| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
jjsimpso
.
Joined: 27 Feb 2007
Posts: 94
Location: USA
|
 Posted: Wed Jun 04, 2008 2:13 pm Post subject: Assigning concrete grades/scores to video game reviews |
 |
|
With the recent controversy over the industry's growing use of metacritic(xbox live delisting, publisher formulas for royalty payments, etc.), I thought now might be a good time to discuss video game review scores. I made a proposal for a new system over at my blog that I'd like to outline here to get a little feedback.
First, I'll just come clean and admit that I like the idea of assigning a concrete score. The way I see it, the act of criticism itself implies a certain belief in objective judgment. Of course there is room for personal opinion, but I expect most every critic has a good idea of how he'd rate a game even if he refrains from doing so in his reviews.
Having said all that, there is clearly a problem with the way most game critics rate games. I think a lot of publications which review games realize this but don't have any good ideas on how to approach the problem. Thus you have Play magazine dispensing with review scores entirely and EGM/1UP modifying their scale to A-F, neither of which really addresses the problem.
Now that we actually have an emerging academic field devoted to studying video games, perhaps game critics should start looking there for some ideas. The obvious idea that can be drawn from what little I've read of the academic literature is to rate video games along two dimensions, one corresponding to a ludological view and one to a narrativist view.
I go into a lot more detail on this in my blog, but what do you guys think? Is the general idea sound? Also, feel free to debate the necessity of concrete review scores in the first place. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
jjsimpso
.
Joined: 27 Feb 2007
Posts: 94
Location: USA
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 04, 2008 2:15 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Post copied from my blog for convenience:
| Quote: | I've been considering writing a few game reviews for my blog, which inevitably leads to thinking about scoring systems. Assigning a concrete score to any creatively produced work isn't something to take lightly. If a grade is assigned, it naturally creates an aura of objectivity and carries the weight of perceived authority. In many cases, the grade assigned carries more weight than the content of the review itself. The final score also opens the critic to criticism as well. If the critic desires the air of authority that concrete scores engender, he must take as much responsibility for the score assigned as he does for the content of his review.
It is for all these reasons that a critic should think carefully about any scoring system that he adopts. It is vital that the system used is consistent with the critic's philosophy of judging the medium in question. For me, the act of assigning a score of some sort is important because I believe that works of art CAN be judged objectively. I wouldn't bother with criticism at all if I didn't feel that this was the case. The challenge is to devise a scoring system which is informative enough to allow readers with their own varying predilections to make their own interpretations of quality without sacrificing the objectivity and finality of assigning a 'final' score. It is difficult to do this with a single, one dimensional metric.
In the old days game magazines would rate games on graphics, sound, difficulty, etc. Breaking the score down to this level of granularity is problematic for a couple of reasons. First, I might not be an expert in every category I might determine is necessary to judge. I feel much more qualified to judge a game's graphical quality than I do its sound design, for example. Second, it is important for a critic to take a stand on excellence, to make a final judgment. A myriad of small judgments certainly doesn't carry the same weight as one definitive score. And finally, the metrics used to describe one work's greatness may not paint an accurate picture of another.
Speaking of video games specifically, academics in the field of game studies can be roughly divided into two different camps, the narrativists and the ludologists(the wikipedia entry for ludology has a brief description of the differences for the uninitiated). I have yet to see a game scoring metric which synthesizes the current academic discussion on games. Therefore, I am proposing the use of a system which consists of two scores, one measuring the game's excellence from a ludological perspective and the other rating the narrative as it applies to the game. For lack of better terminology I will refer to these as the L-Score and N-Score, respectively. I am personally more of a ludologist, but that doesn't obviate the importance of narrative elements. After all, people play games for different reasons.
The L-Score is the score which is most closely related to the uniqueness of the medium. I have argued before that games are different from art because they aren't simply admired, they are also played. It is the interactive nature of games which ludologists emphasize, and so one can think of the L-Score as a metric for gameplay and game design. Mechanics, systems, and level design are the key components measured by the L-Score.
If the L-Score is a measure of a game's design, then the N-Score is a measure of its artistic achievement. The narrative, in this case, is defined rather broadly. It consists of the game's music, writing, visual style, sound design, overall setting, etc. All of these factors influence the player's involvement in the game and are therefore important even if they don't have much of a direct impact on the actual gameplay.
