I like how you've always separated
previews from
impressions. Lots of sites don't do that.
I always get really sick of reading previews at other sites (where the previews and impressions are combined) that only offer praise and say nothing bad about the game and then when the game comes out they give it a really bad score and blast it for bad gameplay. They must have at least an inkling that the game wasn't on track to being a winner, but they never even hinted at it before the review. (For some reason
GameSpy and
Killzone come to mind as a really huge example of this.)
For the reviews, have you guys ever considered letting other staff members jump in at the end and add there own one or two line take on the game (either echoing the reviewer or disagreeing on some point)? Multiple reviews are great but many games don't get them because they're either not "big enough" or you just don't have a second reviewer who thinks he can write a completely separate review that contains information/opinion that hasn't already been said in the first review. I think it would be worthwhile for example if someone didn't necessarily agree with Jonny's opinion that Metroid Prime 2's multiplayer felt "out of place" but agreed with the rest of the review.
Also for reviews, you don't state (at least that I could find) whether games are compared with everything else on the market (PS3, 360 and PC), just other offerings on the system (Wii, DS, GBA) or against other Nintendo offerings on different consoles (GCN, etc). Perhaps it differs by reviewer.
Finally, you don't actually have an "editorial policy" as the topic title suggests (only for news, previews, impressions and reviews). Perhaps you should add one stating what
constitutes an editorial?
After finally (sorry, just thought of this), maybe you should also add a policy about rumors. What is a rumor and how big does it need to get before it's mentioned on NWR? Speaking of which, I saw a rumor on GoNintendo.com that
Microsoft is considering purchasing Capcom. It's the only place a saw such a rumor, so I have no idea how credible it is, but it hasn't gotten a mention on NWR. Is that because there's really no reason to believe it at this time? On a similar note, I'd like to hear more of these rumors. Even if they turn out to be a load of rubbish they spark some interesting debates in the forums. (Just make sure they're clearly labeled as rumors.) Karl has been slacking off lately and we haven't really seen many rumors reported on NWR at a time when they're flying all over the place.
Overall, a pretty good policy. Linking it right on the main page lends you some credibility that other sites don't really have.
Also, I
love how you guys got rid of the one-post-per-minute rule for editing posts. I've edited this post like seven times in the past five minutes.
Topic: Editorial Policy (Read 2971 times)
