On what points do you criticize a game?

[DoctorObviously]

Like, for example, when you write reviews or talk to a friend about a game. What are the first points in your head that come up? Is it the lasting appeal? Graphics? Or an overall well developed character?

Mine are:

Story
Idea
Characters
Voice Acting
World and Level design
Graphics
Amount of frustrations
Value
Lasting Appeal
Controls
AI
Music

 

[wooty]

Playability is probably my highest priority, on top of sheer frustration. YOU WILL NOT BEAT ME

 

[Julianking93]

Pretty much everything.

I review games occasionally here so I have to critique everything if I wish to be a good reviewer.

 

[Bonkekook]

Explorability, if that's a word. I like to be able to explore everything I'm shown. I hate when developers put in a lot of buildings, and then you can't even go in them to see what's there. That's part of why I loved Oblivion so much.

 

[GamingAwesome1]

I nitpick EVERYTHING, so it's kinda hard for me to not find fault in any given game, if anything annoys me or is just not up to par I will bag it out relentlessly.

 

[Mr. Grey]

Story, characters, dialogue, events, side-quests... damn near everything.

My whole anger and frustration is currently aimed at TaleWorlds for what they did to the Couching of the Lances in Mount and Blade: Warband! The fiends didn't even separate Single Player and Multi-Player when nerfed it... now being on a horse is useless.

 

[Sakurazaki1023]

There are quite a few specific things, but the main thing is fun. There are many cases where I can ignore a games faults if I'm having a blast playing it. Like-wise, if playing it feels like a battle of attrition, then I will never rate it well.

 

[More Fun To Compute]

Depends on what is good about the game. I don't judge apples based on how orangey they taste.

 

[MissGinaKid]

I mostly judge on Controls, Story and replayabillity. But if i still had fun with all these issues i get torn apart.

 

[Jinx_Dragon]

Everything!

I'm critical of games and very few manage to live up to my overly high expectations. Doesn't mean I don't have fun with them, just I have yet to come across a game I would want to carry my babies. I don't know if it is nostalgia but it seems modern games are moving further and further away from what would be perfect. Sure I like better graphics that come with modern games but it seems more often they sacrifice story, game play and other elements in favour of a game that sparkles.

 

[literallyanythingelse]

Fun - I could ignore Prototype's shitty graphics and poor voice acting cos it was such a blast to play. Same idea for other games.

 

[Pingieking]

Story
Character Design
Controls
AI
Level Design
Replayability (a minor one for me)
A combination of Originality and Execution

I think that both originality and execution are important. I will rate a very original game with flawed execution about the same as a very non-original game with great execution the same.

 

[Jamieson 90]

poor control system/setup Even a game with a good story and graphics can feel poor if the controls feel ackward.

 

[DoctorObviously]

I nitpick EVERYTHING, so it's kinda hard for me to not find fault in any given game, if anything annoys me or is just not up to par I will bag it out relentlessly.

Finally, a like-minded person. Nearly every single game I buy end up getting a score of no more than 65%.

 

[Enkidu88]

In order of importance:

Story
Gameplay
Graphics

I'll have some nitpicks on all the other areas but as long as those three things don't have serious issues I can usually enjoy a game.

 

[Nivag the Owl]

Unskippable cut-scenes make games completely unplayable for me. It's the only thing that seriously frustrates me. I can look past anything else. I tried to play Haze a couple of days ago and I had to stop playing before I even had a gun in my hand. I just can't deal with it. Graphics don't need to be good, I don't even take note of voice-acting. I get to immersed in a game to actually remember that people have put talent into creating it.

 

[Lamppenkeyboard]

It depends on the game. I wouldn't criticize Shadow of the Colossus on its lack of side quests, or the fact that there weren't nearly enough enemies to fight. That wasn't the point of the game. Note that I didn't like SotC, but it was for the 'right" reasons.

I basically only criticize a game for failing what it sets out to do. Saints Row 2 has much more fat women getting thrown in to traffic than it does story. I did not buy the game to have tears brought to my eyes, I did so to have a sandbox game worthy of my free time. It delivered for the most part, so I like it.

That is pretty much my answer for any game.

 

[DeleteThisPlease]

My main focus for any game is always the same. I focus in on one thought of 'how much fun I'm having.'

This is the reason why I'll stop playing L4D2, even though I think it's a fantastic game, after a particulary brutal/punishing round or after a Grifer kills me and my team and tea-bags our faces while a Tank is on the way, or after going 3 games in a row with a negitive K/D ratio in MW2.

It's not fun when you're loosing badly. And that makes me want to stop playing for a while and to get some food or do something until I feel better enough to go back to it.

But beyond that, I look at story, gameplay, characterisation, art direction, creativity, and how these elements are utilised in the game proper.

I could go into a detailed explanation about how I do this, but it would just end up boring you all. So that's all I have to say on the topic.