Reviewing the Reviewers
![mirrorsKaleidoscope[1]](../../../../img.hsmagazine.net/2012/06/mirrorsKaleidoscope1.jpg)
by deuce_for2, HSM special guest contributor
Most reviewers (little ‘r’) blow. Actually, scratch that. Most reviewers are not even reviewers. Having an opinion and writing it down does not make you a reviewer. It does not even validate your opinion. It just makes you an opinionated person who wrote it down and inflicted it upon others. Reviewing is about analysis and not about opinion at all.
I am not talking about HSM in particular or even HSM reviewers at all. HSM has a high standard that I have not seen matched anywhere else, including many of the major game review sites.
An important part of what I want to give you is the ability to quickly identify a non-reviewer so they do not waste any more of your time. They are everywhere. They are so pervasive that they encourage others to do the same. People read such reviews and tell themselves that they can state their opinion more clearly and that their opinion is more valid. “I have an opinion. I can write a better review.”
It spreads like a virus. “I have a keyboard and played the game. People will want to hear what I think.” Yes, they are called friends and family. No one else cares. Or at least they should not. Honestly, your friends and family should care a lot less than they do, but they are nice people. How do I know? They read your opinion just because you asked them. They should not waste their time. At least until you have an idea of how to be a true Reviewer (big ‘R’).
And I also want to help you avoid the basic errors made so commonly that it is getting harder and harder to find real reviews. I want to read real reviews and I want you to write them. Please!
Let Me Tell You About Me
Here are some openings that are typical of non-reviews:
“Typically I do not like games in this genre. And this game is no exception.”
“Let me tell you about my gaming history…”
“I sent them my opinion about where the sequel should go, but they did not listen to me.”
“Here were my expectations of what this title would be…”
“Here is how I felt when firing up the game…”
“Let me tell you what I did not like….”
If the reviewer is talking about themselves, they are reviewing the interaction between the product and their expectations. This is not a review of the product; it is a review of the synchronicity between the makers of the product and this one person. A true Reviewer does not mention themselves as part of a review. They talk about the product and how they expect it will be recieved by the larger audience.
Let Me Tell You What Happened To Me
Things that happened to the person anecdotally are typical of non-reviews:
“I had to upgrade my video card because my machine did not meet the minimum specs.”
“For some reason my cat kept pawing at the screen while I played.”
“Just when I got to the big boss fight, my Mom called me for dinner.”
“My neighbor was no help in multiplayer.”
“While I was installing the game, the power went out in our whole neighborhood.”
He is right you know.
While interesting stories, they are not a part of a real review. Imagine that the page is finite and ink costs as much as gold. How much time would you give to stories about pets and neighbors? A Reviewer might write those in the first draft, but skillfully highlights and deletes them when editing.
You are reviewing a product. Talk about the product. If you are not, highlight and delete.
I Am Their Target Audience
This is probably the biggest mistake made by reviewers that should lead to jail time. No “one” is their target audience. Even if you are “in” their target audience, you are not representative of their target audience as a whole. This is where the Reviewer is able to utilize empathy. How will the target audience receive the product? That is the meat of the review.
My Anecdotal Experience
In 2001 the company I started came out with a demolition derby game that was/is sold on RealArcade. Don’t buy it. It is horribly old and runs on DirectX7 which is not supported any more (now that is a good review). In the review that RealArcade posted back in 2002, the reviewer (little ‘r’) wrote, “I reluctantly have to admit the game was fun.”
Reluctantly? Why? Is your family under threat of retaliation if you review a $20 game as fun when most games cost $50? Is it that you do not want a lower-budget game to be fun? Is it because it didn’t have the latest graphics and huge audio budget and was fun? You would have enjoyed writing the review more if it were not fun? I guess I should apologize for ruining his chance to write a scathing review.
