What Are You Playing?

Hmmm you know, I'm seriously considering creating a Games Review thread.

Seeing other people's views on games is never a bad thing, especially if it goes against the norm.

What do folk think? maybe take turns at reviewing games? We could generally stick with "new releases" but also one person per month could do a "classic" review, of something like KOTOR or MarioKart or something, a game we all assume people prob have played but some people might have missed?

Good idea Dubz. We'll have to all agree on what rating system we use. ie; is the final score an average of the scores for graphics/playability/longevity etc or just a one-number (well considered) gut-feeling? And is 7/10 considered an average game and 5/10 really quite poor, or is 5/10 average (being halfway between best and worst possible scores)?

But yeah, a reviews section sounds good! We could do movies to. Oooo! And gadgets! And recipes!!

Ign.com wrote:

10.0 (Masterful): "It doesn't get any better than this..."
9.5 to 9.9 (Incredible): "Without a doubt, these are must-own titles that stand at the top of their field."
9.0 to 9.4 (Outstanding): "...it's a worthwhile experience with just a few imperfections."
8.5 to 8.9 (Great): "An excellent gaming experience that misses the boat in just a few key areas..."
8.0 to 8.4 (Impressive): "...they're still a heck of a lot of fun and should appeal to most gaming enthusiasts."
7.5 to 7.9 (Good): "...they're still entertaining enough to provide genuine entertainment while they last."
7.0 to 7.4 (Decent): "...they still boast enough credible ingredients to make them fun in smaller doses."
6.0 to 6.9 (Passable): "Rent these games or download the demo first before spending your hard-earned money on it."
5.1 to 5.9 (Mediocre): "...only diehard fans of the particular genre will get any enjoyment out of middling games like these."
5.0 (Meh): "...the epitome of "middle of the road."
4.0 to 4.9 (Poor): "...you'll probably find yourself returning to the store for a refund."
3.0 to 3.9 (Bad): "...you know you have some major suckage going on."
2.0 to 2.9 (Terrible): "Maybe the cat could find some use for them."
1.0 to 1.9 (Abysmal): "The absolute worst of the worst."
0.1 to 0.9 (Worthless): "Okay, so we lied....We think of them as sewage in a box."
0.0 (FAIL): "Run far, far away and never look back."

Ign.com rating system

I can't see the point in 7 being average really why have more scores for saying how bad a game is then for how good it is?
Good idea though, I'm interested in your views on The witcher looks interesting

Well here's my recommendation for a game review template:

GAME NAME
Platform: PC, Xbox360, PS3, Mac, etc
Genre: FPS, RTS, RPG, Platformer, Sim, MMORPG, Puzzle etc
Theme: Sci-Fi, Fantasy, Contemporary, Abstract, Family, Horror, Action, Comedy etc
Synopsis: A brief run-down of the game, summed up in a short paragraph (you could use the game creators' own blurb for this)
Visual Representation: Video, Cover Art, Screen-shot, whatever so long as it "shows" the game.

First Impressions: Quite literally, what you thought of the game the first time you played it; what you liked and disliked about it and what really stuck in your mind.
Score it out of 10, using those wonderful IGN.com ratings Nord found

Graphics: Review what you think of the graphics/animations in the game, giving good and bad opinions as you see them. This could involve not only "in-game" work, concept art, in-game cinematic videos, right down to the visual style, use of colours, anything you like really. Not everyone has the same graphical capability on their systems so it might also be worth mentioning what graphics card you are using if it is on PC/Mac.
Again, score this out of 10 at the end of this paragraph as a summary.

Audio: Covering in-game sound effects, background music, soundtrack, voice-acting (if any), any and all sound should be reviewed here, again try and be as thorough as possible to give people an idea of what to expect. As with graphics, not everyone will have surround sound home-theaters connected to their game, so if it is PC/Mac game it might we worth mentioning what your sound capabilities are.
Again, score this out of 10 at the end of this paragraph as a summary.