There may be some overlap between the components measured by the L-Score and the N-Score. For instance, the sound design in a first person shooter may provide an increased level of information and awareness to the perceptive player. Such a feature could be considered relevant to both the N-Score and the L-Score. Likewise, in an exploration intensive RPG interesting environments may be necessary to realize the goals of the game's design, making those environments important from a design perspective as well as an artistic one. Despite any overlap between what is being measured by the two metrics, each metric is still able to stand on its own.
All games are scored relative to what they are trying to achieve, with the very highest scores reserved for true innovation. The traits that make a good RPG are simply quite different from those of an action game, and so the game's concept must of course be in mind when considering the quality of the game's design. Similarly, when judging a game's narrative it would be silly to expect the same level of exposition from a shooter as from an RPG. The narrative of a shooter is less about plot and more about evoking a certain feeling through music and visual presentation. Genres which are more narratively focused will in some ways be judged to a higher standard. The fact that many story-focused RPGs require 40+ hours to finish places a huge burden on developers to create a consistently strong narrative and interesting setting. A five stage shooter should not be punished for having less content(unless more content would make for a better shooter.)
There has been a lot of debate recently concerning game review scores, with several print magazines altering or eliminating their review scoring system(EGM and Play, respectively.) I believe the main reason for dissatisfaction with most current game review metrics is that they no longer accurately reflect gamers' increasingly sophisticated view of the medium. Games are simply more complex than other forms of consumer entertainment, and as video game consumers continue to become more sophisticated they will demand more sophistication from video game critics. The solution is for video game critics to draw from the emerging field of game studies. My proposed L/N scoring system is the first step toward applying game studies research to video game review scores. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
dhex
Breeder
Joined: 13 Dec 2004
Posts: 6319
Location: brooklyn, Nev Yiork
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 04, 2008 2:17 pm Post subject: |
|
|
short version: a well-written review doesn't need a score, because you know the score from a well-written review.
your proposed system, while interesting to us, is probably useless to most people who buy games. of course, so are scoreless reviews, so long live the niche!
_________________
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
kirkjerk
.
Joined: 12 Apr 2006
Posts: 1227
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 04, 2008 2:48 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Interesting topic.
My first thought is that it reminds me of that bit from Dead Poet's Society:
| Quote: | To fully understand poetry, we must first be fluent with its meter, rhyme, and figures of speech. Then ask two questions: (1) how artfully has the objective of the poem been rendered, and (2) how important is that objective. Question one rates the poem's perfection, question two rates its importance. And once these questions have been answered, determining a poem's greatest becomes a relatively simple matter.
If the poem's score for perfection is plotted along the horizontal of a graph, and its importance is plotted on the vertical, then calculating the total area of the poem yields the measure of its greatness. |
(Of course the movie has a grand time kicking that attempt at quantification around, and my personal feeling is for "multiple intelligences theory of literature" you need many more dimensions, but I don't think the fundamental concept is unsound.)
So in this case, I'd say (1), the horizontal quest for artistic perfection maps to your N-Score, while (2), the vertical quest for importance maps to your L-Score.
...
That said, is there any chance that video is a MUCH better medium for video game review? At least in the sense of "will I want to play this game", and not more thoughtful analysis. It seems like small amounts of game play footage (along with commentary for context, that also explains how representative any given bit of footage is) might better tap into the intuitive "snap judgement" that is said to be fairly reliable.
_________________
=/ \(<D)_/
==/\/ >_ kirkjerk.com |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jjsimpso
.
Joined: 27 Feb 2007
Posts: 94
Location: USA
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 04, 2008 2:49 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| dhex wrote: | | short version: a well-written review doesn't need a score, because you know the score from a well-written review. |
That is a good point, but not having any score prevents the 'wisdom of crowds' type stuff which metacritic and other such sites attempt. Of course, you could view that as a good thing! I think some of metacritic's problems could be mitigated by better metrics however.
| dhex wrote: | | your proposed system, while interesting to us, is probably useless to most people who buy games. of course, so are scoreless reviews, so long live the niche! |
Yeah, the mere mention of ludology makes it pretty niche. I'm not convinced it -- or maybe some better system -- has to STAY niche, although anything that is more complex than 1 to 10 will probably be misunderstood by most readers. For instance, everyone is familiar with the Richter scale for earthquakes and can draw a certain amount of information from it without understanding that it is logarithmic and not linear. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Shapermc
Hot Sake!