He did not recognize that it was exactly his job reviewing such a product to find such a treasure, to make people aware that a low budget game can actually be fun. He found the product that most Reviewers are hoping to find. The one that would easily be bypassed as low budget, but is actually fun. He gave it three out of five stars because other than being fun, it was low budget.
Hating/Loving Everything Is Not Reviewing
I have a friend who is proud of the fact that he dislikes almost all movies. He likes a handful; not a handful a year, a handful ever. He thinks all people should talk to him before going to a movie. He considers himself “discerning.”
There comes a point when you are so tilted in one direction as to be useless. The same can be said for people who like things too much. If everything is that good, what are reviewers for? At some point they are so nice, reviews become commercials and discerning becomes a superior dance. Balance is required.
Always Start Positive
It is important to remember that real people made whatever it is you are reviewing. If accessible and findable, they will almost assuredly read your review. Producers of products use the reviews to see if they are doing it right and where they need to focus their efforts next time. So start on what they got right. If you cannot find anything, then maybe you are the wrong person to do the review or the product is so bad it is not review worthy.
Always critique things. “This is bad” is not a review. What is bad? Be specific. “It wasn’t fun” sounds reasonable, but is mostly useless. “I was bored with the repetitive tasks.” That is good. It points to the “why” of the fact that you were bored. If you only point out how you feel, you are a critic (mostly useless). If you point out the “why” you are now a Reviewer (big ‘R’).
I Had A Point
Make sure to mention the product. I know this sounds obvious, but it does happen that people forget to talk about what they are reviewing. Make a list of all the things about the product you want to talk about and make sure you mention them. I have talked with reviewers before and asked what the most important thing about the product that they wanted to say. Only to find that the most important thing in their mind was never mentioned in the review.
In Review
A true review is about the expectation of how a product will be received by the audience. Should people get it or should they stay away. Most products have enough of both good and bad to leave the jury out. For many reviews, the most useful aspect is the list of all the things that people reading might find important. The least useful is what you thought of it.
I highly encourage people to write reviews. Like any skill, you get better as you do it. But most importantly, notice what people talk about after your review. Did you excite them to talk about the product more or are they confused and asking for an explanation? From each you can learn and improve.
Final thought: while all rules are meant to be broken, learn to follow the rules before you break them. You have to know why a rule is a rule before you can break it at an appropriate time. Do your best and keep getting better. And take heart — no one reviews the reviewers.
June 14th, 2012 by John C. Ardussi | 23 comments
John C. Ardussi (deuce_for2) is a developer for PS Home and other platforms. He recently started a new company, Game Mechanics who is now making items and games. Be sure and tell him what you think of what he is doing. He truly listens and adjusts based on input from the community.
LinkedIn
Great read. I think most will find the personalizing stance was a bit of a grey area. A bit ironic to the point, but cleared up in the final thought. Overall, well defined and valid points. I will definitely be considering while writing a review of my own. Thanks!
I hate reading game reviews that look like a movie critic wrote it. Have you.. NO, How many times have you read a movie or game critics negatic review and liked said movie or game?
The same can be said of plays and restaurant reviews. When reading reviews I would rather have information than actual personal opinions. wouldn’t you? As far as positive reviews go I feel the same way. I just want details and not personal likes or dislikes.
Even when telling someone that I like something I trust others to get more information and find out for themselves. You may not like what I like. I like gargling peanut butter. Don’t you?
I remember an old high school teacher saying: A good review , be it positive or negative, should have want to see the play (play the game in our case). If i feel i want to buy that game or item/place on home just so i can make my own mind about it. I give credit to the review. If it only offer personal feeling from the author i will rarely go beyond the first few sentences.
I enjoyed your article and I will be taking a lot (maybe all) of your advice for future use -- in some cases. However, my first -- little “r” -- review for HS Mag was almost my last when I asked a friend to read it and tell me what he thought. What I remember most was his first comment… that I used the word “I” too much. In other words, I had written too much about myself and not enough about the personal estate that I was reviewing. That remark was crushing to me. My review happened to be a writing contest entry and it was one of the ones that won, so I took that win to heart and kept writing. Norse has said many times here at this mag that we are writing about the social aspect of Home and I think our “I” statements are understood to be one person’s experience, for the reader to agree or disagree with. We write or include personal stories as often as we write articles and “big “R” reviews. I used the word “I’ 13 in this comment, btw.
