any good or not. [/B][/QUOTE]

It is always good to find reviewers you can identify with. Consistency I think matters the most; even if you consistently disagree with a particular reviewer, the reference point is helpful.

_____________________________

Jeff Vitous
Director, Special Project and Partnership Development
The Wargamer
www.wargamer.com

(in reply to Les_the_Sarge_9_1)

Post #: 6

Of Reviews - 8/21/2003 9:26:49 AM

ShermanM4

Posts: 298
Joined: 7/14/2003
Status: offline

[QUOTE] have read some reviews, but I can be honest, I don't read many. I think it is an attention span problem. I rarely even read reviews for games I like let alone games I am not fond of.I am not sure why I am this way though, I read exceedingly dry literature for relaxation normally.

Maybe it is an unconcious knee jerk reaction to reviews.
[/QUOTE]

I couldnt agree with you more:)

_____________________________

"Perserverance and spirit have done wonders in all ages."

~General George Washington

(in reply to Les_the_Sarge_9_1)

Post #: 7

- 8/21/2003 9:28:01 AM

junk2drive

Posts: 12907
Joined: 6/27/2002
From: Arizona West Coast
Status: offline

i was interested in blitzkreig, dl'd demo, read their forums. the people there ripped a game mag review to pieces. seems the reviewer was a fps type. the learning curve is very high/long from my experience with the demo. the reviewer didnt have the time/patience/desire to learn the game and blew it off as too difficult to play. my .02

(in reply to Les_the_Sarge_9_1)

Post #: 8

- 8/21/2003 10:07:50 AM

Les_the_Sarge_9_1

Posts: 4392
Joined: 12/29/2000
Status: offline

Hmm I must say, when I started this thread I didn't know where it might lead (sort of like most threads I suppose).

Early on a stumbled and dropped the ball though. I think my original thinking of "paid" for was in relation to paid articles submissions (whole different beast).

Let me just say for the record, I was incorrect thinking that paid reviews was "commonplace".

That said, I am not myself "condemning" reviewers, merely I was reflecting on how sometimes they get given a lot of status.

Looking at jvitous's post (formal greetings Jeff by the way, low post total doesn't in anyway automatically make you new to Matrix Games of course), it is true some reviewers are just plain over taxed in the process of reviewing games.

One thing I have had to fight with (internal matter) is my own inherent bias. I am most definitely known as a turn using wargamer. I have trouble liking some genre's of games.

I can't outright claim to be sure I could really handle being expected to review games as a form of work. Some games I just plain can't handle.

Sometimes I surprise myself though.

This has been an interesting year for me. I was asked to Moderate a forum I had not so long before got disgusted with. Sure couldn't see that one coming.
I have been asked to give an opinion on a game specifically because I am known to hate the type. That was sure out of left field.
Right now I am testing the new Mega Campaign for Steel Panthers. Something I posted a lot of posts claiming would never see the light of day as it would be a waste of effort asking for a #4.
I am finding it an interesting experience playing a game with specific intention to pick it apart where needed, and offer insight to making it all it can be.
I am rather looking forward to seeing my name in the same credits with others in the hobby we all call industry greats.
Rather cool actually.

Through it all though, I have to deal with my big mouth heheh.

I hope everyone knows when I talk wargames I am doing it in style eh. I'm an aries, Mars is in my blood :)
We aries only come in one form basically, blunt :)

_____________________________

I LIKE that my life bothers them,
Why should I be the only one bothered by it eh.

(in reply to Les_the_Sarge_9_1)

Post #: 9

Enjoy the "reviews" - 8/21/2003 10:01:00 PM

moore4807

Posts: 1089
Joined: 6/2/2000
From: Punta Gorda FL
Status: offline

I for one like reading Les' commentary on life and gaming

I also agree that there are several different formats of gaming, and what works for one doesnt work for others, reading reviews generally show that too

Having said that I must eat my crow too -I am definitely not an RTS person - yet I've gotten addicted to Day of Defeat (Half-Life mod) I was introduced to it by a co-worker and a local server that is run by some good guys. From that we have attended airshow/re-enactments in Reading PA one weekend, frag fests on weekend nights, and generally opened up a whole new facet of gaming that I enjoy, BUT I still generally dont like RTS games!

