|
Thought I'd bump this again when I had something to show for it.
UPDATES:
Valkyria Chronicles review added
Dead Space review added
Muramasa review added
Reviews:
Final Fantasy XIII
Valkyria Chronicles
Dead Space
Muramasa: The Demon Blade
New questions to consider:
How do you feel about the scoring? Is using a decimal number too ridiculously specific?
Do you like the Love it or Hate it section? Does it contain valuable enough information?
Is my writing overly cheesy and/or repetitive?
Note: Sorry for some of the ugly review formatting and pictures, I do what I can working with forum tools.
Note: I do take your criticisms to heart and will (and have) edit things you point out if I feel you are right. Just trying to get better here.
Original blog:
+ Show Spoiler +Gaming has always been my passion and I follow the industry everyday, reading and talking about it on other forums simply as a hobby. For a time, I really wanted to be a gaming journalist myself, but as I continued following it I realized just how much of a circus the whole system was. Game reviews are strongly opinionated, important information is left out, and what should be an analytical recommendation turns to something more like a ranting blog post or a something you'd see in a forum (kind of like this). No, it's not about whether you disagree with their score or not, it's the fact that the article itself is such junk and that they label a game with a score afterward for millions to look at -- it's sickening. Some journalists are just terrible writers, which is weird because you don't even need to be very advanced ( I know I'm not) to write articles for the masses, and some think they are so good that their reviews read like some sort of philosophical outlook on game design. Do readers really want all this? Isn't it just about whether or not you want to save the $60 or not? So I've finally tried my hand at this. My goal? To write a fair, objective look at a game and hopefully have the ability to recognize the pros and cons of its design as opposed to merely picking on the stuff I personally don't like or praising the things I personally love. It's impossible, I know. Everyone likes different things, and a review will always hold a slanting opinion. But I want to get it to the level where it really feels like a recommendation to you, and not to myself. An example to explain my issue with game reviews: + Show Spoiler +Think of the when the first Assassin's Creed was released. The game had huge hype and great things were expected of it. It ended up with extremely mixed reviews and whenever this happens you can be sure to find hilarious examples of how terrible gaming journalism is. Gamespot (one of the heavy hitters in reviewing) for example, gave the game a 9.0. But in its cute little "Pros and Cons" section, the only negative aspects they found with the game are: Confusing ending, a few small visual glitches Can you seriously be anymore naive? First of all, they dock the game an entire tier for just those complaints. Secondly, they didn't mention anything about the game's extreme case of repetition (not anywhere in the article either) -- which was the biggest complaint among people who purchased this game after seeing such high scores. This is one case of many, and many similar cases abound with other reviewing sites including the embarrassing use of double standards. But what we can gather from this example is: While repetition isn't always a flaw in a game, a person who's career it is to analyze games should notice when it isn't done properly. You have to make the call. Am I going to dock it because it was poorly implemented? Am I just going to mention it? Or am I going to completely neglect it because I loved it? Reviewing a game isn't a blog, it's potentially other people's money. When you make the call, you better be sure. To summarize, knowing gamers is just as important as knowing games. More ranting, if you're interested + Show Spoiler +Perhaps you've noticed these type of "reviewers" in the forums you visit. Someone mentions a game and someone else is quick to reply with, "Oh that game was terrible, so overrated -- the story was shit and the graphics are in 2D. Plus all you do is mine minerals and build troops but it's not like it matters since when you play online you get rushed in two minutes."
Game reviews today really are just glorified versions of posts like these. The game of Starcraft may very well be a terrible game to some people, and that's fine. But does it deserve to have its score lowered because a critic can't see the cinnamon sugary swirls on every bite?
