This Issue

Previous Issues

About Resolution

Subscribe

Forum

 
About our reviews...
The purpose of the review...

This is an issue that crops up frequently when discussing videogame reviews.  Should a review's main function be to inform readers, persuade them, or help them engage with what makes a particular game tick?

We look at it like this.  Anyone can find a game's Wikipedia page and get instant access to its feature set.  Anyone can look at screenshots and videos and immediately know how impressive the game looks.  As such, we see reviews as a way of providing insight into whether a game is worth your interest, and why.

This means a game doesn't have to excel technically in order to receive a positive review, but if there are glaring problems in this area, we will undoubtedly tell you about them.  Likewise, if a game ticks all the usual boxes but fails to speak to us in any meaningful way, it's unlikely to get a glowing write-up.  We strive to treat games as they deserve to be treated: as a serious and valid form of both art and entertainment.  Obviously, in doing so, we cannot achieve complete objectivity.

But then, can anyone really achieve this?  And what weight does a carefully balanced analysis of that type hold, anyway?  No consumer is going to sit down with their new game and take careful notes on what it does well and what it could improve.  You're going to be thinking about whether you're enjoying yourself or not.  So that's what we do as well.  Reviews are opinion.  Informed, considered opinion, backed up with clear examples, perhaps; but opinion nevertheless.


Why bother with scores?


We ask ourselves the same thing every time we glance at the latest ludicrous comments thread arguing whether that 76% should have been closer to 79...

Still, we kind of like them.  Some people struggle with the conceptual, and numbers can be a helpful way of getting a quick idea of a game's quality.  Of course, coming up with a specific number in a hundred-point scale is far from an exact science, so we tend to think in wider bands, then decide where abouts in this band a given game fits.

You can find these categories below, along with a brief description of what they mean.  The actual number within these bands is completely subjective, and one person's 80% might be pushing a 90 for someone else.  For that reason, we absolutely insist that you primarily read the body of the review, in which our knowledgeable writers will explain how and why they came to that judgment.  We certainly put more thought into the words we write than the numbers we tack on the end, though we do our best to score games as carefully as possible, particularly towards the higher end of the scale when you'll start to seriously think about parting with a substantial amount of cash.


What our scores mean...

0% - 19%
Just... speechless.  What on Earth happened here?  If there was supposed to be something resembling an enjoyable game buried deep within the confines of this disc, we certainly haven't come anywhere near finding it.  Games falling into this band are simply awful.  If you threw them into a fire, they'd bounce back and burn your skin off.
Recently: ShellShock 2 (Issue 4, 18%)

20% - 39%
These games range from the inexplicably bad to the barely competent.  There might be a few elements of fun hiding away here, but with such an abundance of far superior titles out there, there's not much point in giving these ones the time of day.
Recently: Sonic Unleashed (Issue 2, 39%)

40% - 59%
Either bland, unimaginative and uninspiring games, or interesting ideas clumsily executed.  Some of these titles might be worth considering if you really like the look of them, but do tread extremely carefully.  There will undoubtedly be superior options available.
Recently: Prince of Persia (Issue 3, 50%)

60% - 69%
Reasonable games.  These titles get a lot of things right, but they're still some way off the head of the pack.  They're hampered by certain issues that prevent them from being effortlessly enjoyable, but may still be worth a look if they sound like your sort of thing.
Recently: Mirror's Edge (Issue 2, 67%)

70% - 79%
These are good, solid games.  They're unlikely to rock your world, and there'll almost certainly be substantial room for improvement, but you're unlikely to come away from them truly disappointed.  Certainly worth an investment, as long as you're not expecting perfection.
Recently: F.E.A.R. 2 (Issue 4, 76%)

80% - 89%
Excellent, highly commendable releases that fall just shy of true greatness.  There's not an awful lot to criticise here, and most players will have a brilliant time with these games.  They're towards the head of the pack, and if you're looking to purchase something in a particular genre, you could do far, far worse than to opt for one with an 80%+ score.
Recently: Crayon Physics Deluxe (Issue 3, 85%)

90% +
Just... speechless.  But in a completely different way from before.  These games are simply mesmerising, moving the medium forward with their astounding excellence.  A game scoring over 90% is an essential purchase, something that no self-respecting gamer should be without.  Head to the shops immediately.
Recently:
Spelunky (Issue 4, 90%)

Contents
Issue 4

Podcast

Editor's Note

The Special Report
A silly video! Hooray!

The Evolution of Horror
A look back at the genre's history

16-Bit Boy
Do our minds corrupt the most innocent games?

Is it 'Game Over' for survival horror?
Where's the genre heading?

The Angry Gamer
Are games programmed to cheat?

Listen to your Elders!
Lessons from the FPS grandfathers

Interview:
Vince D. Weller
What makes a good RPG?

Interview: Dan Pinchbeck
How far can we push FPS boundaries?

First Impressions: Resident Evil 5
Rekindling the spirit?

Reviews:

F.E.A.R. 2: Project Origin
Multi

Cryostasis: Sleep of Reason
PC

The Last Remnant
Multi

The Path
PC

Big Bang Mini
DS

NecroVisioN
PC

Syberia
DS

Spelunky (Game of the Month)
PC

ShellShock 2: Blood Trials
Multi

Hotel Giant 2
PC