Joined: 14 Oct 2004
Posts: 6279
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 04, 2008 2:49 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| dhex wrote: | | short version: a well-written review doesn't need a score, because you know the score from a well-written review. |
When ever I find reviews that I read from Edge online I never read the score and always know if I'll like the game or not without looking at the score. Most consumers and readers honestly don't care about what's written and that's why mags like WIRED only put up 50-100 word blurbs about the games with scores. I'm honestly sure that most people actually read the full reviews because they're so short. When I write for entdepot I always assume 95% of people reading the review will read the first paragraph and the last only (the "final thoughts" section), so I have fun with the meat mostly.
_________________
“The average man has a secret desire to be a swaggering, drunken, fighting, raping swashbuckler.”
-Robert E. Howard in a letter to a friend circa Decmber 1932
"There is no place in this enterprise for a rogue physicist!" |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
kirkjerk
.
Joined: 12 Apr 2006
Posts: 1227
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 04, 2008 2:53 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Oh, plus, this makes me miss the Zzap!64 with reviewer's faces expressing degrees of delight and disdain.
Oh, plus plus: grade inflation. I have no idea how metacritic works, but any system that doesn't try to normalize the numeric range a review system outputs is doomed to failure... as a rule of thumb, a system based on 100% might never dip below 50%, but a system based on Five Stars might well give zero or one star.
_________________
=/ \(<D)_/
==/\/ >_ kirkjerk.com |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Shapermc
Hot Sake!
Joined: 14 Oct 2004
Posts: 6279
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 04, 2008 3:03 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| kirkjerk wrote: | | Oh, plus, this makes me miss the Zzap!64 with reviewer's faces expressing degrees of delight and disdain. |
GamePro use to have a 5-star-esque rating scale with faces and ... honestly I always hated it.
| kirkjerk wrote: | | a system based on Five Stars might well give zero or one star. |
I personally like the 4 star system because it forces the reviewer/reader to think outside the box because there is no middle score (like 3/5 stars is the easy cop out middle score)
_________________
“The average man has a secret desire to be a swaggering, drunken, fighting, raping swashbuckler.”
-Robert E. Howard in a letter to a friend circa Decmber 1932
"There is no place in this enterprise for a rogue physicist!" |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
kirkjerk
.
Joined: 12 Apr 2006
Posts: 1227
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 04, 2008 3:10 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Shapermc wrote: | | kirkjerk wrote: | | Oh, plus, this makes me miss the Zzap!64 with reviewer's faces expressing degrees of delight and disdain. |
GamePro use to have a 5-star-esque rating scale with faces and ... honestly I always hated it.
|
Well, yeah, but it wasn't a portrait of the reviewer, right? Just some abstract "radical cool guy"?
_________________
=/ \(<D)_/
==/\/ >_ kirkjerk.com |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
dessgeega
loves your favorite videogame
Joined: 16 Jun 2005
Posts: 6563
Location: bohan
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 04, 2008 3:11 pm Post subject: Re: Assigning concrete grades/scores to video game reviews |
|
|
| jjsimpso wrote: | | First, I'll just come clean and admit that I like the idea of assigning a concrete score. The way I see it, the act of criticism itself implies a certain belief in objective judgment. |
but the goal of criticism - real, meaningful criticism - isn't to establish whether a game is good or bad, or whether it's better than final fantasy, it's to offer insight or context - to actually SAY SOMETHING about the work and the medium, not merely to grade it. the problem with numerical scores for games is that they're stuck on this IS IT GOOD IS IT BAD axis, which has little room for real insight.
_________________
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Shapermc
Hot Sake!
Joined: 14 Oct 2004
Posts: 6279
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 04, 2008 3:22 pm Post subject: Re: Assigning concrete grades/scores to video game reviews |
|
|
| kirkjerk wrote: | | Well, yeah, but it wasn't a portrait of the reviewer, right? Just some abstract "radical cool guy"? |
Right. I thought you were saying Zzap! did the same thing. That's actually kind of awesome.
| dessgeega wrote: | | the problem with numerical scores for games is that they're stuck on this IS IT GOOD IS IT BAD axis, which has little room for real insight. |
_________________
“The average man has a secret desire to be a swaggering, drunken, fighting, raping swashbuckler.”
-Robert E. Howard in a letter to a friend circa Decmber 1932
"There is no place in this enterprise for a rogue physicist!" |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
purplechair
.
Joined: 28 Mar 2005
Posts: 378
Location: in my pants
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 04, 2008 3:57 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| jjsimpso wrote: | | Speaking of video games specifically, academics in the field of game studies can be roughly divided into two different camps, the narrativists and the ludologists(the wikipedia entry for ludology has a brief description of the differences for the uninitiated). |
My understanding is that this 'debate' fizzled out a year or two ago, with all involved looking a little embarrassed.
