What are you looking for...

[Trolldor]

In a review?

As a first-time game reviewer I want to ask your opinions on a gameplay review, as an average consumer what key details are you looking for?

I'm asking these questions mostly because I find a lot of reviews don't really explain how a game plays, they just make judgements.
For example, the reviewer might claim the controls are clunky, but he won't expand on why they are so.

For reference I'm doing 'Dawn of War - Retribution' and it's my first review ever, including screenshots.
I've had a piece of writing formally published already, but it was a short story rather than a review so this is new territory for me... and I write things slowly. Hopefully I'll have it up by the end of the week, but with uni smacking my face (fuck you group tasks) in probably not.

 

[Mrrrgggrlllrrrg]

What I look for in a review about anything really is "Is it worth my money?".

 

[RedEyesBlackGamer]

I look for a description of the story, talk about gameplay mechanics and how well they work, how long it is, and whether it does the job it set out to do. The last one is important. Look at Naruto Ultimate Ninja Storm 2: it set out to be a game that fans would love and buy. To the average fighting game fan, it wasn't anything special, but the true to the manga story made it a must for fans.
I also like the reviewer to finish the game they are reviewing with the time it took them to finish (approx.). That gives me a good idea by how the reviewer played how long it'll take me to play it.
Edit: Only review things you know about or have interest in. I hate reviewers who try to review a Yu-Gi-Oh! game and say they don't play or watch the show. Their review is officially invalid to me. Don't review genres you don't like. You won't be able to give a clear, unbiased review of a game in full.

 

[iLikeHippos]

Analyze what Yahtzee is doing right and the little details of his show and you know just what to do. ^.^

In all seriousness, the one thing that brings reviews down most of the time is when they fail to captivate the interest of the reader/viewer. This is a concept critics like Yahtzee have gotten a good grasp on.

Be edgy, critical, funny and yet informative. I'd recommend it. Anything else is just trivial.

 

[New Troll]

Personally I don't care about gameplay, or any other single aspect of a game than for the game as a whole. Terrible gameplay does not mean an unenjoyable time.

But what I enjoy most in reviews, or at least find most helpful, is comparing the aspects of the reviewed with other stuff. I'm a visual person who's been around, so telling me the gameplay is a lot like this game and the feel of the game is sort of like that game and the fun fctor is exactly like doing whatever fun or not so fun action.

Also jokes that make cherry coke squirt out my nose is a plus.

 

[TheAweDude]

I look for you to not spoil anything about the story. I realize some people want the story spoiled, so put it at the end. Put all the gameplay in an objective manner at the start. For example, if it is an RTS, compare it to another game. Don't say, when the rebel faction starts it's offensive, the gameplay gets slow. Say: the gameplay does get slow 20-30 minutes in, but after that it gets better.

Also, make comparisons. In the RTS example, you could say it has the ease of SupCom2, the speed of Starcraft but the story of, some other RTS with bad story. X + Y - Z + Q

 

[Griphphin]

Give it an air of having given the game a fair shake. If there's one thing that's annoying it's feeling like the reviewer is out to get the game. If an element is bad, talk about how it's bad, but if an element is good, don't downplay it to perpetuate the trend of badness.
[sub](It's a good thing I don't take ZP seriously )[/sub]

 

[More Fun To Compute]

Don't try to inject a lot of your personal position and ideas too much into the review. This is annoying. If you think that all games should be exactly the same as your favourite game and every design choice that makes it different to that game is a stupid mistake then keep it to yourself and try to appreciate and understand what is there.

Do try to describe how the game plays.

Don't spoil the game by over describing everything like a let's play or bullet point list of the major plot points.

Do point out parts that are particularly boring, broken or original.

 

[Iwana Humpalot]

Do not spoil even a tiniest bit of the story. If the game is a sequel, compare it to the game that it is a sequel to. Find your own way of doing these reviews, some type of way that make you unique, i don't want anymore random game reviewers.

 

[DustyDrB]

I want reviews to answer a few questions:

-How does it run? Is it buggy or is it polished? Do the gameplay mechanics work?

-How do you play the game? Sometimes, comparison to other games' mechanics work here.

-How much single-player content is there?

For platformers:

-How is the level design?

For RPGs:

-How does it handle genre standards like inventory, leveling, story, and character customization?

Other things that help, but aren't a must:

-Are there good boss fights?

-Is the story interesting (without providing spoilers)?

 

[Trolldor]

Thanks guys.

Will take it under consideration.

No, really. I'm not just saying that.
Promise.

 

[migo]

It's rather hard to say with a first review. I actually check out multiple reviews by the same reviewer.

For instance, the Pay, Rent or Pass guy at Machinima seemed like he did a good review the first time through, but after watching 5 of them, he said pretty much the same thing about all of them, which makes him largely useless.

Usually now I'll look up a youtube video to see how the game plays, so I don't need a description of how it plays, but some detail on something done very well or very poorly is nice.

 

[Lord Beautiful]

Edit: Only review things you know about or have interest in. I hate reviewers who try to review a Yu-Gi-Oh! game and say they don't play or watch the show. Their review is officially invalid to me. Don't review genres you don't like. You won't be able to give a clear, unbiased review of a game in full.

Actually, that sounds like the most sure-fire way to get an unbiased review. Trouble is, if that's a genre you like, you actually want the reviewer to be biased in favor of that genre.

Me, what I look for in a review/reviewer boils down to "everything." Tell me everything you possibly can about a game's design so I can get a clearer image.

 

[RedEyesBlackGamer]

Edit: Only review things you know about or have interest in. I hate reviewers who try to review a Yu-Gi-Oh! game and say they don't play or watch the show. Their review is officially invalid to me. Don't review genres you don't like. You won't be able to give a clear, unbiased review of a game in full.

Actually, that sounds like the most sure-fire way to get an unbiased review. Trouble is, if that's a genre you like, you actually want the reviewer to be biased in favor of that genre.

Me, what I look for in a review/reviewer boils down to "everything." Tell me everything you possibly can about a game's design so I can get a clearer image.

I meant that since the only people interested in such a niche game are fans, trying to review it as a newbie doesn't tell the majority of the potential buyers anything.

 

[Kpt._Rob]

I generally want to see a description of the gameplay mechanics, what makes them bad or good, and what makes them fun or monotonous. Since gameplay mechanics are often hard to describe in words, I really like to see pictures that emphasize what I'm being told about the gameplay. I also like to see some small description of the story (though nothing really in depth, I hate spoilers), as well as the aesthetic.

Other things, if there's multiplayer or Co-op I like to know what it plays like, if it's any fun, and, as basic as this may seem, how many people can play and if it's local or online.

And finally, any little features that really made the game great or bad, a really fun collection challenge (like Arkham Asylum had for instance) or really annoying little things that take away from the game.

 

[mireko]

It could be useful to review in the context of the genre. For example, a lot of reviewers instinctively criticize linearity and strategic combat in JRPGs, or cover-based shooting in TPS games like Gears of War, without taking into account that those elements are expected of games in those genres.

While it can make for perfectly fair criticisms of the genres themselves, it's somewhat pointless to attack a game for adhering to those conventions, because fans familiar with them will lose faith in your opinion.

TLDR: Don't review genres.