I've written rough reviews on games before, some of the games I've hated with a passion -- but I knew quality and I praised it where it was deserved. The review isn't about me -- if you are going to recommend a game to a friend you make sure you recommend a game for him and not say, "oh hey I loved this, buy it!" The reason I wanted you to click on my blog: + Show Spoiler +So I'm trying to build this new philosophy around reviewing a game, one that doesn't leave anyone out. One that so people just don't merely glance at the score and rush to the store or ignore the game altogether. It's practical, in fact very similar to what we are all familiar with. I can't nitpick everything, instead I'm reasonable. If you're one of the few people out there who simply can't enjoy a game that features a plumber with a red hat then I apologize in advance for not covering all my bases. So before you read my review of Final Fantasy XIII (or any of the others I've now added), don't immediately scroll down to the score and give me that, "pshhh you over/under rated this game so hard, LOL." That's not what my reviews are about, they are about you. I want you to tell me if you feel like you are in a more understanding stance on the game and whether or not you'd buy it or not. There are no spoilers. After my big talk I'm also going to hide in defensive mode here and say that I'm still learning and I don't think I'm exactly any better then what's out there at the moment. Hopefully though you see what I'm trying to do, and constructive criticism is appreciated. My writing isn't too high level but I'm not trying to write an essay here, just a review. Still, anything that sounds terrible feel free to let me know. Link to Review(sorry I didn't want to reformat for this forum)
|
I personally hate any number system for reviewing unless its a 1 - 5 scale.
Also, I agree that the majority of professional game reviewers are extremely ridiculous. I think reviewers should mention things like "I didn't like this part but others who enjoy these type of experience may enjoy it."
Also I hate hearing that "the controls are clunky."
You wrote a really nice review and I hope you keep it up!
|
Osaka27146 Posts
I often wonder how much time reviewers actually spend playing the game. I most often use reviews for sports games (example, which NBA franchise to go with this season etc). While I know they are busy people, I find that with games that have no definitive ending, reviewers very rarely play with any depth.
A simple example would be the MLB The Show 08 or 09. Reviewers liked it a lot, and commented on all the different game features. However, comments about the game mode called "The Show" (ie the whole fucking point) were limited.
I just wish that game reviews felt like the reviewer had explored the game, rather than glanced through it.
Read your review. THAT is what I want to read when I google FF XIII review. I put this into the spotlight on the front page.
|
On March 17 2010 14:27 Manifesto7 wrote:
I often wonder how much time reviewers actually spend playing the game. I most often use reviews for sports games (example, which NBA franchise to go with this season etc). While I know they are busy people, I find that with games that have no definitive ending, reviewers very rarely play with any depth.
A simple example would be the MLB The Show 08 or 09. Reviewers liked it a lot, and commented on all the different game features. However, comments about the game mode called "The Show" (ie the whole fucking point) were limited.
I just wish that game reviews felt like the reviewer had explored the game, rather than glanced through it.
Unfortunately yeah, it might be likely that they don't finish games all the time or play them through enough. It's a business and there are deadlines, and having that big review out on the front page before the others is sometimes key.
EDIT: Thanks Mani, I appreciate it.
|
Canada5565 Posts
The only game reviews I ever read are IGN ones. I have never been disappointed or even strongly disagreed with them as far back as I can recall. Your review was really good, read just like an IGN one.
|
Canada8031 Posts
Personally, I'm not a fan of game reviews with number ratings. First, games rarely get a score below 7.0. Most of the time, this can be attributed to the fact that reviewers are unwilling to piss off potential advertisers. Second, how on earth does this number relate to how good a game is? For sections like "gameplay", the criteria used to determine the rating will most likely differ between games, so comparing games directly is difficult at best.
The only reviews I take seriously are the ones similar in nature to those done by Penny Arcade on their front page. In several short paragraphs, they tell me what they liked, what they didn't like, and whether or not it was fun. In addition, I know that they enjoy playing games, and most importantly, I know that they're willing to crap on a bad game at the expense of potential advertisement revenue. In short, I feel like I can trust their opinion as opposed to those of professional game reviewers.
