Gamepad Dojo Reviews

[Kim]

So, after going a while without updating the site I recently added two reviews.

Mirai Gen Reviews Mirror's Edge

NonCon Reviews Persona 4

Go ahead and critique the reviews, I'm more than open to it. I plan on doing reviews for MadWorld and FFXII as soon as I finish the latter, so expect those in the near future.

Also, I'm aware that the site is as ugly as ever. I'll get around to fixing that... eventually.

[bluestarultor]

Well, first off, Mirai's on a wee bit of thin ice for not being able to give a rating. Especially when that's what most people look for in a review. On the other hand, he justifies it. What really is a major issue is that there's no problem with adding a qualifier to a recommendation, and he bounces between saying he liked it, saying he won't recommend it, and saying that people need to try it right after saying it's not worth a rental. There is a smell of sandals in the air, if you know what I mean. What could remedy that is simply putting down two groups: a stance for people who meet criteria that might allow them to enjoy the game, and a separate stance that can serve to warn away people who will find it frustrating.

Also for Mirai's review, it seems to ramble a bit in no constructive way. Some of this is because of the format. There are lots of small paragraphs and too much blank space for the review's own good.

In short, the info is all pretty good, but there needs to be one or more solid stance, and the format needs major work to keep readers interested in continuing down the page.




As for your review, the format is much better. There's maybe a couple grammatical errors, but overall, it's not too bad. Something I do see is there's a little too much attention paid to insignificant game details, like the status defects, which gives them seemingly undue importance compared to more important details, like the weakness system.

Also, in one case, there's a large shift in subject that's not matched by a large space in between. When you go from talking about battle to talking about the Social Links, there should be a clear break in between. In that area, I think things might actually be a bit better-explained with a bit more detail, although what you have is pretty good.

Another thing that strikes me is that you start the review long and then it drops off and dwindles to nothing after you're done with gameplay. It looks like you had a review, realized your deadline was in an hour, and threw together a small comment for the rest. The effect is somewhat unsatisfying in that there's so much hinted at, but so little delivered. In terms of graphics, examples might be in order, like if there's a level that looks like the inside of a beehive, you should work it in somehow, and there's no mention of what KIND of music the game has. Many people played P3 and loved the music in the game because it was executed so well, even though they despised the genre. If the case is the same, just say, "hey, it's well-executed, so lovers of Beethoven-inspired heavy-metal rap ballads (or whatever) will drool for the soundtrack, and it shouldn't turn too many people completely off while they play." Also, WHY does the main battle theme need to die in a fire? Is it a totally inappropriate whale-song Enya remix? Are there high, annoying notes all over the place? Is it just poorly put-together?

Most importantly, the difficulty gets next to no attention. What you need to do is express in anecdotal terms how difficult the game is. Like "OMG THE FIRST BOSS BEAT ME TO DEATH WITH MY OWN LIFE BAR ON EASY!" or "the first few battles feature monsters who take your party over their knees and spank them, just to set the tone" or "the enemies always seem to know your party's weakest member and focus on him, and never fail to exploit a weakness in your current Persona." Just saying, "it's hard, yo!" doesn't provide enough info for the reader to judge by.

Also, counting off the systems only goes so far. Quest 64 had great systems, but the implementation blew. Your gameplay area could use some subjective opinions on how well certain things worked and what those things were.

Basically, the review boils down to a couple minor technical errors and a need to less recount facts and more give an understandable opinion and supporting examples.

[Daimo Mac, The Blue Light of Hope]

Oh jesus. Nonny I'll have a retro review for you tomorrow evening.

[Bells]

I don't like formulaic reviews. Never did. Even when i was going on IGN for reviews, i would always start at the end. With the closing comments. Because. they are more personal. And if i liked or got curious, i would track back for the technical stuff.

The same reason why i never watch trailers of games or "official videos". I look for gameplay footage. To see what is it like to actually be playing that game...

I also don't like Scores... they tend to be way too much loose to serve as any kind of basis. What makes a game B and what makes it B+? What is a 8.5 game and a 8.7 game? Or a 8 game compared to a 7.5 one?!

