Wednesday, September 2, 2015

The Myth of the objective review

Logo property of Metacritic.com


I'm back from the Holiday and looking forward to Mario Maker. So lets talk about something completely different.

After reading a not so warm review of Metal Gear Solid 5 and the expectable backlash that followed I thought about it. I have already talked about reviews, not taking them personal, but I think it's time for it once more. With Gamergates one year anniversary just passing and their crusade for a more ethical games media still underway, it's a topic that is as fresh as it was one year ago, when the whole movement started.

Firstly let me say once more, don' take reviews personal. Especially not the scores. The score is the thing that's the most irrelevant in a review. It's just a number, without any meaning. I would love it, if it disappears all together. But this is a vain dream. The vast majority of people still wants an easy way to compare Super Mario to Call of Duty, even if the two aren't comparable in the slightest. And it's a lot easier to only see the 9/10 GTA 5 got and fuss over it, instead of reading the whole review.

But enough of that. There are no objective reviews, because there is hardly any objective press. It's always to a degree subjective. Even with things like tech news, where just the specs of a new device are reported, there is a certain degree of subjectivity. The room you give a specific feature, above some other, is a subjective influence on an objective report. Some reporter may think that the backwards compatibility deserves more room than the online features or the shop, while other think the exact opposite. Not because of malice, but because different people have different viewpoints. Because of that a review of, for example, The Evil Within from a writer, who is not a huge fan of horror games, will be completely different than one from a Shinji Mikami enthusiast. Both are ill suited for writing a review, but because of completely different reasons.

And this doesn't only apply to reviews. The recent Jimquisition talked about this in detail.



Everything around us influences us. So even if you try your best to go to a review or preview event with an open mind it will influence you. This events are carefully crafted spaces to provide you with an optimal experience and later, when you write about it, you will associate this with the game.

Ok so there are no objective reviews and previews. What shall we do then? Forget about them all together? Well of course not. The answer is simple. Ethics and honesty. This not only applies to the classic games media, but especially for Youtubers. Just be honest with your audience. If you were invited to a special preview event for Just Cause 3, which started with a sky dive from a plane onto a luxurious island resort, where you played the game for 3 hours and then relaxed a the pool (this is extremely exaggerated of course) then tell this to your audience, either in front of your Video or article. And not only hidden in the descriptions or at the end. Even the, excuse my words, dumbest idiot in the galaxy and beyond shouldn't be able to miss the information. Hiding it only makes you look bad in the eyes of everyone, when it inevitably comes to light, while telling outright gives your audience a valuable information, which may lead them to have a more critical approach to your piece, which is totally fine. Sponsored content, exclusive preview events and such things are all fine. It's how the industry works (even though I would prefer otherwise). Just don't hide it. Your audience isn't dumb. They'll understand it.

And now lastly lets return to the review in detail. I already told you that I don't really like scores at the end, even though I also do it myself. (Which may or may not change in the future. Still undecided.) A review is always an objective piece from it's author. Some may like the art style of a game, while others call the graphics outdated. Still the goal of every review should be to give a complete as possible overview of the game. Detailing the aspects of gameplay, sound, graphics, controls, design, story and characters. Of course every reviewer will weigh things differently. I, for example, don't delve all too deep into the graphics aspect of a game, because the gameplay is much more important to me. But this is ok. As a customer you should, and can, find the review site, which is most suitable for you in terms of style and weighing of factors, but not certainly the one that agrees with you the most.

And lastly I wanted to share with you the review style I would find the most appealing. It's probably not really feasible, because it takes a lot of time and space. I like the concept of the Famitsu, where four people review a game. I would tone it down a little though. Two people should review a game. Not together, but each for him or herself. They both write a review and can give up to five points. After both reviews are written they come together and have a talk about the game, where they discuss it thoroughly. After all that the reviews are both published, along with the discussion and the score (adding both 5 point scores to create a traditional 10 point one). This kind of dual review, while still not objective of course, would give readers a varied outlook on the game.

In the end there is only this to say. There is no such thing as an objective review. But we still should try to be as objective as possible, while reporting. And we should be honest with our audience. Because our respect is the least they deserve.

And as always

thanks for reading

No comments:

Post a Comment