Anyway, regarding your review, it seems pretty well written. I'd like to see more emphasis placed on the story though. As it stands, you've only mentioned that the voice acting is decent, if corny, and that progression is linear. Unlike something like a shooter, the story is a vital part of any RPG, and it alone can make or break the game depending on its quality. You don't even have to really get into spoilers or anything to do this. At the end of the day, all you really need to mention is whether or not the story is believable, whether you enjoyed/hated it, and why.
On a side note, I really don't know why people are so against linear gameplay. As long as the story's fine, it shouldn't matter.
Losing the party leader in a battle results in instant defeat, but the convenient "Retry"
option is always at hand for you to use. You missing a picture here? It kinda feels like there should be one.
|
On March 17 2010 15:04 Spazer wrote:Personally, I'm not a fan of game reviews with number ratings. First, games rarely get a score below 7.0. Most of the time, this can be attributed to the fact that reviewers are unwilling to piss off potential advertisers. Second, how on earth does this number relate to how good a game is? For sections like "gameplay", the criteria used to determine the rating will most likely differ between games, so comparing games directly is difficult at best. The only reviews I take seriously are the ones similar in nature to those done by Penny Arcade on their front page. In several short paragraphs, they tell me what they liked, what they didn't like, and whether or not it was fun. In addition, I know that they enjoy playing games, and most importantly, I know that they're willing to crap on a bad game at the expense of potential advertisement revenue. In short, I feel like I can trust their opinion as opposed to those of professional game reviewers. Anyway, regarding your review, it seems pretty well written. I'd like to see more emphasis placed on the story though. As it stands, you've only mentioned that the voice acting is decent, if corny, and that progression is linear. Unlike something like a shooter, the story is a vital part of any RPG, and it alone can make or break the game depending on its quality. You don't even have to really get into spoilers or anything to do this. At the end of the day, all you really need to mention is whether or not the story is believable, whether you enjoyed/hated it, and why. On a side note, I really don't know why people are so against linear gameplay. As long as the story's fine, it shouldn't matter. Show nested quote +Losing the party leader in a battle results in instant defeat, but the convenient "Retry"
option is always at hand for you to use. You missing a picture here? It kinda feels like there should be one.
Is the image not loaded for you? I'll see if I can find a replacement. Thanks.
How to discuss a story is something I'm hung up on. Like you said, they are vital to certain games and letting people know about it is crucial. But I'm not a literary analyst and I don't think I'm confident enough to critique it in finer detail, and without spoiling. I know that any story can be hated by one just as easily as it is loved by another. It's such a tough topic.
Perhaps in the future I'll figure out a way to improve it. I also didn't want the review to be too lengthy, and a quick visit to the the official game's site can give a better story summary.
I also agree that too often reviewers hand out huge scores out like candy on halloween.
I hope you noticed that I formatted the score summary in a more unique way that's tailored to the individual game. It's not the generic, "Story, gameplay, sound etc...", I scored the parts of the game that are what I believe to be its true segments. And the "Love it or Hate it" segment is going to be a part of any of my reviews, something that I wish people really pay attention to.
|
This was one of the best reviews I've read. I don't really get too many games now that I'm in college, so I haven't followed much other then ZP, and even that is for the comedic value. I read bad newspaper reviews and I remember old IGN reviews I used to read, and I like that this was more descriptive. "if you are used to dubbed anime - this is awesome, if not, maybe you won't like it" gives me waaay more information then "lol Japanese is always better kawaii desu dubbing sucks"-like bandwagons that reviewers love to jump on.
|
You, sir, are amazing! Keep writing reviews!
|
One of the most frustrating things I think in game reviews are when they break down their points into things like, Gameplay, Graphics, Sound etc. Why the hell is sound and graphics as important as gameplay? A game can look pretty and sound great but still be the worst gaming experience ever, and it will score quite well on those scales.
