It's a little weird that Tomb Raider will be a Square Enix property, isn't it?
As I've a full playing slate for the coming week, I should have plenty of substance to write about in the coming days aside from "I'm too tired to think straight." I've got Flower, F.E.A.R. 2, Onechanbara (both Wii and Xbox 360!) and Sonic's Ultimate Genesis Collection for Xbox 360.
I'm dubious about Flower, but only because I think half the reason I so mightily hate flOw is because people over-vaunted my expectations. So I'm firmly refusing to adopt any preconceptions. Here's a fun question: if you're a game reviewer and a game's being massively hyped, should you:
a. Enter a zen state in which you meditatively disregard the hype and judge the game on its own merits or b. Allow yourself to be swept along on the hype wave and share in the expectations -- so that your experience will be just like the average consumer's?
If you like to discuss questions like these, you will be happy that the latest Wall Of Text from Shawn Elliot's reviews symposium is now published. You really only need to read the parts I wrote, though.
...Yes, I'm joking.
I'm really looking forward to this Genesis collection, by the way. So is my cat Zelda, who has been cuddling it all day. It looks like I mis-named her; she's obviously a hardcore Sega fangirl. Go figure:
She's never been like this with any other game.
16 comments:
I must not make a LOLcat.
I must not make a LOLcat.
I must not make a LOLcat.
I must not make a LOLcat.
I must not make a LOLcat.
It could be either a or b. Of course a seems like the better of the two because then you aren't going into the game with any bias towards it. However, b can work too if you can still see the game from an unbiased perspective despite how much you think it will be good.
I'd say b. The whole point of games reviews is to inform the reader from a perspective they can identify with.
While not every reader is looking for the same opinion (and naturally gravitate to reviewers who share their opinions) public perception and hype are a big part of first impressions.
No one can review from a vaccum so be honest about any and all influcences on your review. They're going to be there whether you admit it or not. That's how I try to approach it when I'm reviewing at least...
Awwww kittiee!!11one :3
I mean... I'm really looking forward to your opinions on FEAR 2. (Also, did you saw the cat-vertisings of Fear 2?).
Leigh, as a reviewer, do you think there's value in trying to shield yourself from pre-release coverage? I realize it's important (and fun) to be a part of the online "gaming community" and to keep up with what people are talking about, but that stuff, like you say, affects the reviewer's reaction to the game. Heck, some reviews almost read more like responses to built-up expectations than to the games themselves. That's fine in some cases, but it also decreases a review's useful lifespan.
If you thought it would make you a better, more insightful reviewer, would you make an effort to avoid reading about games before playing them? Or would that make you less effective as a journalist? (Or should a person, ideally, be one and not the other?)
Jeff,
I tend to shield myself anyway, as much as it's possible. Since I write about the game industry every day, it's super easy to become jaded and burnt out, so I just sort of really need to pace my consumption of that stuff.
I read pre-release coverage if it crosses my "desk" and I think it's interesting, but I tend not to voraciously chase it. Even with Metal Gear Solid 4, where I was actively an anticipating fan, I avoided overexposing myself just because I feared that'd ruin my experience.
I don't really think TOO much about myself "as a reviewer" versus "as a consumer." I mean, I frequently head-check to make sure I believe that I'm in touch with the things that my readership cares about even if my experience has been different, but as far as what I expose and don't expose myself to, I let it happen organically.
I don't actually read a lot of games writing, to tell you the truth, unless I have a specific subject I'm seeking out that I want to get a pulse on from others. I spend like eight hours a day on this machine at minimum doing industry coverage -- I just can't muster an interest in blogs, editorials, reviews and blogitorials as a way to spend leisure time.
Just like to keep my palate clean, you know?
Yeah, I've gotten a lot better about ignoring pre-release coverage for games I might want to play. As a plain old consumer, it definitely makes a difference.
Oh, and Flower is pretty spectacular, at least through the first three levels. It tries to get at your emotions a little abstractly, if that makes sense. Kind of like Rez for hippies.
I don't see why hype is such a big deal for people. When you review, you say, "They said it would do X, Y, Z, but it actually does A, B, and C, which is disappointing/expected/a pleasant surprise." Then you go on and do a normal review. As long as you do a good job explaining how the game plays and how it compares to similar games, it should be obvious to the reader what its strengths or failings are. No need for a false dichotomy.
I'm with you 100% on fl0w, I don't see what everyone got so worked up about.
I'm trying not to get my expectations up for Flower, but Michael Abbott is certainly singing its praises.
I like to think of myself as an "a" man. Maybe it's because I frequently buy games from the discount bin (AAA games of yesteryear and obscure rereleased gems, mostly). The last time I let myself be swept in the hype tide, it was with Mercenaries 2, and the 50€ I paid for that still hurt.
Of course, taking into account the hype when writing a review is necessary in order to better compare the expectations to the final product. But that is one thing; letting the hype get to you personally is something else altogether.
LARA CROFT CONFIRMED FOR KINGDOM HEARTS 3
What an adorable little kitty. I am so jealous. My family is allergic, so I can't have one, no matter how much I beg. :(
::cries::
i wanna kitty!
Well, here's my theory for kitty affection for Sonic:
Karma.
Clearly, your kitty is picking up on the wonderful karma that is classic Sonic, and resonating with all the wonderful goodness and joy that past Sonic has created in our lives.
This looks familiar
From my understanding, both in what they have said and what I can tell from their work, professional film critics tend to avoid trailers and other hype material for films. As one who follows films and video games more or less the same way (I follow a title just enough to determine in development whether or not I'm interested and then stop paying attention--I usually determine this by what talent is involved), that's the perspective I like to read in reviews.
At the same time, it seems video game reviewers have a much harder time ignoring the hype. Most do double duty as inudstry journalists and end product critics (whereas film writers generally get to limit their other writing to words about venues and interviews with artists, critics get to write about demos at cons and talk to PR agents about sentences in their press releases).
As one who has massive loathing for the game industry hype machine, I prefer to read video game writing that doesn't spend its time addressing and debunking expectations. I more want to know about what someone who has sat down to play this game has to say about it than the person who wants to get his hands on the playable version of that kickass trailer from last year's E3.
So, uh, basically, I think "a" is what should be strived for.
I tend to get sort of put off of a game as well if I hear to much hype. This is really happening with Killzone 2 (don't care at all) and God of War 3 (cared but am rapidly ceasing to); I guess I'm interested enough in Flower that I'm staying kind of zen about it. Sure is a lot of twittering about its greatness; I've been too stuck on Retro Game Challenge to notice the rest of the gaming world this week.
Post a Comment