{"id":604,"date":"2008-04-16T16:00:23","date_gmt":"2008-04-16T16:00:23","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/danielprimed.com\/gaming\/general-gaming\/my-continual-frustration-with-game-reviews"},"modified":"2012-03-03T09:58:16","modified_gmt":"2012-03-03T09:58:16","slug":"my-continual-frustration-with-game-reviews","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/danielprimed.com\/2008\/04\/my-continual-frustration-with-game-reviews\/","title":{"rendered":"My Continual Frustration with Game Reviews"},"content":{"rendered":"

Even though nothing of the sort is on the blog yet, I have recently been writing a few articles about casual and non-gaming themed games. As I’ve been transferring my thoughts into a digital format I’ve started to realize some of the major issues that these types of games face when put up for review. It seems that no matter how well these games excel in their respective area (training your brain, karaoke etc.) they were always seem to fall up short when it comes to game reviews. Upon this realization I have been re-analyzing my stance on video game reviews and over the past couple of weeks I have drawn a series of conclusions that I’d like to share with you.<\/p>\n

Prelude<\/h3>\n

Before my eventual realization I noticed a few strange quirks about some games which I would now like to use as examples.<\/p>\n

\"brainMy first observation was Brain Training on the Nintendo DS, my personal view on this game, as has been probably already been mentioned in this blog before, is that it perfects a design in which itself has created. The exercises in the game are designed to test your brain. It sounds ridiculous that I have to almost re-phrase the game’s title to actually emphasis my realization of what I am doing when I play this game. Obviously I know that this game is about testing the brain but it wasn’t until I went hands on that I could admire it’s simple effectiveness which it dishes out in strides. It is an odd sensation; you can actually feel your brain working away, its quite incredible.<\/p>\n

Brain Training is almost flawless in approach and because of this I believe that it is one of the must play experiences on this system. It is unique to it’s platform and is something that demands to be sampled at least once. Not so according to the reviews generated by Game Rankings which mark this title as being decidedly average 78%<\/a> (NB<\/strong>: to the average gamer >80% is regarded as ‘average’ or not worthy of purchase).<\/p>\n

Lets take another title of interest; House of the Dead 2 and 3 Return for the Wii. This game has been praised but also severely panned at the same time with great misunderstanding from me. According to the game reviews, the dated visuals and presentation are reasons to hinder one’s purchase of this title. But, in my mind isn’t that the point of buying the compilation? Yes the visuals are dated but this is what you should expect from two last generation titles, why penalize the game for what it is trying to be? Why not review this game on the grounds of a (price reduced) retro compilation rather than a fully fledged Wii game?<\/p>\n

\"house<\/p>\n

What I am trying to drill home here is context and how the current review model falls apart with varying context.
\n<\/p>\n

Defining the Current Review Model<\/h3>\n

Mainstream video game reviews since conception have been fixated on a certain orientation of play expectancy. The typical video game review is looking for the $AUD99,AAA blockbuster title set for a core gamer market. It is only recently with the strong change in:<\/p>\n