As for your review, it was pretty good. You do seem to present a very unbiased view on the game itself which is really nice to read. Sadly I feel that a lot of readers however want biased opinions in reviews. They want someone to rip into things they didnt like and praise things they did like even if that leads to reviews that arent exactly fair.
|
On March 17 2010 16:57 Fen wrote:
One of the most frustrating things I think in game reviews are when they break down their points into things like, Gameplay, Graphics, Sound etc. Why the hell is sound and graphics as important as gameplay? A game can look pretty and sound great but still be the worst gaming experience ever, and it will score quite well on those scales.
I think those are more of ancient remains from the days when games didn't have almost the same graphic/sound standard. Nowadays it seems all games are at roughly the same level of technical realization. So yes, those scores shouldn't be counted into a serious review. More like eMbrace did, pointing out the aesthetics, not the sheer graphics. Just because I can run some FPS with AA, DX11, super high resolution and what not, it doesn't mean it actually looks good.
|
You seem to be addressing the game at least in part from the POV of someone familiar with the genre, which is a fine way to review. Will offer some feedback when you review a genre I am interested in. I don't mean that to be dismissive, just that I can't judge your reviewing based on a review of a game from a genre I don't play at all. Almost the only reviews I pay attention to anymore is Zero Punctuation - it would be great to see some more standard reviews that aren't crap. Congrats for trying to do something about it.
|
The review isn't loading properly for me, but I'll check it later on for sure. It really sounds interesting, judging from your opening post, and the reactions in this thread.
As a comment to your point of leaving story evaluation out - you don't need to spoil plot or be a litterary major to say if you felt the story was important to the game, if you liked the way it was presented, if it was confusing and if it was something that made you care about the characters. Even without an educational background in story interpretation, your opinion about how the story worked for the game should be of importance to the review, especially in a j-RPG (which very much revolves around the story progression).
Edit: Finally got it to load. It's a nice review, although I feel some of your word usage and angling is naively optimistic at times, which fires up the good ol' cynic in me, making me automatically misinterpret (or properly interpret?) what you write by assuming you are primarily interested in making people play the game rather than giving a balanced review of a product. My point is - your angle (This game is good, you should play it) comes off too obviously, making it feel more like a sales pitch than a somewhat balanced review. Of course I understand you're enthusiastic about games you like, as am I, but you're very much falling into the same trap as other reviewers (although your reason is ideological, not financial) by putting a lot of emphasis on what you feel is good (without really comparing it to other measures of "good") while avoiding going too deep into what's bad (again, without comparison to other products).
As a sales pitch to a pal, this'd be an interesting read, but as a critial consumer reading an internet review, I'm a bit more skeptical.
|
the Dagon Knight4002 Posts
I worked as a professional game reviewer for about three years...
The way that games are reviewed means the whole thing is a mess. I've seen games reviewed that I know, for a fact, never left their shrink wrap. I've also seen games that gave us an absolute blast in the office (admittedly usually because they were a little silly or really buggy) receive review scores below a 5/10 with just about everyone there knowing we'd be playing it again after work.
Sad stuff 
|
Great review sir!
It actually made me like and understand FFXIII more. (since i was a "bad linear story" bandwagoner)
Of course there are some areas that can be improved (writing and style wise) but choice of content and balance feels good. It remind's me of good old reviews in gaming mag's, like when 3dfx was newest technology. 
With writing reviews I think its good to have one's own style and be somewheat biased toward something (genre, platform or art style) but acknowlage the other side and make a point about it in the review, like you did.
I hope you will write more and be a succesfull reviewer/writer in this harash times of anonimity and corporate greed.
On March 17 2010 20:41 plated.rawr wrote:
My point is - your angle (This game is good, you should play it) comes off too obviously, making it feel more like a sales pitch than a somewhat balanced review. Of course I understand you're enthusiastic about games you like, as am I, but you're very much falling into the same trap as other reviewers (although your reason is ideological, not financial) by putting a lot of emphasis on what you feel is good (without really comparing it to other measures of "good") while avoiding going too deep into what's bad (again, without comparison to other products).