*times
Wow that is really something very useful to consider. I can recognize a lot of the mistakes I’ve made in reviews. I will certainly take the advice and keep it in mind next time I write a review.
In large part, HSM was created as a reaction to the loose-cannon fanboyism that passes for video game journalism today — both the drooling “OMG dood MW2 roxxors!” me-first crowd and the jaded neckbeard fanboys who feel qualified to tell game developers what to do. Indeed, our April Fools “troll takeover” gag was a direct response to this.
That doesn’t necessarily make us “better” — there’s an audience for the type of writing listed in the previous paragraph — but if the ESRB is to be believed, and the average game purchaser is forty years old, then we suspect there are a hell of a lot of people out there who are looking for something a bit deeper than a bowl of LOLspeak tapioca.
One of the writing techniques HomeStation writers are encouraged to use is anecdote, as it personalizes the article and that fits with the more social thrust of the publication. That said, we’re also conscious of the necessity for proper review structure, in order to maximize the effective usefulness of the article. What you pointed out about learning the rules before stylistically choosing which rules to break is critical; we take liberties with the AP Stylebook, but we also know what the hell the AP Stylebook *is.*
One of the most clever writers I’ve read in modern times is Patton Oswalt, when he pens reviews under the “Neill Cumpston” pseudonym. He clearly knows how to write extremely well, but he disguises it in a hyper-fanboy style designed to simultaneously satirize and appeal to the lowest-common denominator and the more discerning reader alike. On YouTube, Red Letter Media has also done this extremely well with the “Mr. Plinkett” character and his reviews of various science-fiction movies. Highly recommended.
Thanks for writing this, Deuce; it really hit the nail on the head.
Everybody’s a critic. At least this article slipped in some sage advice.
I like the advice of a true Reviewer being more concerned “about the product and how they expect it will be received by the larger audience.” I think this is something many of us struggle with (myself included) because games are an interpersonal and interactive journey. Unlike film or music, we are part of the experience. Our decisions have outcomes and many times those decisions directly affect the game we are treated to.
I played the entirety of GTA5 following traffic laws when I could and wound up taking a good deal of taxis to get from one place to another. I rarely hijacked vehicles and only killed when absolutely necessary. In Skyrim (a game I have yet to finish with over 220 hours in! WOO!) I have never fast traveled, I rest most nights, I don’t do missions that involve thievery and/or murder. These two games hold experiences for me that are likely quite different from the experience most others play through, so my personal tastes on how to play an open world game has a direct impact on my opinion of those games.
I guess the point is one shouldn’t review a game based on those sorts of factors. It would be silly for me to discuss in a review my observation that Liberty City citizens have a habit of stopping at green lights and going on red when I know full well most people will never be effected by, let alone notice, that game quirk.
I think there’s room for articles that explore the interpersonal connection one has with a game but I guess those sorts of articles shouldn’t then end in a score. I think it’s important for everyone to take this advice into consideration when deciding what kind of reviewer they want to be. Don’t be pressured to include a score, or an analytical exposition of a game when what you really want to do it write about what the game meant to you. I’ll be the first one to admit I have been guilty of this reviewers rush.
Thanks for the wisdom Deuce, it has certainly pointed out the reason I have found some of my past articles… unsettling and cumbersome.
Woah you already played through GTA5? jk we know you meant 4
I’ve reviewed a few games, but my main point when I review them is if they are worth playing again or if they will just be a one time experience. Like I am alive, that was a game i played once and I had enough. Skyrim, I would replay that game an umpteenth amount of times and chances are it would be a different experience every time. I still haven’t finished the first time through. It’s tough to generalize a majority opinion on replay though. I could see playing skyrin again but it is such a time consuming game that it could put people off to playing it. Some may even give up on it the first time through and never complete it.
