Operation: OHR

-January 20, 2003
-Sep. 30 - Oct. 5
-Aug. 18 - Aug. 24
-News archive

-Wingedmene
-Resistance
-Kidworld
-Soulfire
-Review Archive

-Levels Of Player Control
-Forget The Utopia
-Encouragement
-Reviewer's Guide
-Article Archive

-BTE 3: Ends of the Earth
-BTE 2: Monterey Penguin
-BTE 1: Wandering Hamster
-OHRlympics Results
-Features archive

-What is it?
-Add a game
-Edit your game
-View the list

-Aug. 23 - Aug. 29
-Aug. 16 - Aug. 22
-Aug. 9 - Aug. 15
-Jul. 26 - Aug. 8
-Jul. 18 - Jul. 25

-Zantetsuken MB
-Help Me MB
-Reasonably Septaweekly
-Hamster Republic

-Aethereal
-James Paige

Ethics of Evaluation (Part 1)

By: Pepsi Ranger

  The method behind the madness of game reviewing

  In light of recent events involving the fiery attacks and icy stares on certain game reviews posted on Operation: OHR, I thought it was time to design a handbook of sorts for those aspiring to review or to refine their skills. I hope that this will in turn not only raise the quality of content offered here, but to also convince people to stop fighting each other. So here we go.

  I'll start by asking a question. The question may be simple, but it's pivotal to anyone who plans on reviewing a game. To get right to it, first sit down and rub your temples. This won't really accomplish anything, but it's good for setting up mood. There, wasn't that nice?

  Okay, well that wasn't exactly the question I meant to ask, but it's still something worth considering. How did rubbing your temples prepare you for game reviewing? Chances are that it did absolutely nothing except maybe relax you. But consider that further. What's the purpose of trying to relax? To alleviate tension, right? I guess what I'm getting at here is that it's better to review a game when there's no other distractions threatening you to produce a decent job. After all, nothing says, "this is a bad time," like a bag full of stress. So, before you sit down and do anything toward game reviewing, make sure you're truly ready.

  Now, in perspective, stress relief is not essential to making a good review. Realistically, I'll often sit down at my computer at around two in the morning or so to write up a three-page critique (using Microsoft Word) and finish about an hour and a half later. My state of mind is not always going to be positive at such a late hour. Certainly, tension relief is usually the last thing I'm thinking about. I mean if anything, I'm asking myself, "Why in the world am I still up at this ridiculous hour playing a game I don't like?" It's not like sleeping wouldn't be more exciting, right? But, beyond the factors of time, I still make sure that my exhaustion doesn't come equipped with a headache, so the right mood and endurance is necessary. So, to summarize this ramble, it's a bad idea to review a game if you're not physically or mentally up to the challenge. The last thing anyone wants is for quality to suffer under the weight of bad timing.

  And that is only the beginning.

  Now that the right mood has been established, it's time to ask the second most important question (which should actually be the first, but I never plan out my thoughts ahead of time, so we'll make it the second). This of course has to do with motivation. So, here, let's ask it. Why do you really want to review this game?

  Has the question sunk in yet? It must have if you've made the firm decision that you're gonna do it. But has it really? Think about it for a moment. Do you want to review this game here because it completely changed your life? Or is it possible that it was so awful that the only way you could ever feel good about yourself is if you warned others to stay far the heck away from it? Or do you want to review the game simply because you feel sorry that the author has been waiting over five months for anybody to say anything about his work?

  If you give consideration to these factors, you may decide that all reasons are worthy for writing a review. And there's nothing wrong with that. They're all viable. But, regardless of why you choose to review a game, make sure that you stick to your reasons, and also be aware that the overall purpose is to help steer people in the right direction. In other words, trying to knock out ten games by Sunday is not a good reason to review a game. Telling people why they should play this game by Sunday is better.

  Anyway, that question should've been a given, but it's something that needs to be remembered every time a new game pops up on the review board.

  So, with the small stuff out of the way, let's get into the good stuff.

  Think of reviewing like you'd think of the beach. What? Yeah, think about it. What's so special about the beach? It's got sand, it's got water, and it's got seagulls, correct? What does that have to do with reviewing? Let's break it down further.

