Topic: Rhythm Thief & the Emperor's Treasure Review

[NWR_Neal]

It's the age-old debate of critique versus product review.

To that end, I ask you: Would you review a game like you would a printer? If so, then yes, go do some product reviews in that vein. Be matter-of-fact in your reviewing "The graphics are technically sound."

I'd rather see reviews be treated as more critique than product review. Since I'm in a position where I guide the editorial direction of this site, then that's how it will be. I'm sorry. I'd rather have people describing their experiences with the game than soullessly saying 'The gameplay is fundamentally good." Of course, there is some wiggle room for a fusion between the two concepts. That's sort of what I strive for. Although, if you want basic details about a game, go read a preview or some PR-prepared fact sheet. It can be more in-depth than Ceric's, but if that's what you want, then go find it. You can find stuff like that on our site. You won't find that in our reviews.

And on the subject of scores: Unfortunately, scores bring the hits/ad revenue. They are a necessary evil of the business side of games press.

[TJ Spyke]

Scores are also a quick reference. If I see a game with a 2.5/10 score, I will likely just skim the review.

[Khushrenada]

I'd rather this thread was a further discussion of the game instead of a topic of what reviews should be but I guess that's the direction this thread has gone.

Personally, I have nothing against this review and thought it was just what a review should be. The review stated what the reviewer liked about this game and worked in favor of his enjoyment of said title and what what he didn't like and worked against his enjoyment. I understood his reasons for them and that's the best you can ask for in a review.

I, personally, like to read a lot of film/tv review and criticism but there's a lot more than can be found in such reviews. They can point out subtext that I might have missed in a viewing, pointing out acting techniques, other technical aspects, background information that can enhance one's veiwing of a film/show. They can break down into details about a character and their motivations and actions.

I don't think you can really do that about games. Games are about an experience. You are given a challenge whether it be to get from one end of a stage to the next, get first place in a race or win enough microgames in a row to move on to another stage. Maybe it is an interactive like Phoenix Wright or Hotel Dusk. But basically, you have a goal and whatever tools the game supplies to help you reach that goal and overcome the obstacles it puts in place of that goal. Obviously, there are various ways it can dress up those challenges and the gameplay whether it be making story based like an RPG or building on the info you have to make more challenging puzzles like Picross.

The point I'm trying to make is that in the end a game review mainly has the technical merits to focus on to critique which keeps them from being that interesting. Sure there are cases where story and characters can have an effect on the review. I think of Metroid Prime vs Metroid: Other M and the effect a story can have on people's opinion of a game. But in the end, it's mainly about the experience and as long as the reviewer can communicate what their experience was like and why, what caused them to be positive/negative, then they've done their job.

A good review can be negative or positive but as long as ther reader understands why the reviewer took the stance they did, then even if they disagree with the review, hopefully they can still understand whether they would feel the same way with such an experience. And I think this review did that.