Words and Phrases That Should be Banned from Game Reviews

[Luke]

For the grief they get here, I think game informer does a pretty good job on their editorials, previews, and reviews.

To each his own; I abhor game informer reviews. With the latest edition (Halo 4 cover) there's a two page review on the new Spider-Man game where the reviewer never even played the game. And that's nothing new to gi. The entire review could have been summed up with "it looks kinda cool".

[noiseredux]

I think the issue is that even though the disclosure is there it's a very incomplete review. For example, if I'm reviewing Akai Katana and start off by saying "I don't normally play shmups" then my review is going to be completely useless for people who do play shmups, though it will be useful for those who also don't really play them and want to try one out. Really, any time a writer is tempted to say something like that it says that you need two reviewers: a newbie and a veteran.

I get what you mean, but sometimes find the neophyte thing interesting. If someone that's never played a Capcom fighting game reviewed SFxT, I'd be just as interested to read their impression of it as a review by a guy who follows EVO closely. Two different perspectives.

[BoneSnapDeez]

I absolutely loathe it when I read professional reviews (IGN, Game Informer, etc) that begin with phrases like....

"I've never played a game of this particular genre but..."
"I never played the 1985 original but allow me to review the 2011 remake as if it were an original game released in 2011!..."

That happens more than you would think...

I don't have a problem with this. It's full disclosure, and it's also letting you know that THIS review is based on just THIS game, while another review might be reviewing it as a compare/contrast to the preceding game in the series or original game that's now being remade or whatever.

Well I have to respectfully disagree. That type of thing is appropriate for blog postings and whatnot, but professional publications should have someone on staff who is familiar with the genre and history of the game being reviewed.

To give a couple of examples:

http://wii.ign.com/articles/111/1112284p1.html

Someone who has never played a JRPG should not be reviewing a game like Arc Rise Fantasia. A person reading this review doesn't want to hear about some dude's "first RPG experience" (again, that's blog stuff), they want to know how the game stacks up against other Wii/7th gen RPGs. Also, one of the notable features about this game is its similarities to the Tales series (as it has some of the same developers), but the reviewer obviously can't comment on that as he knows nothing about RPGs at all.

Here's another one:

http://www.destructoid.com/review-ys-i- ... 0037.phtml

The reviewer spends nearly the entire time complaining about how the game is "too old school" even though he's reviewing a port of a 1987 title. You can't simply review this from a 2011 context, it's not a 2011 game. It would have taken the reviewer only an hour or two to play around with older versions of the game (all you would need is DOSBox or an SMS emulator and a ROM). That way he'd be able to clearly see how the game was improved for the PSP version. This is just lazy.

This is why my favorite reviews are at places like HG101, where every write-up is done by someone with extensive background knowledge on the game and who has played every port and variation. I realize this is obviously impractical for weekly gamer magazines and whatnot, but they should really try a bit harder to make sure knowledgeable folks are reviewing their games.

[Jmustang1968]

For the grief they get here, I think game informer does a pretty good job on their editorials, previews, and reviews.

To each his own; I abhor game informer reviews. With the latest edition (Halo 4 cover) there's a two page review on the new Spider-Man game where the reviewer never even played the game. And that's nothing new to gi. The entire review could have been summed up with "it looks kinda cool".

I'm not sure I recall this one. Was it not a preview then?

They generally have interesting takes on some stuff and take a shot at issues in gaming culture. They also throw in some retro stuff. It isn't amazing but I generally enjoy thumbing through a print magazine.

[retrosportsgamer]

If you want to, I can post my whole "Words to avoid when writting" notes if I can find them.

It's not a short document.

I'd be interested

[noiseredux]

Well I have to respectfully disagree.

I don't really consider HG101 to write reviews. I consider them to write histories.

I do get what you're saying though. But it's also not practical. Any publication hires a staff and has to pass out those games among them. What do you do if you're like "oh we need to review this new Tales game... now I know Joe likes RPG's a lot, but he's never played the Tales series so he can either play 3000 hours of games in the series before reviewing this one, or he can just divulge that it's his first time playing a Tales game"? Sure it's not ideal, but it's just logistics.