  What is the purpose of sand? It symbolizes unity. One grain of sand alone is virtually meaningless to a person. But, what happens when a trillion little grains of sand inhabit an area together? They make the beach. Where one grain of sand can get stuck in a person's eye, a trillion grains of sand can serve as a place for suntans, sand castles, and romantic memories to name a few things. Am I saying that a review should give people sunburns? Actually, that would be a neat trick, but no. The purpose of a review is to incorporate together smaller details such as feedback on graphics, or the nature of ripped music, or anything that wouldn't help the author a whole lot if it stood alone. In other words, a reviewer's opinions should not be limited to just one thing. In order for it to be complete, the review must touch on several different factors that cover the game from beginning to end. A review that only deals with graphics will do nothing less than irritate a person who is looking to see what the gameplay is like.

  Okay, so the unity of details is an important factor. It's not like no one knows this already. That may be true, but it's still important to remember. But, it's also important to remember that a beach isn't complete without its ocean.

  What is the purpose of the ocean in context to the beach? It's a place for people to get their feet wet, right? When we go to the beach, chances are that we are also going there to play in the water. We don't always know how much fun it will be, or if it will even be safe, but it's still something we plan on doing anyway. Granted, there are always signals and such, like flags and wave conditions, that help us decide if our day in the water will be worth it, and these things will typically influence our final decision to swim. But the point is that signs can only guide us, while the experience is what we really want. A review that's designed for aiding the player's choice should only give enough information to either entice or warn of the conditions ahead. What's actually in the water or beyond the horizon should be left for the player to discover. No one wants an experience ruined.

  Well, that may have been a little less obvious than the sand illustration, but it's still not a completely new concept. Yeah, okay fine. Let's talk about the seagulls then.

  Normally when we think of seagulls, we think of little irritating scavengers that fly off with our food. But, for the sake of this review, they're not scavengers. Instead, they're part of the mood of the beach. Think about that for a second. When we go to the beach, what do we expect to find? Sure, the sand and the ocean will always be there regardless of the time of day. But what about the ambiance of seagull cries? Doesn't the beach feel just a tad naked without those little white birds flying around? Yeah, the beach has everything it needs whether they're present or not, but it's not as exciting, is it? A review can also be complete without its birds, but it doesn't mean that it'll be an interesting read. Essentially, a review should have a style to it that not only serves the purpose of game coverage, but also keeps the reader's interests in mind. No one wants to read boring warning labels off a can of bug spray, so don't make them read one about some guy's one-day experiment with converting stick figures into action heroes.

  Speechless now? Good. But, let's dive a little deeper into the style of a review. When we examine a majority of the existing reviews, we'll find that those that have seagulls are written to appease to people's humorous side. I know that I myself am guilty of this. But, that's not to say that all reviews should make people laugh. Any style that applies to a reader's emotions is acceptable as good content. In other words, those who can write humor are encouraged to do so, but that doesn't mean writers with strengths in drama, suspense, sci-fi, romance, or horror shouldn't take a stab at tailoring their reviews in those ways too. Realistically, if someone sat down and explored the romantic side of Bugamon Quest, we might actually have a Pulitzer Prize winner among our ranks. And this is the stuff that makes a review special.

  Well, I hope we're making some progress now. But, we're not finished just yet. All we've done so far is set the review up and decide how it should look. Question number three is what do we actually talk about? Ah, good question. And this is something that is completely up to the reviewer.

  Let me start by saying that there is no formula to creating an outstanding review. The only real requirement is that you play the game you're reviewing. I'm not saying that you should turn the game on, thumb through the intro, kill off a couple bad guys, walk into a few houses, and decide that you're bored and want to get the review over with now. I'm saying that you need to play the game. This means going through all that other stuff, but also doing everything it takes to finish. If a boss is too hard, state that in the review, but don't give up. Keep fighting and fighting until you win. If you can't win, see if the cheats are enabled. If they are, use them and pass the impossible. If they're not, send the author an email saying his game is too hard, and review something else. I'm not suggesting that a game can't be reviewed if you don't beat a boss or something, but you run the inevitable risk of not having an accurate critique, which may damage the value of all the good things that appear after that boss battle. Not to mention, an incomplete review might potentially start a flame war on the message boards.