This is why, whenever i talk about a game i take a page out of this guy

http://www.youtube.com/user/wiiviewr?blend=1&ob=4

Wiiviewr on Youtube. Just a dude, in his house, doing reviews. Sometimes with his kid. He classifies the game in a way that i think is spot on. Just "buy, rent or skip". Even when he comes down on games that i like (like Tales of Symphonia 2, which he didn't finish.) i can't find an ounce of bias on him nor dislike his work. He gives a personal account of what it was like for him to sit down and play the game, and he goes for the non-mainstream titles, which i really appreciate.

EDIT: Also, he is appreciated on Youtube to the level where Ubisoft offered him free games to review and added him to their Press Release list.

Maybe Gamepad Dojo can become one of these places i go to hear about games without having to dodge Bias =P i already like what you guys put there, but of course, there is room for improvement.

[CelesJessa]

Randomly! I think there maybe needs to be more pictures with the reviews. Maybe I am easily distracted but I think huge chunks of text can be taken easier if there's some relevent screenshots with it (a funny caption to go with the screenshot is also a plus), especially when you're discussing visual aspects of the game.

Plus it makes the long (4+ pages equivalent?) essays more bearable and wouldn't make people such as, say, me, just skip right to the final word to get the gist of it instead of having to read that huge wall of text.

[Kim]

Thank you all for your criticism. It was much needed. I've been wanting to add pictures, so I'll probably start doing that and modify existing ones.

Blues: I'll probably shorten the status effect bit down a little. Also, reason that the gameplay part was so long versus everything else is that there was much more to discuss and I didn't know what I should cut out of that part and add to the others to make it more balanced. I didn't want the other parts to feel needlessly drawn out. Any tips? Also, with the difficulty part, explaining that is probably going to be very hard, though I want to figure out a way of simplifying that into categories or something.

Bells: I change my review style around on what I feel suits the game best. Persona 4 I felt would be easier to review if categorized, whereas, if I remember correctly, I just blather on and on about Mother 3. Thing with points is that I don't change anything to fit the points, they're just there for reference for those that like them. In fact, I'll do a quick number scale for what each number would be.

10: Not perfect, as no game is, but raises the bar for video games in one or more regards, with almost no flaws whatsoever.

8-9: Excellent. Great game, worth owning. Only a few minor flaws hold it back.

6-7: Very good. Worth at least a rent, the experience is hampered by one or more flaws.

5: Average. Okay, worth a rent if you are particularly interested in the game or genre, but several flaws keep it from being a worthwhile gaming experience.

3-4: Bad. Not really worth playing, unless for free. Does a few things right, but they are overpowered by the things done wrong.

1-2: Very bad. Just not worth playing at all. Flawed on a fundamental level and cannot be salvaged.

0: Can't be classified as a game. Generally used to refer to the glitchy, broken, godawful messes that most game magazines give a 3.

I'm not sure I'd say I'm without bias, but I appreciate the compliment.

So, in short, make the reviews more personal, add pictures, and balance them out? Can do.

[Bells]

we all are biased! Nobody can review games without having some sort of biased.. but as long as you don't hide it and play clean about it, nobody has the right the complain... after all, is your review.

[Kim]

Pretty much. I don't pretend to be unbiased. Basically, by being upfront about it I want people to be able to know whether they'll share my opinion on games.

[Mirai Gen]

[Mirai] bounces between saying he liked it, saying he won't recommend it, and saying that people need to try it right after saying it's not worth a rental.

Hey guys, Blues got it.

I'm going to work on another review probably at some point that's more traditional but I'm not sure - since I started doing the podcast I've yet to feel the Traditional Reviewin' Itch.

[bluestarultor]

I whipped up a sample review that's both categorized and convenient. I'll attach it to this, and if someone wants to actually use it, I suppose it could be a guest review or something. I dunno. Don't really have the time to play games and do this kind of thing. To put it this way, I gave myself 10 categories worth 10 points each, for a total of 100. Before reviewing, I defined exactly what each point stood for and a recommendation scale, and then proceeded throughout the whole review, marking down what I really thought about each category. Honestly, the end result surprised me, not because I thought it was too high, but because I thought it would be higher, since I really like this game. By setting forth the parameters ahead of time, I took a largely subjective notion of a game's qualities and turned it into a surprisingly objective score and recommendation.



*Edited with updated version.*