Gameplay & Story: This one's a doozy and often hard to review subjectively, but try to say how the game plays. What are the controls like? are they well thought-out? how about the input response-time? does the game react how you would expect? does it have different difficulty levels? any major bugs you have spotted? Are there any features unique to the game that you think really stand out? How long was the game? Did it have a satisfying ending? (obviously DON'T give away the ending ), what are the other characters in the story like? This is probably the hardest review section as it is very much open to interpretation, especially the storyline - one person's epic is another man's 'meh'.
Again, score this out of 10 at the end of this paragraph as a summary.

Longevity: Not all games are written equal, and some while they might be great fun to play at the time, really don't play that well second (or fourteenth) time around. Maybe it is an investigation game and the fun comes in finding out whats going on? second time around, unless the game has this as a random feature, its not gonna be that much fun. Similarly, it might be a game with random levels or is just simple and fun to pick up and put down. Would you play the game again? sometimes little features and details can be missed the first time around and often game designers put in their own little 'easter eggs' which can be worth doing the whole game for again just to find. What do you think? is it 're-playable'?
Again, score this out of 10 at the end of this paragraph as a summary.

Personal Opinion: Let rip on this one, say what you like and be brutally honest. This isnt the area to say about the technical achievements of the game, whether its going to outsell the competition or stay around with updates till the year dot. This is to say what you really think of it, good or bad, and whether or not you would recommend it.
DON'T rate this section, its about personal choice.

Overall Score:
Give the game an overall score based on the averages of those listed above, eg:

8.5/10
First Impressions: 8.0/10
Graphics: 8.5/10
Audio: 8.0/10
Gameplay: 9.0/10
Longevity: 8.5/10

Does anyone have any suggestions/recommendations before I set up such a thread? Please be aware these are just suggestions, if anyone strongly dissagrees with something here (such as the rating system or catagories choice) please say so!

PS: I'm calling shotgun on reviewing Dragon Age

(oh and Harewood - seeing as you suggested it, did you want to write up something similar in the "what are you watching?" thread, a template people can look at? then we could also set up a Film Review thread (oh, and if I might be so cheeky - would you be up for helping me make some wee little icons to represent the different review sections pls? like a "graphics" icon or a "theme" icon? something like that?)

Football Manager 2010 my call then

Lord_Nord wrote:

Football Manager 2010 my call then

Fair enough, Nord. 'tis all yours sir!

Lunarwolf wrote:

Well here's my recommendation for a game review template:

GAME NAME
Platform: PC, Xbox360, PS3, Mac, etc
Genre: FPS, RTS, RPG, Platformer, Sim, MMORPG, Puzzle etc
Theme: Sci-Fi, Fantasy, Contemporary, Abstract, Family, Horror, Action, Comedy etc
Synopsis: A brief run-down of the game, summed up in a short paragraph (you could use the game creators' own blurb for this)
Visual Representation: Video, Cover Art, Screen-shot, whatever so long as it "shows" the game.

First Impressions: Quite literally, what you thought of the game the first time you played it; what you liked and disliked about it and what really stuck in your mind.
Score it out of 10, using those wonderful IGN.com ratings Nord found

Graphics: Review what you think of the graphics/animations in the game, giving good and bad opinions as you see them. This could involve not only "in-game" work, concept art, in-game cinematic videos, right down to the visual style, use of colours, anything you like really. Not everyone has the same graphical capability on their systems so it might also be worth mentioning what graphics card you are using if it is on PC/Mac.
Again, score this out of 10 at the end of this paragraph as a summary.

Audio: Covering in-game sound effects, background music, soundtrack, voice-acting (if any), any and all sound should be reviewed here, again try and be as thorough as possible to give people an idea of what to expect. As with graphics, not everyone will have surround sound home-theaters connected to their game, so if it is PC/Mac game it might we worth mentioning what your sound capabilities are.
Again, score this out of 10 at the end of this paragraph as a summary.

Gameplay & Story: This one's a doozy and often hard to review subjectively, but try to say how the game plays. What are the controls like? are they well thought-out? how about the input response-time? does the game react how you would expect? does it have different difficulty levels? any major bugs you have spotted? Are there any features unique to the game that you think really stand out? How long was the game? Did it have a satisfying ending? (obviously DON'T give away the ending ), what are the other characters in the story like? This is probably the hardest review section as it is very much open to interpretation, especially the storyline - one person's epic is another man's 'meh'.
Again, score this out of 10 at the end of this paragraph as a summary.

