LCVG Research. Review Poll

[Romier S]

Wanted to do a quick poll and find out what you folks look for in a review. What exactly is most important to you? Ive posted most of the major things I can think of but if what you want is not in the list please specify in your reply.

 

Thanks for the feedback guys.

[Mark E]

Witty is cool if you can manage it, but very few writers can. Ergo, if a joke comes up, take it, if not, go for useful content. It'll be harder to take reviews seriously if they're written like monologues too. Gotta be careful of getting to the point where the viewer doesn't know what to take seriously. Too many 'net sites now think they're funny and hot shit when they are not.

 

See: ps2.ign.com

[Robot Monkey]

I said "Other". What I want depends on the game as well as the reviewer.

 

I liken it to Car and Driver, a magazine I enjoy reading. I've read one page reviews for shitty vehicles that were hilarious. But when Ford introduces (for example) an all new F-150, I want (and get) an in-depth look at the vehicle, with a lot of techincal highlights and sidebars.

 

If the review covers a new vehicle in a popular segment, the review might spend more time than usual covering "what's new" and what distinguishes it from others in the market segment.

 

Regardless of review, I always find the counterpoint sidebar informative in their reviews.

 

Am I making sense?

 

-j

[Calvin]

I selected in-depth gameplay.

 

But, I'd also like in-depth tech specs, a witty review, & a good final summary.

Why not wish for everything?

[Camp]

As I answered "other" I am expected to explain why:

 

I like review formats that don't force me to read a novel. I want there to be an in-depth reveiw in the event I really want that level of detail but I also expect a brief summary that provides me with the gist of the review. I expect this summary to be clearly delineated from the body of the review so I can quickly find it (in the event it's a game I'm only casually interested in). I want the summary to follow a regular format and not be more than a paragraph in length.

 

That's all I ask.

[Buck]

In depth gameplay coverage is the main thing I look for, since that's what interests me in games Of course, all the others are good to have as well.

 

BTW, Romier, thanks for not making one of the choices "A Midtown Madness 3 Review"

[adamsappel]

Other: I like a review to tell me not just that a game is good or bad, but to compare it to other games in that genre. Sure, SCII is great, but how does it rate against VF4:E? In the case of a multi-console game, which version is best and why? (And not just "Xbox!") I like a summary paragraph, since there won't be scores. I want the a/v specs mentioned, but I don't to read through someone's 5.1/720p orgasm. I want to know how long a game lasts (the total time spent beating the game, not just the in-game clock). I'd also like to see a shorter "second opinion" review. Tell me what's bad about a good game, too. For those of us who often wait to buy games (read: cheap bastards) I'd love it if a reviewer would revisit his reviewed games and say if he's still playing the game or has changed his initial opinion.

[Mark E]

I want the summary to follow a regular format and not be more than a paragraph in length.

 

That's not a bad idea, it's similar to the format I use on my movie review site. I have a long review, then at the bottom I have a section called 'Bottom Line' where I sum everything up in a couple sentences for lazy asses who don't want to wade through my beautiful beautiful prose .

[Camp]

I have a long review, then at the bottom I have a section called 'Bottom Line' where I sum everything up in a couple sentences for lazy asses who don't want to wade through my beautiful beautiful prose .

 

exactly. I think it's important to remember that not everyone wants to read the full review of every game. They may miss out on the beautiful beautiful prose but at least they can get an idea of your thoughts.

[Chris]

I picked "Other" as well. Certainly gameplay information is most important, but I'd also like the reviews to touch on the technical information, video, graphics, sound, online, etc. Informative writing with a bit of humour is good although the right mix may be difficult to achieve. I think the final summary section is a good idea, too. Sometimes you're pressed for time, or not interested enough in a game to read through the whole review initially. Maybe the final summary will get you interested enough to go back and read the whole thing.

 

I'm sure the reviewers here will get it right.

 

Whew! And with that, I believe I've voted in every single poll.

[adamsappel]

I would also like to see the online aspects of a game addressed separately, and NOT being online-compatible isn't a worthy criticism of a game.