As a sales pitch to a pal, this'd be an interesting read, but as a critial consumer reading an internet review, I'm a bit more skeptical.
I think being enthusiastic about a game (especially if it's a superbly done game) is a good thing. As I page through old game reviews of my childhood i find them cheesy and over the top sometimes, but because of that i loved reading them. Of course back then at the end there was a sceptical paragraph about shortages or problems of the game that made the whole review not only fun to read but also informative about "is this game for me?".
Since games are about entertainment, entusiastic reviews appeal to younger (or less informed mainstream player) audiences more. I think we just must be shure that there is a balance betwen fun and informative parts of reviews.
As an "experienced gamers" we can or atleast should be able to skim the article and flesh out what we need to know about a new game in our beloved series. Which is increasingly difficult nowdays. I think OP's review is a step in the right direction here.
sorry for bad english cheers!
|
I used to absolutely love gamespot and held all their reviews as fact. They used to have a really top-notch writing staff that KNEW games. Then in early 2007 their lead reviewer/editor left the site (greg kasavin) to work for EA, and jeff gerstmann took over. I think gerstmann is generally a really funny/cool guy but I think his reviews arent very good, and the quality of gamespot started to dip. Then at the end of 2007 with the whole gerstmann scandal just about every good reviewer left gamespot and I started to trust must game reviews a lot less. Then in 2008 when GTA4 came out and was just about the most praised game of all time and I played it and it sorta sucked and was OK at best, I completely stopped trusting game reviews. Basically game reviews en masse are an OK indicator to tell if a game is super bad or not, otherwise theyre all just garbage.
I like how you point out that so many game reviewers are just awful writers, I really hate it.
I hate when game reviews spend 5/6 of the review just summarizing all parts of the game and then only have opinion in the last paragraph or 2. I ALREADY KNOW WHAT THE GAME IS ABOUT.
I have the opinion that the game reviewer should be a fan of the genre that the game is in (and be writing that review for fans of the genre with maybe a mention for people who arent fans), because really im sure if I reviewed FF13 I would give it like a 5/10 because I hate JRPGs with a passion.
good blog 5/5 would read again
|
is it me or are way too many games getting way too high scores over the last 2 years from game sites? I almost feel like it's an industry wide conspiracy to try to trick consumers into buying more games to save the industry from suffering lol
also I totally agree about game reviews that just sound like advertisements. OMG I HATE THAT
|
On March 18 2010 02:26 Ideas wrote:
is it me or are way too many games getting way too high scores over the last 2 years from game sites? I almost feel like it's an industry wide conspiracy to try to trick consumers into buying more games to save the industry from suffering lol
also I totally agree about game reviews that just sound like advertisements. OMG I HATE THAT
This is the reason why I love gametrailers. There is hardly any games that get a 9/10 on that website. The highest rated games get somewhere around a 9.3 or 9.4 --and also is very rare to see-- out of 10 rating and there is always critcisms in every game. I love their reviews.
|
On March 18 2010 02:26 Ideas wrote:
is it me or are way too many games getting way too high scores over the last 2 years from game sites? I almost feel like it's an industry wide conspiracy to try to trick consumers into buying more games to save the industry from suffering lol
also I totally agree about game reviews that just sound like advertisements. OMG I HATE THAT
i was noticing that too and i think they really are just doing that for the extra cash
|
On March 18 2010 04:12 kidd wrote:Show nested quote +On March 18 2010 02:26 Ideas wrote:
is it me or are way too many games getting way too high scores over the last 2 years from game sites? I almost feel like it's an industry wide conspiracy to try to trick consumers into buying more games to save the industry from suffering lol
also I totally agree about game reviews that just sound like advertisements. OMG I HATE THAT This is the reason why I love gametrailers. There is hardly any games that get a 9/10 on that website. The highest rated games get somewhere around a 9.3 or 9.4 --and also is very rare to see-- out of 10 rating and there is always critcisms in every game. I love their reviews.