I feel like writing reviews is a bit of a balancing act. You want to tell how you feel about the product but at the same time you want to be truthful when something isn’t right. That is why Norse and Terra have always stressed that when we criticize it is done in a constructive manner, not derogatory. I agree with what you have said here Deuce, everyone has opinions about everything, but not all are worth listening to. And most people seem to forget that though it is an opinion, it is your own, not everyone’s. I am sure that as a developer you have heard it all, and I think that you, like the other developers actually appreciate when we tell you the truth about your products, good or bad.
I am glad you wrote this article it was very enlightening to see reviews from the other side of the coin, and we as writers always have room for improvement.
Nice read.
Devil’s advocate Seal here. I would like to inject a heartfelt defense of bad reviews and the bad reviewers who write them.
Last night I was showing a friend my treatment of the Gothic Cathedral private space, which leans heavily toward animated cherry trees, flickering campfires and organic asymmetry. He explained carefully what I had done wrong, and how I should correct it. I listened. Then I replied.
“That’s why I’m me and you’re you.”
That wasn’t a clever putdown. It’s a simple statement of my creative philosophy. Especially as it applies to writing. Which is, anything can work, if you feel it intensely. It may not make sense to anyone else — they don’t need to like it. It’s nice if they do, of course. We all crave approval. But it’s perfectly okay if they don’t.
That’s why we’re us and they’re them. We’re in this writing game to say something about beauty and emotion, not to make everyone happy.
I’ve written things that looked like game reviews that wouldn’t tell the game’s developer anything useful about their creation. I have one in the queue now, one that says a hell of a lot more about Seal than it does about the game she was ostensibly reviewing. (To be fair, I left off the rating section for that one. I knew it wasn’t really a review.) When it comes out, most of the readers of this magazine will say, “Huh?” and move on. That’s okay. Some of them will loathe it and complain. That’s okay too. A few may say, “Wow, someone else shares my gut reaction!” That’s okay too — hey, it’s more than okay, it’s great! As I said, we all crave agreement. But that’s still not why I wrote it.
I wrote it because I had to.
That’s what creation, especially writing, is all about. It’s about having stuff spill from your guts out your fingers, leaving the fossil tracks of your emotions on the paper for everyone to pick over. You do it because you have to. Not because you want to be loved or even agreed with. This is not a popularity contest. If you’re lucky, someone else will see something in it that resonates.
But they don’t have to. That’s why they’re them and I’m me. We’re going to see things differently. And that’s okay. It may hurt if you disagree. But it doesn’t really matter.
What matters is putting yourself out there, making yourself vulnerable, making the effort. And, quite often, figuring out what you wrote AFTER you wrote it. And learning from the experience, and moving on to write something else.
It doesn’t matter if you write well. Sure, writing well will get you a berth on this magazine faster than writing badly. Stating your opinion clearly is going to work better than repeating sloppy cliches. But, ultimately, what matters is what the writing does to you, for you, inside you. The way it lets you see yourself. The conversation you have with yourself, through the page and your eyes and fingers. Did what you just wrote teach you anything about the world, or about games, or about your own inner life? If your answer was “yes”, then the piece succeeded. Even if it features your cat batting at the screen.
It’s nice if someone else gets something from what you wrote. In fact, it’s wonderful. But don’t expect it. They’re them and you’re you. Communication isn’t always going to succeed.
That’s okay. Really. That’s what this creation game is all about. It’s all part of the conversation.
To be devil’s advocate to your devil’s advocate (if only for one particular point): it doesn’t matter if you write well, only it does.
Allow me to explain.
