Main Menu

Question about content

Started by Jarhead0331, March 05, 2021, 06:40:59 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Jarhead0331

I've been looking at a lot of reviews from a bunch of websites lately and I've noticed that many of them just suck. They are relatively brief and light on detailed, useful information. I just can't bring myself to write something like that for this site, or any other I have ever been associated with. I always try to be extremely detail oriented and thorough. Of course, the drawback to this is that reviews of complex games are very few and far between because I just don't have the time to devote to playing AND then writing.  But maybe my approach is wrong. Maybe I should accept that not all reviews need to be a five volume treatise...

So, how do you guys prefer your reviews? Go vote!
Grogheads Uber Alles
Semper Grog
"No beast is more alpha than JH." Gusington, 10/23/18


W8taminute

I voted for balanced however let me add some more detail to my answer. 

There are times when a game review should be semi-balls deep.  For example if we're talking about a game like Stellaris (which I own) I would like to know more about how ground combat works as well as how much control do I have over it.  I'd want the reviewer to give me all the juicy details about space combat as well.  Finally the  more detailed review on the economy model of the game would be all that is needed for a mature gamer to decide if the game is a buy or die deal. 

Other games like Civ 6 (which I don't own) just need to give enough detailed info on each aspect of the game.  Maybe a little comparison to earlier games in the series would be helpful as well. 

I think what it comes down to is that each of us have a deep interest in one or more particular nuances of certain games that if we could just get a decent review on in enough detail we could decide if we buy or not.  Detail should be more of a 'how to do certain things in some cases' not a PHD doctorate paper spanning thousands of pages which basically tells me nothing about the game I'm trying to figure out if I should buy.  For a thesis paper may look damn impressive and bring credibility to a site it does nothing for me to help me know if I would like the game or not.  Just tell me how stuff is done, and without opinion of it's good or not because let me decide.
"You and I are of a kind. In a different reality, I could have called you friend."

Romulan Commander to Kirk

Gusington

Hard to argue against going balls deep...

But with that said, it takes me a long time to go balls deep, like 20-30 hours depending on the game, so at times when writing I break up a longer review into 3-4 parts.

Just a look from a writer's perspective.


слава Україна!

We can't live under the threat of a c*nt because he's threatening nuclear Armageddon.

-JudgeDredd

IICptMillerII

Agreed with Gus. The problem with extremely detailed and deep reviews is that it takes a really long time to produce the actual review.

I prefer more depth and detail, especially if it is something that I am considering dropping money on, but at the same time I think it would be silly to have to wait upwards of a month or more for a review on a game on whether I should buy it or not.

Of course, sometimes it can take a month of playing a game to know if it is actually worth it or not. I think there is a fine line between lots of detail but too late, and too little detail but super early.

jjeanamantog

Most web admins fill their site with appropriate content, hiring freelancers and content writers and checking their work with the SEO content checker services; that's the kicker.

Jarhead0331

Grogheads Uber Alles
Semper Grog
"No beast is more alpha than JH." Gusington, 10/23/18


Pete Dero

Sometimes I prefer non appropriate content.

Gusington

I think you're in the right place then.


слава Україна!

We can't live under the threat of a c*nt because he's threatening nuclear Armageddon.

-JudgeDredd

Sir Slash

Better not let that guy see, The Lingerie Channel then.  ::)
"Take a look at that". Sgt. Wilkerson-- CMBN. His last words after spotting a German tank on the other side of a hedgerow.

Pete Dero

Sometimes I prefer The No Lingerie Channel.

W8taminute

Now I see an opportunity for a corny joke here but I will refrain.  This is probably not the appropriate place. 
"You and I are of a kind. In a different reality, I could have called you friend."

Romulan Commander to Kirk

W8taminute

But hey back on topic. 

One thing I forgot to mention is that when I read reviews I don't care to hear if the reviewer likes the game or not.  The real question is am I going to like the game or not and I can't tell unless I either buy the game or read a really good un-opinionated article that gives me enough info for me to make a decision. 
"You and I are of a kind. In a different reality, I could have called you friend."

