Standard Format

I was wondering if we can get a standard Format going for reviewing games. A review should not be a homework assignment by any means, however, I'm wondering if I'm not alone in seeing the value in going through a process where certain points "must" be covered during the review.

Taking the same format as a number of the top reviewers would be fine or we can create our own. When I read a review I want to be sure nothing important was missed.

Jebediah_Bundy wrote:

I was wondering if we can get a standard Format going for reviewing games. A review should not be a homework assignment by any means, however, I'm wondering if I'm not alone in seeing the value in going through a process where certain points "must" be covered during the review.

Taking the same format as a number of the top reviewers would be fine or we can create our own. When I read a review I want to be sure nothing important was missed.

You know what Jeb that is a really good idea...i think maybe we should talk to tenrowsei. He has his shit down when it comes to reviewing and he covers all aspects of the game including multiplayer. Maybe we can come up with a template of some sort. There is a difference in reviewing than just having an opinion about a game.

Juno and I have talked about this a while ago. My idea was to base the current batch of games off last year's titles, assuming the last batch as a whole set up this years average (the 5)

I'm open to revision if there's a better way to go about it

I think the biggest advantage to structure in the Review process is it allows multiple parties to come in and debate a point if they disagree with something. I'm always up for reading a good argument between gaming enthusiasts, but structure is a prerequisite so the argument doesn't get sloppy.

Criteria for Game Reviews!

The major parts of a game are important, but not more important than their ability to mesh together. Storyline is fine, but if not backed by proper mechanics or appropriate interaction by the player, it’s not a good game. Great mechanics but a bad storyline/character/ect. Do not make a good game, rather the mechanics have been failed by bad writing. Multiplayer is a unique situation in that it shouldn’t be graded in the same basis as single player as everyone has their own view of which is more important. Thus, the two will be graded separately. Multiplayer will be graded on mechanics (this includes matchmaking mechanics) as well as the overall variety to the multiplayer itself.

Story- Obviously something most people play a game for, as story is one of the simplest forms of entertainment. Story alone doesn’t make a good game, Video games are an interactive medium and an art form, mechanics weigh equally as heavy on the quality of a game as story. Story roughly consists of 30% of a grade.

Grapics- Though graphics are nice, this is really negligible save for when it impedes story or gameplay. Graphics are a part of the art of the game, and as such it does have some impact on the game as a whole. Roughly graphics count for 10% of the score.

Gameplay Mechanics- Gameplay and gameplay mechanics are a huge part of a game’s quality and worth, equally as important as the story. QTE’s are a good example of when a game can offer good or bad mechanics. If the situation feels arbitrary or forced, it’s bad. If you’re taking control of a character in a situation which could otherwise be spoon fed to you via cutscene, it’s good. This portion count’s roughly equal to story, so about 30%.
Innovation- The game’s ability to give something genuinely new, a new spin on an old genre, anything that stands above the previous year’s games. Though this isn’t direct and quite possibly falls into both story and mechanics at once, it lends itself to both and has its own weight about 30%. This means if the story is good stand alone, that lends 30% to the score, but if it doubles as something new and fresh, something above previous resent titles, it gets innovation bonus, up to about 30% more. If the game has good mechanics, solid throughout, but also gives a rare cross genre blend that hasn’t been seen in the resent games, mechanics get about 30% more to it. This means sequels have to up the ante to be better than their predecessors.

Trophy difficulty, number, ect. Do not affect score and seems to have afflicted a majority of the gaming community into mindlessly hunting them.

Multiplayer will be split into two groups. Co-operative multiplayer and Competitive multiplayer. The basis in which multiplayer will be graded on is somewhat similar but simpler than single player.
Mechanics- Gameplay mechanics are vital to multiplayer in both forms and make up 40% of the score
Graphics- graphics actually make up a more important role in competitive than cooperative, but in both cases helps or hurts a game more here than single player. 20% it’s important to be able to actually see what’s going on and to know where you’re supposed to go/ who to shoot/ what to grab.
Innovation- to be able to see more than CTF and TDM is very important and is the biggest part of the game save for mechanics. The ability to play the game for more than a few days before everything becomes a bore. 40% of the score rides on this