Longevity: Not all games are written equal, and some while they might be great fun to play at the time, really don't play that well second (or fourteenth) time around. Maybe it is an investigation game and the fun comes in finding out whats going on? second time around, unless the game has this as a random feature, its not gonna be that much fun. Similarly, it might be a game with random levels or is just simple and fun to pick up and put down. Would you play the game again? sometimes little features and details can be missed the first time around and often game designers put in their own little 'easter eggs' which can be worth doing the whole game for again just to find. What do you think? is it 're-playable'?
Again, score this out of 10 at the end of this paragraph as a summary.

Personal Opinion: Let rip on this one, say what you like and be brutally honest. This isnt the area to say about the technical achievements of the game, whether its going to outsell the competition or stay around with updates till the year dot. This is to say what you really think of it, good or bad, and whether or not you would recommend it.
DON'T rate this section, its about personal choice.

Overall Score:
Give the game an overall score based on the averages of those listed above, eg:

8.5/10
First Impressions: 8.0/10
Graphics: 8.5/10
Audio: 8.0/10
Gameplay: 9.0/10
Longevity: 8.5/10

Does anyone have any suggestions/recommendations before I set up such a thread? Please be aware these are just suggestions, if anyone strongly dissagrees with something here (such as the rating system or catagories choice) please say so!

PS: I'm calling shotgun on reviewing Dragon Age

(oh and Harewood - seeing as you suggested it, did you want to write up something similar in the "what are you watching?" thread, a template people can look at? then we could also set up a Film Review thread (oh, and if I might be so cheeky - would you be up for helping me make some wee little icons to represent the different review sections pls? like a "graphics" icon or a "theme" icon? something like that?)

I don't think a score for first impressions is needed, what if a game has a good first impression but is a crap game does it really deserve a better score for tricking you
I'd split gameplay and story up into separate sections as well, but apart from that its sounds solid
I'd probably review an older game like the orange box first, as I haven't bought anything new in ages (apart from ODST)

I agree that Gameplay and Story could do with two different sections, I just didn't want a game which deliberately has no story getting the a lower rating just because of it (some racing / sim games, for example).

However I think "First Impressions" is important to keep in because it works with "Longevity", first impressions are often different to what you think of a game once you complete it, but are legitimate because even if a game is superb in the long run, people might be put off by it at first and the game might grow on them as they progress.

I was considering people just reviewing new games and throw the odd "classic" in now and again but, in hindsight I think it would be more fun for people to review whatever the heck they like so if you wanna do something from the Orange Box PJK, you're more than welcome. I myself am likely to review an older game first as I like to review them after I complete them, to get a full picture.

Hence I won't be starting with something like Dragon Age: Origins, which hasn't been released yet!

Well, I always go around gametrailers, and they've got one great system. Story, Design, Gameplay and Presentation.

Lunarwolf wrote:

I agree that Gameplay and Story could do with two different sections, I just didn't want a game which deliberately has no story getting the a lower rating just because of it (some racing / sim games, for example).

We can just do a N/A for sim games, arcade games etc no one expects tetris or Mario kart to have a highly gripping story arc

Quote :

However I think "First Impressions" is important to keep in because it works with "Longevity", first impressions are often different to what you think of a game once you complete it, but are legitimate because even if a game is superb in the long run, people might be put off by it at first and the game might grow on them as they progress.

I still don't think its necessary really, or good as a scoring system, it seems something like first impressions might be better covered within the gamplay or design section stating why its good/bad and whether its worth playing through, it is important but not worth its own score imo

All this being said are we all going to have to use a set layout for the reviews or can we just use this as a rough template? because I don't feel FI is worth its own score but you do L-dubz but why argue? lets just live oblivious of each others personal tastes!

Well tbh I was trying to work out a basic template so people could cut & paste it, then write their own reviews; for simplicity sake.

Thing is one way or another you gotta have a system otherwise the scoring is meaningless. If one is 8/10 and the other is 55/100 for example then there is no relevance to the score.

How about a compromise then? maybe take out "First Impressions" as part of the score but leave it in for its own sake?

