chuckd21

I've been wondering... what does everyone look for when reading a video game review?

There seems to be several different motivations. Do you read reviews to help make your mind up about making a purchase, rental or skipping a title altogether? Do you seek out those who "think like you" who might feel the same way you do about a game but are able to put it into words better than you can? Do you avoid reviews before playing a game but then read them after you've completed it?

Then there's always the ongoing debate about review scores. Do you care if reviews use scores or not?

Debate. Go.

sauce07

I look for the review to constantly point out how you can see 3 more trees in the distance in the 360 version

chuckd21

For example, I generally don't read any reviews for games I already know I'm getting. Take Alan Wake. I already knew I was going to pick it up, so I didn't read any opinions about it until after I'd completed it to see if others felt like I did.

Then there was Deadly Premonition, which wasn't even on my radar until I started reading reviews for it.

Groucho

I generally avoid reviews, except to double check a feature perhaps ("does this game have offline co-op?"). I prefer word-of-mouth from the "rank and file" gamer instead, since they haven't been enticed by the game developers like many reviewers have been.

Kedrix

I simply just like reading game reviews (good ones anyway). Since I write game reviews from time to time, it helps me get better and at the same time read about something I love. I'm not looking for somebody to agree with me nor be against me, I just enjoy the words in front of me.

superfro

I usually don't look at any reviews untill after I've played/finished the game on my own. If I do beforehand, it's usually just to see bullet points or at least a general idea of time put into the game by the reviewer.

A lot of times I love having no idea what to expect when I pick up a game.

JohnnyDaBull

I already know if I'm going to buy a game before looking at MOST reviews. So I look for what they say negative about a game, and after I play it I look back to see if I agree or disagree with them.

Draven

If I'm already interested in a game, I check the metacritic score to make sure it's worth it. I'll read a few reviews at Giant Bomb if I'm bored, but otherwise they are simply there to supply an aggregate.

Drexl

I feel like I have to read reviews, unless it's a can't miss title like a Rock Band installment or something. I just can't see myself plunking down $60 (or even quite a bit less) for something I don't think I'd like.

I don't pay too much attention to the numeric score though. I need to know why a game was given a good or bad rating. For instance, a game might get a lower score because it doesn't offer anything new, or has poor or no multiplayer, etc.

chuckd21

Rock Band is an exception for me. Even though I know it's a day one purchase, I'll still read every single bit of info I can on it until then.

Tracer Bullet

This hurts my soul, but I think this speaks more to the philosophy and quality of videogame reviews than your desire to read. At least, I hope so.

Draven

It's the same thing with movies. I don't go to see movies I don't think I'll be interested in. 99.99999% of the time, I at least think a movie I see is average. I can't remember the last time I hated one. Because I know what I like.

I also do this at Amazon. If I go on the site to find a specific product and there are models to choose from, I pick the one that has the best review score in my price range. I might glance at the first three or four reviews to see what they say, but I'm really just interested in the total.

So when I see a new FPS or adventure game coming out, I like what I see in previews and the "buzz" is good...that's pretty much all I need to know in advance. And if the reviews are averaging above an 80, I feel confident that I'll like the game.

I don't care what random game writers think about a game...I just appreciate the collective perception: if most people like it and I was interested already, odds are I'll like it too.

The only game this has ever really failed on was the first Katamari game. Goddamn that was awful. I sold that so fast it barely lasted two hours in my console. Otherwise, I've been fairly successful.

superfro

Great....now my soul is hurt.

Tracer Bullet

This post neatly sums up everything that's wrong with videogame culture.

chuckd21

Not everything. He didn't mention Cliffy B or G4TV.

Tracer Bullet

It's so depressing though. I don't want to be challenged. I like what I like. That game got an 84? Can't be worth my time. Portal is a fantastic game? I don't like FPS.

It's a narrowing of experience that I find galling. You don't like videogames. You like Disney World. Safe, fun... bland, meaningless.

boredsilly

I'm definitely a word of mouth kind of guy. I used to give more more credit to reviews, but after listening to many podcasts featuring the people who write them? Not so much.

chuckd21

How do you mean? Exploring a reviewer's personality lessens their opinion? Is that what you're saying?

xmiyux

I think this is a really unfair criticism.

We all have limited time and by this point hopefully have a general idea what we like. It is entertainment - not a career or a job. There are a ton of games out there and each individual needs to basically filter the mess down to a reasonable number to make decisions like: rent, buy, skip. If you have someone who gets to game for 4 hours a week when they stay up late Friday night every week then sticking to big main releases is fine if that is what they like. Or they could spend the same amount of time playing little indie games. No matter what, they used a decision tree of some sort to winnow the field of games to something manageable.

For instance. I hate platformers. Braid got such good buzz that I gave it a shot anyways and was pleasantly surprised to find it very fun. I am obsessed with board and card games. So Spectromancer might bore your standard action fan to tears but I have played probably 50 hours of the game. Same thing with Civilization IV. But Mario has continually sucked when it went 3D.

To say someone is less a gamer because of how they look at reviews is silly. Some like to discuss Street Fighter and frames of animation for counters while others will go on and on about tech trees in Starcraft.

I trust opinions from people who I "know" a little. Podcasters who I particularly like carry a good bit of weight with me because after listening to hours of them discussing games I begin to develop a sense of who shares my taste in games. Their reviews get more credence from me.

xmiyux

Also, to actually address the thread

None of those options really worked for me. The main thing I look for in a review is decent writing. I hate reviews that seem like they are forcing jokes or are generally incomprehensible. The problem is I like humor in reviews (and some snark is always appreciated) but it is a fine line to walk and can be tough to pull off.

I know many people dislike them.... but I really do like the game comments they make on the Penny Arcade blog. They always come across as not beholden to the company that gave them free shit. I know many dislike their comics and I understand why... but their News posts about games are excellent.

Also, Crispy Gamer has some good writers as well.

Dan

I only look for one thing in video game reviews.

Morgan Webb.

But really, I don't pay that much attention to reviews. I can enjoy a game that reviewers hate, and I can hate a game that reviewers enjoy. Sometimes it is fun to read/watch a review if the reviewing style is to my liking (ie: Morgan Webb), but I don't think a review has ever swayed my decision one way or the other.

boredsilly

It certainly can for me. Also, when I see how people who review games talk about reviews, it makes it not worth my while to seek out the opinion of a sole reviewer or institution, when reviews don't give me the same picture of a game that a thread or podcast discussion can.

Don't get me wrong, a person's personality can not jive with mine, and I still can enjoy listening to their take on a game, but it's nice to have that view challenged right away on a podcast, so that all sides are presented. A review is just done by one person usually, and while the review might be more well thought out, I don't find them to be as honest as off the cuff impressions.

superfro

Agreed 100%. Discussion is always a better alternative for me over one person's written impression.

boredsilly

Also this, except for me I trust their take on the podcast more than their written review. I remember when Garnett Lee, of 1up, was talking about 50 Cent Blood on the Sand, and was torn about whether he should give the game a high score because of what it was, even though it was clear that he really enjoyed the game from how he talked about it.

It seems to me that people can think themselves into corners with reviews, since they're a bit more permanent than a discussion, and also represent the site or publication the reviewer works for.

xmiyux

I actually agree with you completely. When I read his question for some reason I was thinking written reviews only. To be honest, anymore, I get my gaming news/review/comments almost entirely from podcasts. The small percentage I don't get from casts comes from forums or formal reviews.