Steel Panthers has always been a playing favorite of mine -on the hard drive over a decade! I was floored by the updates and Mega-campaigns Matrix did. I really enjoy reading the forums and dont always have the need to post a reply- sometimes just rising to the bait is enough... I even enjoy the disagreements because its been 60 years and all the arguments/opinions still have not been put to rest yet...

So keep typing it in Les and I'll keep reading it (occasionally jumping in the fray) It keeps me coming back here...

(in reply to Les_the_Sarge_9_1)

Post #: 10

- 8/21/2003 11:12:37 PM

Von Rom

Posts: 1705
Joined: 5/12/2000
Status: offline

Many years ago, when I first became interested in gaming and computers, I thought all games were alike, and that I would like all game types.

Well, those thoughts were quickly dispelled. :rolleyes:

After playing a variety of games, I found that the games I was interested in were of the strategy/wargame type. Probably had a lot to do with my interest in history, etc.

Even then, I did not like all games within this narrowed field. I again found that not all strategy games and wargames are "equal".

After playing more games, trying demos, reading reviews, etc, I found that even with these games there had to be something about them that "grabbed" me; peaked my attention; and made me want to play them.

I don't know what you would call it - there was that indefinable something about the game that I liked.

Then I realized that people felt this passionate about games that I did not like. But then again, not everyone likes the same type of foods either.

So in the end, perhaps, the type of game we like has a lot to do with the types of food, movies, and books we also enjoy. It is a very subjective thing.

I think if someone is going to write a review about a game, they should have an interest in that particular genre, or at least state their preferences (or bias) up-front, and then review the game.

Since I cannot stand RPG-type games, then it would be very unfair for me, the game, and for people who like that genre, to have me to write a review about an RPG.

Similarly, why would someone who plays only RTS games, then be given the task to write a review for a turn-based wargame (unless they also have a preference for that type of game)?

Anyway, that's my two cents. . .

Cheers!

_____________________________

(in reply to Les_the_Sarge_9_1)

Post #: 11

- 8/21/2003 11:49:52 PM

jvitous

Posts: 8
Joined: 2/1/2002
From: Berwyn, IL
Status: offline

You would hope that the reviewer would be well-matched to the product, that is, predesposed to enjoying that kind of game. It should be mentioned when this is not the case, although such reviews really are of little or no value. If I'm reviewing an RTS and state "I hate RTS games," whatever I say, good or bad, is of little use: since I stated a prejudice against the genre, I likely don't have the experience to judge whether or not fans of RTS games would find the exceptional (or not). People who don't like RTS games are likewise going to get nothing from it; they will automatically suspect any praises and already agree with the negatives, justified or not.

Those who have been doing reviews long enough to consider themselves "professionals" at the business can usually objectively analyze the merits of any game, whether it is their cup of tea in the first place or not. I can and have been pressed to do this at times; it is one of those instances that make game reviewing less glamorous than you would think it to be. The overwhelming majority of reviewers, however, should probably stick with their narrow interest, it helps make the reviewer an authority at their field, and it generally produces a more useful and relevent review.

_____________________________

Jeff Vitous
Director, Special Project and Partnership Development
The Wargamer
www.wargamer.com

(in reply to Les_the_Sarge_9_1)

Post #: 12

- 8/23/2003 12:25:59 AM

Charles2222

Posts: 3993
Joined: 3/12/2001
Status: offline

Testing...

(in reply to Les_the_Sarge_9_1)

Post #: 13

- 8/25/2003 11:59:09 PM

HitMan52

Posts: 50
Joined: 7/22/2003
From: Long Island, New York
Status: offline

I have my own "Triad" to defend against spending my hard earned dollars on a unfullfilling game. The obvious legs of the Triad are the Forum discussions, Professional Reviews ("Paid") and a downloaded or otherwise obtained demo. I have blown more cash on games that didn't deliver the goods because I trusted the developer or publishers reputation and rushed to preorder or purchased it off the shelf as soon as it hit the stores. Those of you with high disposable income levels who can't cure themselves from the preorder syndrome, keep at it, it helps the publishers cash flow. With the exception of a rare impulse buy I now take a more caculated path before I purchase a new game or simulation. I value every gamers opinion (negtive or positive) I can wrap my eyes around and this will get me leaning one way or another toward or away from a purchase. However, what utimately leads me to make a purchase or not is what I experience when playing a demo.

(in reply to Les_the_Sarge_9_1)

Post #: 14