But like I said, I do find it interesting too to read some reviews by a reviewer stepping out of their comfort zone. If "Joe the RPG guy" from the above example plays nothing but RPG's and loves RPG's, then maybe he's gonna gush about an RPG because it's an RPG. Might be interesting to hear "Pete the Shmup Dude" who hasn't touched RPG's since he got Dragon Warrior for free with his Nintendo Power subscription might think of an RPG today.

Now of course this could go either way -- could be super interesting and insightful, maybe even touch upon things that RPG fanatics would gloss right over because they take for granted. Or it could be a shit review that's like "oh man, RPG's are totally slow cuz they're turn based." But of course part of that shit review will be because it's a shit reviewer who didn't know how to tackle the assignment.

[Luke]

But of course part of that shit review will be because it's a shit reviewer who didn't know how to tackle the assignment.

Yup.

A fresh perspective is what sparks better journalism. Sometimes you get a tool who will say "The Godfather trilogy...what's all the fuss?" and sometimes you get "I just watched my first Mafia themed trilogy...let us discuss".

'Sall in the delivery. A reviewer new to a genre can bring a wide eyed enthusiasm that rivals someone that's all too familiar with a genre. But if the newbie doesn't execute well, I would agree you might read some awful reviews.

[J T]

I think we should ban the use of the phrases "excellent play control" or "great game mechanics" unless the reviewer can actually discuss these topics in further depth. Those statements are too broad and subjective to be meaningful, but sometimes that's all a reviewer will say about the game's controls. That just seems to miss the point in my opinion because the interactivity of video games is their central feature. If you can't describe the visceral experience of playing the game and how that feeling does or does not fit into the larger holistic experience of the story, graphics, and sound, then you don't really know how to express what is great about videogames.

[BoringSupreez]

I don't read enough professional reviews to even notice the cliches they use.

This.

I don't read reviews or watch them anymore.

I read tons of reviews, but I've stopped reading professional reviews. I read a lot of Gamefaqs user reviews.

And this article is the perfect opportunity to link to one of my most hated professional reviews, Gamespot's review of The Simpsons Arcade Game for XBLA/PSN. He basically says "It sucks, because it's old."

[BoneSnapDeez]

Well I have to respectfully disagree.

I don't really consider HG101 to write reviews. I consider them to write histories.

I do get what you're saying though. But it's also not practical. Any publication hires a staff and has to pass out those games among them. What do you do if you're like "oh we need to review this new Tales game... now I know Joe likes RPG's a lot, but he's never played the Tales series so he can either play 3000 hours of games in the series before reviewing this one, or he can just divulge that it's his first time playing a Tales game"? Sure it's not ideal, but it's just logistics.

But like I said, I do find it interesting too to read some reviews by a reviewer stepping out of their comfort zone. If "Joe the RPG guy" from the above example plays nothing but RPG's and loves RPG's, then maybe he's gonna gush about an RPG because it's an RPG. Might be interesting to hear "Pete the Shmup Dude" who hasn't touched RPG's since he got Dragon Warrior for free with his Nintendo Power subscription might think of an RPG today.

Now of course this could go either way -- could be super interesting and insightful, maybe even touch upon things that RPG fanatics would gloss right over because they take for granted. Or it could be a shit review that's like "oh man, RPG's are totally slow cuz they're turn based." But of course part of that shit review will be because it's a shit reviewer who didn't know how to tackle the assignment.

Yeah, I consider HG101 a retrospective and historical site. Some of the articles certainly read like reviews though, it depends on the author.

I do like neophyte reviews myself but I believe there's a time/place/venue for that kind of stuff, and I think they belong on independent websites, blogs, etc... Reading something like that on IGN (supposedly an authoritative "industry" website) just seems inappropriate. In the case of Arc Rise Fantasia I have a hard time believing they couldn't find at least one other person on their staff who has more knowledge of RPGs and would have been a better choice for writing that particular review.

This may all be a moot point anyway. I'm in agreement with BoringSupreez here, most "professional" reviews are almost entirely worthless. I used to have a Game Informer subscription and nearly every review just read like a press release for Activision, Bungie, EA, etc. They served no purpose except to hype up new games and convince people to go out and buy them (hopefully at GameStop of course!). Today I mostly read HG101, RPGamer, GameFAQs user reviews, and the many blogs of RacketBoy members.