Edit: I mean, I don't want to sound like a jerk (on this occasion), I'm just saying that it's not a great idea to base your model around, since it was always a slightly silly idea (in my opinion) and the two camps have since admitted that it's not really one or the other.
Last edited by purplechair on Wed Jun 04, 2008 4:00 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
dessgeega
loves your favorite videogame
Joined: 16 Jun 2005
Posts: 6563
Location: bohan
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 04, 2008 3:59 pm Post subject: Re: Assigning concrete grades/scores to video game reviews |
|
|
| Shapermc wrote: | |
that's right games are products not experiences i forgot
_________________
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
dessgeega
loves your favorite videogame
Joined: 16 Jun 2005
Posts: 6563
Location: bohan
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 04, 2008 3:59 pm Post subject: |
|
|
that slips my mind sometimes
_________________
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
dessgeega
loves your favorite videogame
Joined: 16 Jun 2005
Posts: 6563
Location: bohan
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 04, 2008 3:59 pm Post subject: |
|
|
SORRY
_________________
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
dessgeega
loves your favorite videogame
Joined: 16 Jun 2005
Posts: 6563
Location: bohan
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 04, 2008 4:00 pm Post subject: |
|
|
(i was being sarcastic by the way.)
_________________
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
purplechair
.
Joined: 28 Mar 2005
Posts: 378
Location: in my pants
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 04, 2008 4:09 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I'd also like to add that I disagree entirely with this L- and N- analysis lark. I think the virtual gears and sprockets that determine your interaction within the game are just as much a work of art as the composition of the environment.
Too many rules = bad
Too many colours = bad
etc
Last edited by purplechair on Wed Jun 04, 2008 4:11 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
SuperWes
Updated the banners, but not his title
Joined: 07 Dec 2004
Posts: 3725
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 04, 2008 4:11 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I think EGM sorta has the best reviewing system around. They have 3 people give a number/letter score and write up fairly small one or two paragraph reviews. This way the implications behind a single number objective score are disregarded and the reviewer can just throw a number down and explain it away.
The problem with doing away with review scores altogether isn't in how it affects the big games, it's what it does to the smaller ones. While GTA4 might get a three page spread with a number that's worthless if you've read the review, something smaller, like Shiren or Bangaio DS will get maybe a paragraph. Now unless the reviewer has the talent to really make that game shine in a paragraph what's really going to make a skimmer take notice is going to be the number attached. Hype, not quality, dictates coverage, and small games that are still really good will go completely ignored by masses if numbers disappear.
This is most apparent when you look at Play's review system. They review portable games in a small subset of the magazine. I've never understood making this strong distinction, but it's been there since the beginning and it only ever seems to waver if there's a cover story on a portable game. So given this and the fact that they're getting rid of scores, I think it's safe to assume that very few portable games will ever get more than a few sentences tossed out for a "review," and even the best portable games will come off as diversions to the casual reader. So while I stand by the motivations behind doing away with reviews, I don't think you can just erase the number and call it a day without some serious consideration to what a review needs to consist of.
-Wes
_________________
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
SuperWes
Updated the banners, but not his title
Joined: 07 Dec 2004
Posts: 3725
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 04, 2008 4:32 pm Post subject: Re: Assigning concrete grades/scores to video game reviews |
|
|
| dessgeega wrote: | | but the goal of criticism - real, meaningful criticism - isn't to establish whether a game is good or bad, or whether it's better than final fantasy, it's to offer insight or context - to actually SAY SOMETHING about the work and the medium, not merely to grade it. the problem with numerical scores for games is that they're stuck on this IS IT GOOD IS IT BAD axis, which has little room for real insight. |
Ooh! I agree with this! But I also think that "reviews" are often more useful in telling me whether I want a game than "criticism" is. Criticism should never have numbers. Reviews should seriously consider whether or not it is criticism or not, and apply numbers thusly.
-Wes
_________________
Last edited by SuperWes on Wed Jun 04, 2008 4:58 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
purplechair
.
Joined: 28 Mar 2005
Posts: 378
Location: in my pants
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 04, 2008 4:40 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Personally, I'm of the belief that game reviews should draw comparisons to similar experiences.
- Smash TV is like autoerotic asphyxiation.
- Tombi is like eating slightly-too-much mediocre cake.
- Morrowind is like flying to another country with just a rucksack and trying to start a new life.
