How (Not) to Read a Review

I remember when you, Dan, wrote the review on Dead or Alive 4 and you gave it an 8.5. I absolutely went crazy: I almost wrote in about it. Reason? I thought it deserved an Editor's Choice (9.0) at least. But, then I checked myself: people will disagree over things like reviews. And I resolved myself to take the mature road and deal. I've abided by those rules since then.
The reviews are meant to be a guide: they're not mandatory to read before you go and spend a minor investment in a game. They're meant to help in the process of helping us readers to determine what is garbage and what is a "must-have". That's why I still subscribe to this magazine after 4 years: I want someone else's opinion on a game.
One more note- no matter how hyped up a game is in a preview, I always wait for the review for obvious reasons. The debate over "previews" versus "reviews" is another topic, however.

I agree that it is sad this article had to be written. I've been a loyal reader of OXM for many years, and there have been PLENTY of reviews that I haven't agreed with. But who cares? I have friends who don't like the same games I do. Does that mean that I'm going to change my opinion? No. Does that mean that I'm going to get mad at them for their opinion? Heck no. I think this goes back to the mob mentality most people seem to have. If other people don't like this game, why should I? And suddenly, they don't. Then there's the flip side of that. I'm going to be mad, because your opinion doesn't justify mine.

I read this magazine to get an idea of which games are going to be worth my $60. Idea is the key word there. I take the subjective matter (this is fun, it was boring, no storyline, etc.) with a grain of salt. I mostly look for objective things like the camera doesn't control well, the graphics belong on the PS2, something like that. And on those occasions when I buy a game that I love and OXM gives it a lower-than-I-would-give-it review, I read what they have to say and move on with my day.

It's just really sad that an article like this even needs to be written. OXM is, just like any other gaming mag, centered around reviews. If you never agree with the review scores, don't whine about it. Go elsewhere, since you'll never be satisfied. And Dan, 2.0 for Space Giraffe was a kindness. A brutal kindness, but a kindness nonetheless.

And for RDAY22: OXM does include a statement that equates the game to other titles (i.e. "Fable is a game for those of you who like Elder Scolls"). Look along the very left or right edges of the page and you'll see extra info like the publisher and developer, potential release dates, etc. The Reviews will have "selling points" that will give a rough idea of the game. Also, the Previews under "Xbox Next" will have a "For Fans Of" listing.

I really liked this article, mainly because I was suprised to learn that there were people that would become so personally involved and angry over what is basically an opinion(title fanboyism instead of just platform).
The only concern I have over game reviews is if a publication consistently gives overly high marks to games that are obviously undeserving - it would seriously make me question the veracity of its reviewers. I wouldn't want to be paying for a magazine of written ads.
As long as I believe the reviewer is being honest than I'm willing to listen to their advice. That trust has saved me some money in the past (Rainbow Six: Lockdown) and introduced me to some great games that I may have let slip past (Breakdown, Beyond Good and Evil). Sure I haven't always agreed on some high marks (KUF:COD or Halo 3), but it's usually a point or so quibble.
A reviewer should be, and in some ways can't help being, very picky - The sheer volume of games alone would dictate that. They should be reviewing for the pickiest of us out there. If you're writing for the gamer that accepts anything that's slapped on a disc then maybe a five as the lowest rating would make sense- no, actually it still wouldn't make sense-sorry, it's not logical to believe that just because the game runs on the console it automatically gets five points on a ten point scale.

If you have to write an article like this to stand up for your reviews, then you're doing it wrong. There should be no need for such articles. The reviews themselves should stand on their own. If you have to write an article like this, then I think that should make you think a little more about what you write. You can't just write an article like this and think it will totally absolve you from your responsibility of your reviews. They not only affect your readers, but they also effect publishers and developers. Its one thing to lowball a game review a point or two where it only affects your readers, but it's a whole other matter when your score is so far off from reality that it affects the publishers and developers bottom line. I mentioned this before and I'll mention it again your Space Giraffe score was a crime. I personally did not like the game, but it did not deserve in any way a score of 2.0(broken). It's not a broken game. Give if it up Dan, articles like these will not change people's reaction when they see a review getting a review it does not deserve. Maybe should take your own advice: How Not to Write a Review?
Tommy McClain

Here is the way I see it. I read the whole article to know what the game is about and what features it has in it. I look at the score and the positive and negatives as to why it was scored such so that I can know if it has a special camera or other things that I might not want to put up with or might be looking for in a game. Then I look at the reviewer, because I know that some reviewers have personal preferences of certain games over others and If there are games in the past that they had liked and I had agreed with them then I will be more akin to agree with them this time. I look at all this and even then if it is a type of game that I might like I might check it out.

This is the way I believe people should look at a review. They shouldn't just look at the score and be like "should have been higher" or "lower" and "well just because you didnt like dosn't mean that no one else does" because it is all just opinion. If you cant make a decision and form an opinion for yourself then you need to go back live with your parents. People should not get mad at a person just because they had stated their opinion. That is what you guys at OXM and other companies get paid to do. Like I said though this is just an opinion and there will be people that will disagree with the statement that I just made. Does that mean that I should change my opinion? NO! Should they change their opinion? NO! You should ask these people that do these things this question: If someone else came along that disagreed with their opinion, should they change it? That there is my opinion and how I feel about it.
Thank you.

Jeez this was freaking long. Could you just assign a numerical score to how well or poorly you think we're reading the reviews? Maybe give it like a 5 for all the people that aren't sure if they agree with you or not.
Btw you're messed up, Space Giraffe is a solid 8.75, you should have given it at least a 5 for all the gamers that would have liked it.
I KEED I KEED! These are great points, all. My favourite aspect of OXM is reading about a game I haven't played or demo'd for myself yet just to get a 'ballpark figure' on whether I might want to buy it, rent it, or write horrible things about its designer on GameFAQ boards.