Romulan Commander to Kirk

Boggit

Having written nearly 70 articles for Grogheads over the years, I can offer some food for thought:

1. Reviews can take a long time (potentially several days work) if you are going to do them reasonably well.

2. You have to play the games sufficiently to become conversant with it well enough to comment on it. That can also take a long time to get your head around them;

3. A theme e.g. an AAR is sometimes a good way forward. a) it makes things interesting for your readers and b) it gets to put game play into context, and c) it allows you to concentrate on a particular aspect(s) to avoid getting bogged down;

4. Complicated games virtually require you write a book/dissertation/manual to cover all aspects, and whilst I was prone to do that in the early days it took forever to produce them. Then you realise post publication that you'd missed something, or would have written things differently. Some of my earlier reviews could be up to 7-9,000 words long (just short of an undergraduate dissertation), whereas now they vary, but usually at around 2-3000 words. Less is more sometimes;

5. Don't forget that pictures and captions add a layer of extra chrome, which also need to be thought about and made relevant to the main text;

6. I often will give my opinion, if only as feedback as to what I think of the game. When I recommend a game it is because I think it is good, but like W8taminute says it won't tell you if you'll personally like the game. FWIW, those who follow my recommendations are the best judges of whether my tastes coincide with theirs. I have done reviews on games I don't like very much, but even then I tend to be somewhat muted in my criticism as others may like the game anyway. If I can say something positive I will, but I'm loathe to say bad things directly about games - you need to read between the lines of what I'm saying sometimes. I recall a few years back one game designer having a rant because my review of his game was not exactly sparkling with praise. My thoughts were that if he wanted a better review he could bloody well design a better game rather than one that made watching paint dry an interesting option! Fortunately that is fairly rare as I try to concentrate on games that interest me in the first place. Why waste the time and effort doing a game you have little interest in?

Positive or critically constructive feedback and questions are always welcome. The Grogheads community is one of the main reasons I put in the effort to do these articles. In the Feedback sub forum I am happy to engage and will usually try to give a reasonable answer to reasonable questions.

Just a thought for those who have unreasonable expectations of writers: I don't appreciate "entitled" readers. I remember once getting criticism for my "delay" over a review that came out around 6/9 months after release. It took ages to do as there was a lot to look into and the 7.500-8,000 word article ended up split into two (and FWIW, it was IMHO a good article). For people like that it may be a surprise but I also have a life outside of hobby writing. Sometimes it can take an effort of will when you have other things going on. I'm not an owner of the website, nor am I paid for my work, so it's nice when the community expresses some appreciation for the effort made (which to be fair they usually do O0).

Most of the time writing articles is rewarding as most people seem to like them. I think a lot of that is because I'm a gamer first and foremost who is actually interested in the games I write about. I suspect from having met a number of full time or "professional" game journalists in the past that some will knock out articles very quickly just to stay on top of release schedules, but as Jarhead suggests will not have much to say beyond product marketing hype. The reason for this is often tight commercial time scheduling for knocking out an article, and to be honest from what I have seen I suspect some either neither play the game at all, or maybe just a few turns without any knowledge of it before writing a generic article. It's a sad state of affairs as some people come to the industry with great intent, but having to write a lot of articles to short order means that a) learning multiple games enough to write sensibly on them is very time consuming; and b) soon becomes a chore rather than fun to do. The consequence of this are these very lightweight articles, which are often little more than the PR packs sent by the publisher/developer and repackaged into an article for the reader just to stay on top of the publication schedule. :( To be fair, I have a measure of sympathy for these journalists because of the pressure they're under, but it doesn't address the quality of their work.

I think feedback is great for improving things and also as to what sort of games you want to hear about. :bd:
The most shocking fact about war is that its victims and its instruments are individual human beings, and that these individual beings are condemned by the monstrous conventions of politics to murder or be murdered in quarrels not their own. Aldous Huxley

Foul Temptress! (Mirth replying to Gus) ;)

On a good day, our legislature has the prestige of a drunk urinating on a wall at 4am and getting most of it on his shoe. On a good day  ::) Steelgrave

It's kind of silly to investigate whether or not a Clinton is lying. That's sort of like investigating why the sky is blue. Banzai_Cat