- Final Fantasy 8 is like being in a coma.
See? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jjsimpso
.
Joined: 27 Feb 2007
Posts: 94
Location: USA
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 04, 2008 4:47 pm Post subject: Re: Assigning concrete grades/scores to video game reviews |
|
|
| dessgeega wrote: | | jjsimpso wrote: | | First, I'll just come clean and admit that I like the idea of assigning a concrete score. The way I see it, the act of criticism itself implies a certain belief in objective judgment. |
but the goal of criticism - real, meaningful criticism - isn't to establish whether a game is good or bad, or whether it's better than final fantasy, it's to offer insight or context - to actually SAY SOMETHING about the work and the medium, not merely to grade it. the problem with numerical scores for games is that they're stuck on this IS IT GOOD IS IT BAD axis, which has little room for real insight. |
I actually agree with you that insight is more important than assigning a grade. And I love the types of personal impressions and experiences that I read in TGQ. But at the same time, since a lot of writing about games isn't like that, I think an exploration of better metrics would be worthwhile. Plus, I just think review scores are fun. Kinda how I also like Top X lists, etc.  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
kirkjerk
.
Joined: 12 Apr 2006
Posts: 1227
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 04, 2008 4:50 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Shapermc wrote: | | kirkjerk wrote: | | Well, yeah, but it wasn't a portrait of the reviewer, right? Just some abstract "radical cool guy"? |
Right. I thought you were saying Zzap! did the same thing. That's actually kind of awesome. |
| SuperWes wrote: | | I think EGM sorta has the best reviewing system around. They have 3 people give a number/letter score and write up fairly small one or two paragraph reviews. This way the implications behind a single number objective score are disregarded and the reviewer can just throw a number down and explain it away. |
So, going down memory lane, I quickly googled up some relevant stuff (Jeff Minter focused)
http://www.medwaypvb.com/yakstuff/index.htm has http://www.medwaypvb.com/yakstuff/graphics/mamallamarev.jpg
seems like they're aiming for the best of all worlds... there's the faces (and the ones with them cringing are more amusing than the positive response) which has each reviewer give a rough estimation, each of those faces has a bit of EGM-like commentary, then there's a bunch of 0-100 grades for Presentation, Graphics, Sound, Originality, Hookability, Lastability, and then the capper seems to be the O-so-British "Value for Money"
_________________
=/ \(<D)_/
==/\/ >_ kirkjerk.com |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
kirkjerk
.
Joined: 12 Apr 2006
Posts: 1227
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 04, 2008 4:51 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| purplechair wrote: | | - Smash TV is like autoerotic asphyxiation. |
It is?
_________________
=/ \(<D)_/
==/\/ >_ kirkjerk.com |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
kirkjerk
.
Joined: 12 Apr 2006
Posts: 1227
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 04, 2008 4:55 pm Post subject: Re: Assigning concrete grades/scores to video game reviews |
|
|
| SuperWes wrote: | | dessgeega wrote: | | but the goal of criticism - real, meaningful criticism - isn't to establish whether a game is good or bad, or whether it's better than final fantasy, it's to offer insight or context - to actually SAY SOMETHING about the work and the medium, not merely to grade it. the problem with numerical scores for games is that they're stuck on this IS IT GOOD IS IT BAD axis, which has little room for real insight. |
Ooh! I agree with this! But I also think that "reviews" are often more useful in telling me whether I want a game than "criticism" is. Criticism never have numbers. Reviews should seriously consider whether or not it is criticism or not, and apply numbers thusly.
|
Yeah, I think the criticism/review distinction is pretty crucial.
A review is more or less an introduction, and a judgement... meaningful criticism can be an introduction, but will often assume more context on part of the reader.
There might be interesting overlap between the two, but fundamentally they tend to be different outlooks.
I guess this gets back to me wondering if youtube might be a better outlet for review, while critique can probably best be done in more thoughtful media.
_________________
=/ \(<D)_/
==/\/ >_ kirkjerk.com |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
sediment
.
Joined: 15 Aug 2007
Posts: 428
Location: SUPERPOWER GEORGIALAND
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 04, 2008 4:57 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| kirkjerk wrote: | | purplechair wrote: | | - Smash TV is like autoerotic asphyxiation. |
It is? |
Totally, it's incredibly lethal, yet great fun.
You know... I tend to pay more attention to criticism than I do review, when buying games, since there's the nagging suspicion that certain reviewers are flatly bought. I don't know if this is really the case anymore, but for a long time, it certainly seemed to be.