  And never forget that there are other people out there who can beat the boss. You don't have to be the sole hero of the OHR community.

  Of course, some games are designed to be incomplete, and most people have an idea when there's nothing else to do in a game. When you think you've reached that point, then it's a safe time to review.

  Okay, so you finished the game. What then? What do you actually say about it? Again, this is completely up to the reviewer, but here's a point to consider. You're not just writing stuff down for the player's benefit. You also need to do what you can to help the author. The whole reason why someone posts his or her game up for review is so that they can get some feedback. And when I say feedback, I mean feedback.

  "Wow, the graphics really suck," is not good feedback. "The maptiles are too dark, and the shorelines look like my yardstick," is better feedback.

  When you review a game, pretend it's yours. Think about the things that you love about this game and would never change, no matter how much money someone may offer you to alter it. Write those down with enthusiasm. Then think about those things that you like, but would change if you could. How would you change it to make it better? After you think of something, write that down. For example, you may think the sword works in favor of the postman, but a swordfish might be more interesting. If that's the case, don't be ashamed to mention it. The author may not take your suggestion, but he'll at least appreciate the advice. And what about those things you didn't like? How would you improve them? What about the things you hated? Can this game function just fine without a certain element? Would it even be better? When you're expressing your thoughts on paper, remember that this is more than a review. It's a guide to the author's revisions. If you're not gonna help the author, then don't expect the next update to be any better.

  Another thing to consider also is how to weight the content you plan on writing about. I'm not going to go into any long explanations here, but it's always better to speak more of the negative stuff than the positive stuff. After all, the author doesn't need three paragraphs describing how amazing his musical selection was if there is no reason for him to change it. Give him information that will actually help him produce something better later. Unless the game is excellent, no review should provide more than a third of positive content. You can still sell a player into playing a game with just one sentence. It is also vital that you balance your opinions in favor of the area that you are most gifted in. In other words, if you're game designing strength comes in the form of art, then devote a hefty part of your review to the graphics. It's better to help the author in the areas that you know you can. This doesn't mean that he or she won't appreciate your comments about things that you don't have amazing abilities in. But you'll be the most help in those areas that you yourself can do well.

  And that's enough of that. Anyway, we're almost home, but there are still a few threads to tie up.

  Pretend that by this point you've already written half the stuff you plan on saying. You'll probably finish the other half after you cram the rest of your pizza down your throat. All is good, right? Not quite, my friend. Not quite. The fourth question you should be asking is if you got your information correct. And to make no mistake that this is an important question, I'll write it down as a question. Is all my information correct? Let's find out.

  One thing that irritates me about any review is the total disregard to getting a name right. If I just made a game about a picture frame salesman named Biff, it's gonna get on my nerves if the guy who reviewed it keeps calling him Bill. Okay, do we understand now? The hero's name is Biff. Not Bill. He lives at the Instant Memories Shopping Center. He doesn't live at the Instant Mammaries Shaping Center. There is a fine line between picture frames and breast augmentations. For the sake of your credibility as a reviewer, get your information right. If you make a couple spelling errors, the author will get over it. But if you completely butcher the obvious, no one's gonna take you seriously. The point is that as a reviewer, you want to make sure you pass along all information that is necessary, but you also want to be sure not to make yourself out to be a fool. And this isn't suggesting that you should go researching the history of the game's development, or how it ties into the games from which the music was ripped. I'm only saying that you should be sure to get the content, as presented in the game, as accurate as possible. You can't always know that the third scene after the huge cave battle was ripped off from Mega Man 19. Just write what you know you can.

  And that's good for starters. If you're at all interested in writing good reviews, hopefully this will serve as your jumping point. Obviously there are some things that haven't been dealt with yet, like which angle of nice or mean is best to take when scrutinizing the evidence, but parts two and three should theoretically handle that.

  Last thing I want to address before sliding into part two is the nature of talent. First of all, there is no miracle to writing a great review. There are no lines that decide what's good and what's bad. The only lines that exist are the lines of helpful and useless. If you write something that's helpful to both players and authors, then you have a good review. If you don't know the difference between a subject and a predicate, then what difference does it really make? You're not here to compete with me or with anybody else. You're here to speak your mind. So do it, and don't worry about what everyone else will think. With that said, let's move into deeper territory...