When you want your voice heard, and the thoughts you have on a topic to matter to more than just yourself, it’s essential to keep in mind the other people who possibly could be reading what you have to say. Think about it -- when you write a comment in a public venue, it is going to be read by many people, coming from many backgrounds. They don’t have to agree with your point of view, but wouldn’t you at least want them to respect it (and by association, you)? So yes, writing well is necessary.
Writing for one’s self is great -- all artistic endeavors are exercises self-indulgence on some level -- and it has its place. And you’re right; when writing for one’s self, writing well doesn’t matter, but when sharing that piece of yourself publicly, the work does need to be taken to the next level above the self.
This is the beauty of a review: a reviewer is doing their best to explain the whys behind their opinions on a subject, and if the bare minimum result is getting someone else thinking and sharing their whys on a level that’s at least as clear as the reviewer’s, then count that as a successful result, too. No, not everyone has to agree with the point of view originally expressed. However, that can’t happen if neither person can write (at least on a rudimentary level) well. What that will result in is a likely flame war, or worse, having those thoughts completely ignored. There’s plenty of those to be found online -- far too plenty.
You don’t have to start out as a good writer, so long as you’re willing to grow. And that -- at least when talking about HSM specifically -- will ensure you’ll have a long, enjoyable stay here on the team.
Important point here, not everything you write is a review. If you are doing a review specifically, then you have some obligations to your audience. And more so to the people who created whatever you are reviewing. To talk about what happened to you this weekend, then drop a score at the bottom for something that was only mentioned tangentially does not make it a review. If you are doing a review, then do a review. If it is not a review, just acknowledge that you have done something else. That is okay.
Doing everything well is important. You may not start there, but everyone should be striving to do better at everything they do. Always doing your best should be your base. Mediocrity is overrated.
I picture the next ten articles submitted by the staff starting with the sentence “This is not a Review.”
[Like]
Hey, now. Mediocrity is the fuel that keeps the Web growing.
“Here is how I felt when firing up my laptop to read this article…” First of all, my opening sentence which is a slight mutation from example that you gave in your article doesn’t make much sense. Here is how I felt? How can one feel “here”? I totally agree with what you’re saying in this article. I personally don’t write reviews. I am a self appointed “fluff” writer. I love calling myself a fluff writer, and for the most part that’s true. With the exception of maybe one or two articles, my writing tends to be lighthearted fluff pieces. I love the reaction of the editors and members of the writing team when I call my stuffed fluff. Almost without exception, they are quick to defend my choice of writing style. It is almost like they think I’m being derogatory when I use the word fluff.
I have never written a review of the game or space. I’ve made a written reviews on personalities or experiences. But the guidelines you point out apply in these matters to. There are truths and what you wrote that apply in all forms of writing. Even fluff. I seem to remember an old saying that goes… Lock a monkey in a room with a typewriter and given enough time he would write the works of William Shakespeare. That statement always fascinated me. I have even send that idea to Mythbusters… The key to being read is to write something readable. People have the writing style or styles. And readers may have their preferences on the styles they prefer. I am no writer but I write. And I can’t write just for the sake of writing, it has to be something that I know or feel strongly about plus be something that I can convey in not only an entertaining way but conveys my point. That said, if I write something from my point of view, which I almost have to because it’s the only aspect I have access to, I try to write it in a way that others can relate to.but I’m not so sure writing isn’t like video production. When I first started shooting video professionally, I was told always to use a tripod, level the camera, color balance and make smooth deliberate movements if necessary. That all changed. A very high percentage of television programming is shot on shoulder mounted cameras, slightly tilted, abnormal chroma tweaking and slightly shaky. Can the rules of writing also evolve or devolve like the rules of shooting video have. And writers pressing the envelope have to step over the rule guidelines sometimes. What the heck am I talking about. I probably write fluff. I cross no boundaries. I press no envelope. I can even spell check the monkey that’s writing Shakespeare. I defer to you and others that know a lot more about writing than I do.
All that is my fluffy way of saying great article.