I'd be hesitant to put such a rigid review structure in place tbh. Make it feel like too much hard work and only the same two or three people will end up bothering to write reviews. There's some great ideas discussed here but I'd boil it down to the essentials and maybe have a quotable template for people to follow (not this^^).
Here's my slant:

Game Info: Title/Platform/Genre/Link to official site (if possible)
Synopsis: Brief explanation of the game's premise
Media: A couple of vids/screenies (save describing graphics and audio and let people make up their own mind)
+: A brief review of what you thought stood out about the game
-: What elements sucked or could have been improved
Overall impression/summary: A paragraph or two (or three, or whatever) summing up your thoughts and feelings about the game
Score ?/10: Where 1 equates to Christian Rock music, 10 is utter perfection and 5 an averagely playable effort.

I recon that should do.

I'd be down with that, so long as I can can rant like a gibbering mofo with paragraphs of stuff over + and - points (well, in fairness I'm gonna do that anyway) though I have to say, although I like the content of GT's reviews, I prefer IGN.com's ranking system.

I'm also shocked you don't like Bible-Rock, Harewood - After all, one of our characters share's a striking similarity in name, lol

Lunarwolf wrote:

I'd be down with that, so long as I can can rant like a gibbering mofo with paragraphs of stuff over + and - points (well, in fairness I'm gonna do that anyway) though I have to say, although I like the content of GT's reviews, I prefer IGN.com's ranking system.

I'm also shocked you don't like Bible-Rock, Harewood - After all, one of our characters share's a striking similarity in name, lol

Nice LW

I prefer L-dubz system really as its more structured and your going to get a more comparable reviews out of it and I'd be happy with a fixed structure tbh, as for the first impressions section I'm not that bothered what we do with it I was just voicing my opinion, but as you thought up the idea of the games review thread LW I'm not going to wrangle a first impressions score from you

As for me I've been playing some very sub par Linux ripoffs of arcade games, such as, Gnometris (tetris) Nibbles (snake) and trying to beat a computer at chess 4 in a row etc and losing every time, apparently Linuxs motto is to not be user friendly and make you feel like and idiot

And there was me going to ask: "How you getting on with Linux?" heh.

Lunarwolf wrote:

And there was me going to ask: "How you getting on with Linux?" heh.

it actually makes you long for windows

There's a brilliant article about Linux in this month's PC Pro:

David Fearon (deputy editor) wrote:

Lurking behind the veneer of spinning icons is the feeling that the grassroots Linux developers don't really want the unwased mass getting their grubby paws on their lovely, ugly operating system. They're going to carry on lurking in the shadows, wet fish in hand, ready to strike. They want a learning curve. They want you to have to use the command line. Damn it, they want you to suffer.

Haha!

PrioryJK wrote:

Lunarwolf wrote:

And there was me going to ask: "How you getting on with Linux?" heh.

it actually makes you long for windows

Ouch.

Don't get me wrong its is a lot better than windows in many ways, it loads faster, its features are what your used to with windows, barely any viruses, you can text edit spell check on the internet, it'll save the tabs you had open on the internet when you turn off the pc, it gives you a program almost on par with photo shop for free, it just looks and feels nicer and more open than windows.
But then
"lets go on youtube..."
"No"
"lets install this game .."
"No"
"lets use the this custom developed software to run the game"
"No"
"lets spend hours reading tutorials on how to get this game to work on Linux"
"No"
"recognize the disc i just put in"
"No"
"Download the DaD demo.."
"No"
"Love me please just love me"
"....No"

FIFA 10. Best sports game ever (even better than ESPN NFL).

Just bought Uncharted 2 Among Theives, and I have to say it's very good so far

I'm going to be playing everything I can get my grubby little paws on!

I've spent today getting my new graphics card working and its a mental little beast:

Went from an Nvidia 8600GT (which was still good in my opinion) to an Nvidia GTS250 - which is a stonker. So far every game on max settings with excellent frame rates!

(shame I had to buy a new Power Supply to run it, otherwise it would have been good value too!)

Lunarwolf wrote:

(shame I had to buy a new Power Supply to run it, otherwise it would have been good value too!)

Yeah, my mate got caught out with that one when he decided to go down the SLI route^^