gametrailers reviews are completely awful though. there's absolutely no consistency through anything and they always praise or critique the dumbest shit.
just about the only thing their game reviews are good for is seeing long stretches of gameplay.
plus they give tons of super high scores, i think you just need to learn more of it's history. They gave GRAW like a 9.8 or something. They gave
NINE POINT EIGHT
they gave halo 3 THE SAME SCORE. AND THAT GAME SUCKED
by contrast they only gave the orange box a 9.3 and crysis an 8.8
|
Gametrailers is quite radical with it's standards for scoring, I'd have to agree. Their videos are informative but they are quite wild with their opinions.
|
On March 18 2010 13:04 eMbrace wrote:
Gametrailers is quite radical with it's standards for scoring, I'd have to agree. Their videos are informative but they are quite wild with their opinions.
if by wild you mean retarded then ya
|
On March 17 2010 21:10 SirJolt wrote:I worked as a professional game reviewer for about three years... The way that games are reviewed means the whole thing is a mess. I've seen games reviewed that I know, for a fact, never left their shrink wrap. I've also seen games that gave us an absolute blast in the office (admittedly usually because they were a little silly or really buggy) receive review scores below a 5/10 with just about everyone there knowing we'd be playing it again after work. Sad stuff
Would like you to post more about the game review industry. How do people get in? I assume through connections, as some of them can't write. Also, do you only spend 8X5 hrs/week playing games you are supposed to review? And spend a lot of that time "reviewing" games that you like? I can't fathom how the industry works at all.
|
Reviews are quite biased. Especially if the game has an extreme amount of hype, if it gets glowing reviews, that's a lot of money to be made. I wouldn't be surprised if big companies give money to people to give good reviews. It would be a drop on the ocean for them, and easy money for the reviewer. Also safe if the game in question if eagerly anticipated.
I like your concept, observational reviewing. Considering I'd like to do casual reviewing, this is a nice resource. Thanks for blogging this.
|
Some constructive criticism for your review:
1) Its overly effusive. Tone down the "magnificently awesome", the "amazingly brilliant" and rhetoric like that. Its OK in small doses, not every other sentence.
2) You use the typical "on the one hand, yet on the other hand" format. Its OK when necessary, but this the typical overusage I see in game reviews. You don't have to qualify everything so much. See what I mean in this paragraph?
The English voiceovers are for the most part very well done, but dialogue itself is often on the heavy side assisted with the frequent use of corny lines. While some of the talking has the potential to make some wince, the voice actors deliver them with the appropriate levels of emotion, uncovering some truly powerful moments between characters as the compelling narrative takes its shape. Those familiar with the dubbing of Japanese animated cartoons will easily tolerate the superior voice work of XIII, otherwise it can take some getting used to. Nonetheless, listening to what the characters are trying to express goes a long way in taking in this heart touching tale.
3) More about the qualification: take this sentence.
That's not to say this choice of gradual progression is a flaw in any sense, but it still is quite possibly the most likely aspect that may turn gamers away from this title, and at the same time cause many other to enjoy it as the same time.
Totally unnecessary sentence. Simply present the details here ("the game has a very linear structure with no room for deviation for the first 20 hours. However, the experience is still quite enjoyable because of the combat..." etc.)
Also, notice the "same time .... at the same time"
4) Grammar. I don't know if you're a native english speaker, but you might want to double check your grammar. While gaming journalists generally aren't amazing writers, on the big sites this is one of the few things they're pretty good with, and readers will pick up on it quickly.
e.g.
Its gorgeous presentation, tactical gameplay, memorable characters and captivating narrative is enough
Need plural verb- "are".
Final Fantasy XIII is arguably one of the prettiest games to ever grace the hands of gamer -- if not by technical terms then definitely by aesthetic ones.