Sorry, I have to go now, the monkey has pulled the ribbon out of the typewriter again. And all he’s written so far is the complete works of Ayn Rand
Perfectly pointed out Duce, I agree with pretty much everything you said in your article. I’m a bit late to the party here, but here’s my 10 cents; The use of “I” was debated when I was helping set up a gaming site, half of us wanted to use the first-person, the other half saw it as detrimental to any review. Thankfully the latter of us got our way, I say thankfully because I’d never feel comfortable using my personal perspective when giving a broad idea of any given product. What’s importiant for ANY advice on ANY product is keeping in mind that not everyone thinks the same as you. So the trick is being subjective in your constructive criticism while still giving your point of view. Here’s an example; This is a review I wrote for a game I enjoyed: http://www.criticalgamer.co.uk/2010/03/29/hidden-gems-flower-2/
And this is one I hated:
http://www.criticalgamer.co.uk/2010/04/12/rengoku-tower-of-purgatory-review/
Don’t worry, they’re not very long (10mins at most) but I think you’ll see exactly WHY staying away from the first-person perspective is paramount to a subjective review. Again, good read Duce, thanks.
I read both of your reviews and they were both interesting reviews. I’ve played Flower and never even heard of the other game, btw. So, I’m trying to think of a nice way to say this… you may not have used the word “I” but both reviews were your opinion. It occurs to me that reviews ARE opinions. Well, what else do we have? If it wasn’t an opinion, every review article would be a list of stats. So avoiding the first person my SEEM like you’re distancing yourself and being objective, but people just aren’t. We’re subjective about everything and everyone around us. I believe we’re hard-wired that way. So, I’ve decided to happily go on using the first person in my reviews. But, hey… this is just my opinion.
There is a difference between what you like and an analysis of whether a product is right for the intended audience. People in Home do this all the time. While the target audience is something like 70% male, people point out that female clothing is often at the top of the sales list. So if my review of a female outfit was, “I don’t get it. I will never wear it. 70% of the target audience is male. Why would they think this Beyonce knock off outfit would sell?” That may be my opinion, but it is improper analysis of the target audience. Your opinion cannot be wrong. Your analysis can.
Analysis involves comparing it to items that have come before and how they were recieved. And new aspects of the item that have not been done before and how they might be recieved.
There was a memorable review of the Waterfall Terrace where the Reviewer thought the space was good overall, but had corners that would be hard to decorate. This is the kind of information that is useful to someone thinking of buying it. Reviews should be there to help reduce buyer’s remorse, not to proliferate your opinion.
I do understand what you’re saying Deuce. But I think reviews are inherently subjective. Analysis are different than reviews. And an analysis normally can be proven or disproven by math which is not subject. While a movie reviewer can compare a movie to others in the same genre or by the screenwriter or director, the reviewer is still basing their review on their own personal opinion. A food critic may pan, pardon the pun, a dish he doesn’t like but that can be based on personal preference. As in your example of the Waterfall Terrace review, the fact that the reviewer might think it’s problematic to find decorations to fit in the corner, others might see it an opportunity to place a lamp or a plant. I don’t think you can completely remove opinion from a standard review. I express opinions in my articles all the time. But I do not do reviews. I also do not accept reviews as fact. If I had read the Waterfall Terrace review I would still have to see for myself. And indeed, the Waterfall Terrace is one of my favorite spaces. A subjective review still has merit and can alert the reader’s to be mindful of what the reviewer sees as windfalls or pitfalls. Of course this is my subjective opinion and as I stated I do not do reviews. If you have an example of a completely analytical review, I am more than willing to change my subjective opinion. But like I said at the beginning, I do completely understand what you’re trying to say.
FYI: Here is a bad reviewer getting a response from a developer. The reviewer:
1) Never played the demo, only watched it being played.
2) Never played any of their past games.
3) Does not like video games as a storytelling medium.
4) And actually complains that the game is fun and wants the fun removed.
Scroll down and watch:
http://loadoutroom.com/2962/medal-of-honor-warfighter-authenticity/