I agree with you about how we should be using the reviews and rankings. I don't buy a game until I read a review. In fact, I won't RENT a game until I read the review.

My only gripe with you reviews is a minor one. I wish when OXM writes a review you would include in the review a statement that equates the game to other titles. For instance "Fable is a game for those of you who like Elder Scolls". Some sort of comparison to other games to help us make a decision to buy the game.

can this be added in short to the oxm faq?

I read LOTS of reviews - in OXM, online at TeamXbox, GamesRadar, Achievement Junkie (now TalkingAboutGames.com), etc. I even read and write some personal consumer reviews at sites like Goozex. My point being that attempting to make an informed purchase on the opinion of ONE SOURCE is pretty dumb. One also needs to rely upon one's own past experiences to better make the judgement of purchase. And a good demo never hurts, either! One needs to keep all these things in mind when one decides to part ways with hard earned coin.

If I read overwhelmingly positive reviews for a game in a genre I've liked before, especially when I've been keeping up with it's production history/hype, the chances are pretty good I'm gonna buy that game 1st day out. These are usually games I had pretty good feelings about in the first place, anyway.

Games I was on the fence about during production can definitely get a boost to my "must buy" list with a cadre of good reviews, too.

When the over all consensus is good to great, I'll probably put the game on my Goozex list. Or if it goes on sale, or I see it in the bargain bin...

Et-cetera and so-on...

I also like to read reviews of games I have no interest in what-so-ever, good way to weigh a particular writer's leanings. Good way to find a hidden gem. But mostly because it's usually a good way to entertain one's self...

gt: cart00nstrip

That's a good point to write an article about, but often times (and not necessarily OXM), unfair reviews are given out. All major outlets except one may give a game from 9 to 10, while the maverick in that group may give it a 5. Regular gamers, may love said game. And a lot of times, that poor review doesn't stem from poor gameplay, but from the reviewer disliking a series, developer, or voice actor in the game. It happens more often in movies than in games, but it's still quite common.

I value your axpert opinions on games. That's why I buy the magazine, and listen to the podcast.

I use the ratings as follows. Divide the review score by ten, and then multiply by $60, and that's how much I'd pay for the game. A 9.5 or 10, I'll pay the full price, and usually buy it new, but a 7 or 8 score, I can wait until it's on sale for $45, or even less used.

Fair point Dessan, and I don't mean to suggest that a reader who disagrees shouldn't disagree -- only that our scoring system shouldn't be undermined to spare feelings.

Of course fans will go out and share their opposing point of view -- but do they really "need" to "fight"? Not to knock anyone's passion for their hobby, but those seem like stronger words than I'd apply to "6.5, not 6.0" stuff. Do we "need" to have our review discredited with a "fight?"

Maybe that's another topic.

I think it is great that reviews get questioned, but I really disagree with giving games a higher score because someone may like it. That makes nearly no sense, but it takes all kinds of people!

If I may play devil's advocate for a moment, there is a legitimate reason to contend with poor reviews of a game you like, but I doubt anyone with 'review rage' thinks it through logically.

A poor review -- or even one that isn't a glowing eleven-out-of-ten -- tells some potential buyers to back off. If your review has the kind of effect you hope it does, sales of the game you didn't like would be adversely affected, and you'd be proud you saved someone's time and money. The fan of the game, though, wants the game to sell as well as it can because of the direct influence the sales figures have on sequel decisions made my the developers (or even the strength of the online community for the game). The fan then needs to go on message boards and try to undo the damage to the game's image caused by your review by convincing as many people as possible that the game really is worth buying, and that they all should go buy it now -- even if they don't like it or play it -- so that the fan can more likely enjoy a future sequel.

The fan does indeed have a personal stake in the sales of the product, and your less-than-stellar review of it indirectly affects his future. It's only natural he try to fight back however he can.

Agreed. And that is all that I ask as a subscriber.

The only OXM score that I passionately disagree with would have to be Gears of War. No doubt in my mind that that was the most overrated piece of poo. (and not just by OXM, EVERYONE scored it a 10!)

I do have to agree with OXM scale, but I view it in a different light. I see it as a game that I haven't bought yet, but interested in buying, so I usualy pop on to OXM website and see if they have given it a test drive. then I can formulate some type of opinion, because sometimes they usually get it before other do, and if you read the mag, you know the get it way before we do (betas). Its actually very helpful when wanting to buy, or saving your money in that matter. Anyways I think your grading scale is very informative and oppinionated, which what a review is... Don't take it to heart when OXM puts down a game. Its their opinion not yours. Which in returns helps most of us to make that descion to buy or not buy...That IS the question.

Couldn't agree more. A 5 is, well, a 5. It's in the middle. Average. ACCEPT IT
Gamertag: El Patro13

Someone might like it, but if you didn't, why would you score it higher?

-- http://www.nukoda.com --
Gamertag: MitchyD88

Great article Mr. Amrich! I agree. An average game is a 5.0, not a 7.5. So, an average game should get an average score. 0-2.5 is horrible, 2.5-5 is bad, 5-7.5 is good, and 7.5-9 is great. 9-10 is awesome!

I know that I really liked TimeShift, and so I wanted to see the review you gave it before I bought it. While I had wanted it to be higher, after playing it, I feel that the seven-ish rating was about right. I probably would have bought the game no matter what the score was, but the score probably would have affected (effected?) the timing.

You guys are right, I remember I brought Crackdown, at first I felt it deserved at least an 8, but after I finished it... I felt your review was spot on. I think you guys are the only review system that I go by.