_________________
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
kirkjerk
.
Joined: 12 Apr 2006
Posts: 1227
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 04, 2008 5:00 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Sorry for the pile of posts.
Reading http://www.medwaypvb.com/yakstuff/graphics/zzap2columnpg1.jpg - Minter talks about one point still very relevant for reviewing today -- in a time where games just couldn't be about volume of content, he puts it in terms of "Defender Syndrome", where a difficult to learn/control/master game might get an unfair review, because the reviewer won't put in enough hours to really grok it. Today when we have games running into the dozens and dozens of hours, how do reviewers do it? Just play what they can and judge on that? And isn't there the risk of becoming generally so proficient that it skews your viewpoint?
_________________
=/ \(<D)_/
==/\/ >_ kirkjerk.com |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
kirkjerk
.
Joined: 12 Apr 2006
Posts: 1227
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 04, 2008 5:01 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| sediment wrote: | | kirkjerk wrote: | | purplechair wrote: | | - Smash TV is like autoerotic asphyxiation. |
It is? |
Totally, it's incredibly lethal, yet great fun.
You know... I tend to pay more attention to criticism than I do review, when buying games, since there's the nagging suspicion that certain reviewers are flatly bought. I don't know if this is really the case anymore, but for a long time, it certainly seemed to be. |
I'm trying to remember if it's movies or film or both, where blockbusters always get the great reviews... and just not the prospect of payola, but because reviewers WANT to see big ticket things keep getting made...
_________________
=/ \(<D)_/
==/\/ >_ kirkjerk.com |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jjsimpso
.
Joined: 27 Feb 2007
Posts: 94
Location: USA
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 04, 2008 5:03 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| purplechair wrote: | | jjsimpso wrote: | | Speaking of video games specifically, academics in the field of game studies can be roughly divided into two different camps, the narrativists and the ludologists(the wikipedia entry for ludology has a brief description of the differences for the uninitiated). |
My understanding is that this 'debate' fizzled out a year or two ago, with all involved looking a little embarrassed.
Edit: I mean, I don't want to sound like a jerk (on this occasion), I'm just saying that it's not a great idea to base your model around, since it was always a slightly silly idea (in my opinion) and the two camps have since admitted that it's not really one or the other. |
I really don't follow the academic discussion that closely, but did the debate fizzle out because they resolved it or because they realized that there isn't any way to reconcile the two? I haven't heard of any grand unified theories, which is why I decided it might be a good idea to think about games from both perspectives. To some people one viewpoint is more important that the other, so it might be useful for reviewers to think about both perspectives.
Also in defense of L/N, i think that having some type of framework in mind when critiquing a game will often lead to a better analysis. It prevents reviewers from getting caught up in the wonderful presentation of say, Bioshock, and reflexively handing out a 10/10 simply because it does SOME things better than most every game that came before it.
EDIT: fixed a typo |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
kirkjerk
.
Joined: 12 Apr 2006
Posts: 1227
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 04, 2008 5:09 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Sorry. Obsessed. Clearly avoiding something
Fav Minter Quote:
http://www.medwaypvb.com/yakstuff/graphics/zzap3column.jpg
| Quote: | Anyway cheerio 'till next time,
don't believe the ads, the reviews
or the charts, learn machine
code, be creative, write your
OWN games, and keep on Zappin' |
_________________
=/ \(<D)_/
==/\/ >_ kirkjerk.com |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
purplechair
.
Joined: 28 Mar 2005
Posts: 378
Location: in my pants
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 04, 2008 5:18 pm Post subject: |
|
|
When I'm playing Smash TV, I always feel like I'm drowning. But drowning in the BEST POSSIBLY WAY, like I've fallen into a lake of milk and honey while wearing my iron trousers. I imagine this is similar to the appeal of hanging yourself for jollies.
As for post-narratology/ludology stuff, you could start here? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
purplechair
.
Joined: 28 Mar 2005
Posts: 378
Location: in my pants
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 04, 2008 5:20 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| (The clock is now ticking until someone tells me I've completely misunderstood everything and shoots me down) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
purplechair
.
Joined: 28 Mar 2005
Posts: 378
Location: in my pants
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 04, 2008 5:23 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I'd also like to add that, obviously, the pleasure in Smash TV comes when you never quite drown, but just hover precariously on the brink as more waves of enemies flood your screen. That perpetual "Oh shit, I'm so nearly... NO WAIT, I MADE IT! Oh shit there's more..." feeling.
