Reviews for the consumers, Critiques for the developers

Pogilrup

New member
Apr 1, 2013
267
0
0
After listening to the stream with Raph Koster yesterday, I've thought about the importance of people who critique a game based from a cultural or political stand point. In that stream, Mr. Koster made a distinction between reviewing a game and critiquing a game.

Reviewing the game, as I've perceived it, seems to be about whether the game is worth the so and so dollars and what one can expect. Critiquing the game, as I see it, is about analyzing the game from a certain cultural or political perspective with an emphasis on the subtext of the work.

Personally, I feel that reviews can contain some critique but not to the point where the critique on a few cultural/political pitfalls can overshadow the other aspects of the game.

As for critique, I feel that it serves developers better than it does consumers. Critique can allow developers to explore new stories and new PoV. New stories and new PoV is always good if one is seeking to be be fresh and/or stand out from the crowd.

Captcha: Take wrong turns

What?
 

veloper

New member
Jan 20, 2009
4,597
0
0
I doubt game companies would give a damn about such cultural critiques.

There are critics (reviewers) like Total Biscuit who do recommendations for their gamer audience and there's advertisers or "reviewers" like on IGN, who create hypes.
All that matters is their influence on the consumer. Talking at a developer when you're not in sync with their audience is a waste of time.
 

Pogilrup

New member
Apr 1, 2013
267
0
0
veloper said:
I doubt game companies would give a damn about such cultural critiques.

There are critics (reviewers) like Total Biscuit who do recommendations for their gamer audience and there's advertisers or "reviewers" like on IGN, who create hypes.
All that matters is their influence on the consumer. Talking at a developer when you're not in sync with their audience is a waste of time.
You feel that cultural critiques aren't useful?

It could give an edge to a developer who is seeking to do something new.
 

veloper

New member
Jan 20, 2009
4,597
0
0
Pogilrup said:
veloper said:
I doubt game companies would give a damn about such cultural critiques.

There are critics (reviewers) like Total Biscuit who do recommendations for their gamer audience and there's advertisers or "reviewers" like on IGN, who create hypes.
All that matters is their influence on the consumer. Talking at a developer when you're not in sync with their audience is a waste of time.
You feel that cultural critiques aren't useful?

It could give an edge to a developer who is seeking to do something new.
I believe that a true artist, who is free from publisher constraints (like maybe a really small indie company for example), would just make whatever the hell he or she wants to make. Artistic freedom and all that.

The big companies and ambitious indies should be interested in sales primarily, which means simply making what your audience wants.
They'll want to know what their potential customers like, not the outsider perspective.

There's much to be said for fresh ideas, but those should really some from designers on the team and with sales potential in mind (unless it's indies, with no responsibilities except for themselves).
 

death525

New member
Aug 29, 2009
149
0
0
I don't know how well that would work separating the two. People are going to have baggage which will always affect their opinions. Reviews are always going to be opinion based so I do not think separating the review from the critique will be possible or improve the current state of game journalism. Actually I would like to see more reviewers put a little bit more of their taste into reviews. At least that way, I can find reviewers who I know have similar taste to me and I can follow them rather than the current trash that most sites are. That's why I read and trust most of Jim's reviews.