"gamer" should be plural. "by technical terms" isn't the right idiom, the correct idiom is "by technical standards". The idiom "in technical terms" has a different meaning.
|
It depends what you look for, really. Most often if I read a review I just want to get hyped up about a game I already plan on purchasing. I feel like games really can be judged pretty well by their cover. At very least you already know their genre and how they'll play. I also don't think a big name game has every been reviewed without its graphics being called 'gorgeous,' so it just plays into the whole idea that I'm not going to the reviewer for advice.
In terms of my ideal review, if I were going for advice, I find there are some problems with yours as well. This is just constructive criticism.
Losing the party leader in a battle results in instant defeat, but the convenient "Retry"
option is always at hand for you to use.
This is only mentioned briefly, as a tag to a picture, but it's probably one of the most important points of the review. I'm not new to Final Fantasy. I'm not new to JRPGs in general. Most of your readers aren't. So why are you spending so much time on the absolute basics, like explaining cooldown when you could be telling your reader what they really want to know: How has this game improved upon the older ones? IMO the fact that you can retry is a pretty big deal since at least the FF games I've played would have forced you to watch at least a huge cutscene if they gave you a save point.
Basically, what I mean is that you're elaborating on points that are obvious (some people will like this, some people won't LOL) and barely skimming over reasons the game is a competitive force that I should buy over something else.
Good effort regardless though. I liked the screen shots 
|
On March 18 2010 23:52 Chef wrote:+ Show Spoiler +It depends what you look for, really. Most often if I read a review I just want to get hyped up about a game I already plan on purchasing. I feel like games really can be judged pretty well by their cover. At very least you already know their genre and how they'll play. I also don't think a big name game has every been reviewed without its graphics being called 'gorgeous,' so it just plays into the whole idea that I'm not going to the reviewer for advice. In terms of my ideal review, if I were going for advice, I find there are some problems with yours as well. This is just constructive criticism. Losing the party leader in a battle results in instant defeat, but the convenient "Retry"
option is always at hand for you to use. This is only mentioned briefly, as a tag to a picture, but it's probably one of the most important points of the review. I'm not new to Final Fantasy. I'm not new to JRPGs in general. Most of your readers aren't. So why are you spending so much time on the absolute basics, like explaining cooldown when you could be telling your reader what they really want to know: How has this game improved upon the older ones? IMO the fact that you can retry is a pretty big deal since at least the FF games I've played would have forced you to watch at least a huge cutscene if they gave you a save point. Basically, what I mean is that you're elaborating on points that are obvious (some people will like this, some people won't LOL) and barely skimming over reasons the game is a competitive force that I should buy over something else. Good effort regardless though. I liked the screen shots
The way the combat system works in the FF franchise is of radical importance though. A game with FF7's or FF8's combat system has a much different focus than that of FF13. A real big thing about FF series right now is how to make the battle system more innovating, tactical, and fun to play without the LOLONESHOT bosses of FF10 to artificially make them difficult.. I think in that respect explaining the very basics of how the fighting system works is important when considering the context.
|
Thanks a ton for the feedback guys, I just finished editing the review with your criticisms in mind.
|
Just finished a review for Valkyria Chronicles, bumping for feedback.
|
hey guys added a couple a more for you to look at if you have the time. i did these recently when I had some time off of school.
|
Keep it up if you have the time. I missed seeing these reviews back in March. I think you do a good job explaining the game flow and core systems without getting bogged down in too many details. In fact I wouldn't mind seeing more details.
Personally I care a lot about the core mechanics and how fun I think they are, but other people place more emphasis on aspects of the presentation like the visuals, music, voice acting, etc. These presentation components tend to be more difficult to describe objectively, but too often you use very general language in these sections.
If it's any indication of your current achievement, your reviews give me a pretty solid recommendation of which games not to play--even for games which you rate highly.
|
Thanks for the advice, it's tough deciding when to go in depth about something as I don't want to the review to be too long or be over done. I try to keep the visuals/sound information short compared to the other sections, and going too much into the story without spoiling the first few hours of games can be difficult.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