Edit: Much like the feeling I get whenever I try to say something intelligent on here, in fact!
(Smash TV is, if I haven't already made clear, my favourite game)
Last edited by purplechair on Wed Jun 04, 2008 5:25 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
dessgeega
loves your favorite videogame
Joined: 16 Jun 2005
Posts: 6563
Location: bohan
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 04, 2008 5:24 pm Post subject: Re: Assigning concrete grades/scores to video game reviews |
|
|
i think the best advice i could give to someone who loves videogames is write your OWN games.
| jjsimpso wrote: | | I actually agree with you that insight is more important than assigning a grade. And I love the types of personal impressions and experiences that I read in TGQ. But at the same time, since a lot of writing about games isn't like that, I think an exploration of better metrics would be worthwhile. |
but that's why, as a body of journalism, we need to GET AWAY FROM metrics! i'm willing to concede that there might be value in REVIEWS when someone is trying to decide how to spend her money, but our medium has far too many REVIEWS and nowhere near enough CRITICISM.
_________________
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
dessgeega
loves your favorite videogame
Joined: 16 Jun 2005
Posts: 6563
Location: bohan
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 04, 2008 5:30 pm Post subject: |
|
|
all good hard games have this sense that i'm JUST SQUEAKING BY, again and again. there's this feeling that the game has just thrown something HARDER THAN WHAT YOU'VE SEEN BEFORE at you and it seems impossible but you struggle with it and then you somehow survive, exhilerated and joyful. and then the game does it AGAIN. i've compared the rhythm to s/m. it's like your top FLASHING YOU A GRIN before laying something new and diabolical on your ass. and you think you'll never be able to deal with it but then you come out of it sweating and grinning and GLOWING WITH ENDORPHINS. and then she does something worse.
smash tv is a bit cheap, though, like most midway coin-ops. THAT'S WHAT YOU GET WHEN THE MOB MAKES YOUR GAMES.
_________________
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
dessgeega
loves your favorite videogame
Joined: 16 Jun 2005
Posts: 6563
Location: bohan
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 04, 2008 5:31 pm Post subject: |
|
|
i mean 8 out of 10
_________________
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
dessgeega
loves your favorite videogame
Joined: 16 Jun 2005
Posts: 6563
Location: bohan
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 04, 2008 5:32 pm Post subject: |
|
|
actually let's say 7.5
_________________
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
dessgeega
loves your favorite videogame
Joined: 16 Jun 2005
Posts: 6563
Location: bohan
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 04, 2008 5:32 pm Post subject: |
|
|
7.9
and that's final
_________________
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
kirkjerk
.
Joined: 12 Apr 2006
Posts: 1227
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 04, 2008 5:40 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I read--ok, skimmed -- the wikipedia page and the Frasca article, and I'm still wonder, what the hell is etymology of "ludology" All I see is "luddite" and that doesn't seem to be it.
| dessgeega wrote: | all good hard games have this sense that i'm JUST SQUEAKING BY, again and again. there's this feeling that the game has just thrown something HARDER THAN WHAT YOU'VE SEEN BEFORE at you and it seems impossible but you struggle with it and then you somehow survive, exhilerated and joyful. and then the game does it AGAIN. i've compared the rhythm to s/m. it's like your top FLASHING YOU A GRIN before laying something new and diabolical on your ass. and you think you'll never be able to deal with it but then you come out of it sweating and grinning and GLOWING WITH ENDORPHINS. and then she does something worse.
smash tv is a bit cheap, though, like most midway coin-ops. THAT'S WHAT YOU GET WHEN THE MOB MAKES YOUR GAMES. |
I think this is totally lost on me because I mostly grew up on the SNES version, with a generous continue cheat code, and emulation with one button "throw another quarter in". The stakes end up being pretty low, just a bit of pride in avoiding the announcers "Player TWO!" and then something maybe about the way the scores stack up, I dunno.
_________________
=/ \(<D)_/
==/\/ >_ kirkjerk.com |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
purplechair
.
Joined: 28 Mar 2005
Posts: 378
Location: in my pants
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 04, 2008 5:43 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I believe "Ludus" is Greek for "Play"?
Also: Continues are for sissies. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
kirkjerk
.
Joined: 12 Apr 2006
Posts: 1227
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 04, 2008 5:54 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| purplechair wrote: | I believe "Ludus" is Greek for "Play"?
