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 about indie / free games?
We treat all commercial releases the same. If a
developer or publisher is charging money for their
release, we assume they're happy for us to go to town
with it, the same as we would any other title.
With free games, we work slightly differently, and gague
our response in accordance with each individual
situation. Firstly, we want to give small
developers as much coverage as possible: they're
potentially the future of the industry. At the
same time, we don't want to slate their early efforts
for being a bit rough around the edges. What to
do...
Our decision is thus. We only review free games if
they either meet a certain standard, or attract a large
enough player base. If it's a tiny game that isn't
that great and no one is really playing, we won't review
it. We might mention it, if there's
something worth talking about, but it won't get covered
in our main reviews section. If they do
meet these criteria, then we review the game as we would
any other, but we'll always point out that the article
is about a small, independent, freely available piece of
software.
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: Football Superstars (Issue 3,
38%)
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: A Vampyre Story (Issue 3, 68%)
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: Project Origin (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: Resident Evil 5 (Issue 5, 82%)
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: World of Goo (Issue 4, 90%)
|