Also: Continues are for sissies. |
You might be right buIt all comes down to what you're in the game for...
since I know I'm rarely a game for the sake of challenge, for a while I thought it was content... but that's not right either, I usually want to play, not just watch. So the best I've come up with is "novel interactions", I want games to show me interesting and possibly novel ways of interacting with them. (And a little bit of challenge, I do like being fooled into thinking I'm awesome at a game.)
_________________
=/ \(<D)_/
==/\/ >_ kirkjerk.com |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
dessgeega
loves your favorite videogame
Joined: 16 Jun 2005
Posts: 6563
Location: bohan
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 04, 2008 5:59 pm Post subject: |
|
|
yes to ludus. it was first used in the modern context (applied to the study of games) in johan huizinga's 1938 book HOMO LUDENS, or MAN THE PLAYER.
nowadays some people talk about conflict between the LUDOLOGICAL school and the NARRATOLOGICAL school, but pay no mind because it's entirely made up.
_________________
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
purplechair
.
Joined: 28 Mar 2005
Posts: 378
Location: in my pants
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 04, 2008 6:01 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I think just enjoying the interaction of rules does count as ludus.
It goes back to some book by Roger Callois in which he used "ludus" to describe any organised play to a set of rules, and "paidia" to describe free-form screwing around (like when you run around in your friend's back garden and pretend to be Planeteers) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
purplechair
.
Joined: 28 Mar 2005
Posts: 378
Location: in my pants
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 04, 2008 6:02 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| We should become a tag-team. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Cycle
Mac daddy
Joined: 08 Sep 2006
Posts: 2767
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 04, 2008 6:07 pm Post subject: |
|
|
The magazine I work for frequently talk about review scores and what we should do with them. Many of us are frustrated that seemingly so few people actually read the review and just look at the number. We talked about ditching review scores all together but decided that's not the correct solution. We went through a bunch of ideas but haven't found one we liked yet... well, one that we like AND won't lose half our readership. They're... they're very picky.
_________________
Last edited by Cycle on Wed Jun 04, 2008 6:10 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
purplechair
.
Joined: 28 Mar 2005
Posts: 378
Location: in my pants
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 04, 2008 6:09 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| One Line World has a pretty good style. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
kirkjerk
.
Joined: 12 Apr 2006
Posts: 1227
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 04, 2008 6:23 pm Post subject: |
|
|
God damn that was a good eight months!
I want to be part of something like that now.
And damn, I miss blast corps. Never thought of the hulk connection, though it's a bit of a stretch.
_________________
=/ \(<D)_/
==/\/ >_ kirkjerk.com |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Cycle
Mac daddy
Joined: 08 Sep 2006
Posts: 2767
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 04, 2008 6:26 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | | Exactly how in the world did anyone ever come to think Bionic Commando was good? |
lol jackasses need to play the nes game not the arcade one!
_________________
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
dessgeega
loves your favorite videogame
Joined: 16 Jun 2005
Posts: 6563
Location: bohan
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 04, 2008 6:30 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| kirkjerk wrote: | | I want to be part of something like that now. |
maybe you can, kirkjerk. maybe we all can.
_________________
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
kirkjerk
.
Joined: 12 Apr 2006
Posts: 1227
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 04, 2008 6:36 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| dessgeega wrote: | | kirkjerk wrote: | | I want to be part of something like that now. |
maybe you can, kirkjerk. maybe we all can. |
but lets make a deal not to put the fucking interesting stuff in a god damn tool tip, at least until firefox gets its own act together with that.
just like this guy gets pissy and moany about non-configurable controls, I reserve the right to prattle on about that.
EDIT: actually I somehow get the idea that it wouldn't work well as a group effort. Something like that needs a certain kind of consistency and lack of trying to impress other people doing the same thing
_________________
=/ \(<D)_/
==/\/ >_ kirkjerk.com |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Shapermc
Hot Sake!
Joined: 14 Oct 2004
Posts: 6279
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 04, 2008 6:42 pm Post subject: |
|
|
FYI, my consumer reports image post was intended to be sarcastic.
Cycle, has anyone recommended a 4 star/point system? It's vague enough that anything outside of 1 and 4 stars actually require people to read the review to get an understanding of if they'll like it or not. Like, with Eberts reviews I like to see his star rating, see a film, then read his review. It works well that way.
_________________
“The average man has a secret desire to be a swaggering, drunken, fighting, raping swashbuckler.”
-Robert E. Howard in a letter to a friend circa Decmber 1932
"There is no place in this enterprise for a rogue physicist!" |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
