The Armchair Empire - Editorials: Fast or it's FREE!

Brevity is wit.

Newsletter

Be notified of site updates. Sign-up for the Newsletter sent out twice weekly.

Enter E-Mail Address Below:

Fast or it's FREE!

The other day, as I was out raking leaves, I tried to count the number of games I’ve reviewed in the last month and a half. I won’t bore you with the list but the number tops out at 13 – not including the six games I have on the go at the moment. And that’s to say nothing about the 16 (or so) games sitting in my desk waiting to be assigned to a reviewer.

Lots of games, but ask me what I thought of Grabbed by the Ghoulies. I can’t form a comprehensive thought over and above, “Bad.” Or Viewtiful Joe: “Fun with interesting graphics.” Space Colony: “Space Colony”. Enter the Matrix? I remember Jada Pinkett-Smith and Monica Bellucci.

The further I stretch my memory back, the less likely I’m able to describe a game, let alone remember what it was about (unless it’s a game from my formative years). The reason – and blame – can be firmly traced to the Gaming Industry – that nebulous cloud of businesses that supplies our gaming addiction.

Although there is a wider problem at work here, the 4^th Quarter is nuts for games. There’s something about the 4^th Quarter that gets the game publishers into a nearly unmanageable frenzy – 10+ games released per week on multiple platforms! 10 games doesn’t seem like a flood, but multiply that by the number of weeks in the 4^th Quarter.

Now, to review a game properly, you really need to put in the time playing it. The actual writing of a review takes hardly any time compared to the hours and hours of playtime most games demand. (The length really relies on what genre the game is – woe the poor soul that digs role-playing games.) We’ll just use 15 hours as baseline and go on the assumption that the 4^th Quarter is 13 weeks long.

13 weeks x 10 games = 130 games released

130 games released x 15 hours of game time = 1,950 hours of game time

1,950 hours of game time + game reviewers = broken homes, neglected lives, no sleep

No sleep = poor memory

Poor memory + bitterness at gaming industry² = op/eds about the 4^th Quarter

All this math brings to the fore a few questions: How fast can I review a game? How fast is too fast? How much do I actually have to play before I can declare, “Ready for review!” When can I make an educated verdict? Do I have to finish the game?

GameSpot’s original review for Savage: The Battle for Newerth (PC) caused some criticism, because the reviewer spent less than 4 hours actually playing the game before writing the review. Was the review erudite and educated? Could it be trusted? Would anyone put any stock in a GameSpot review again? Those answers are best provided by readers so I won’t throw my two-cents in, but it does reiterate the question of, “How fast?” And in the 4^th Quarter, a speedy review is the name of the game because there are so many games to get through.

If you’re a typical gamer, plunking down a few bucks for a rental is a matter of course when thinking of purchasing a game. (Would you buy a car without test-driving it?) Within 30 minutes you’ll likely have a verdict in your head although on a primitive level. “This sucks.” “Oh, oh, oh, yes!” “Yeah, baby!” “Awesome!” “Why did I rent this?” Over time your opinion becomes refined, you can point to specifics and say what’s wrong and what’s right. You don’t need to finish a game three times over to know it’s bad or good. So why should you or I expect a game reviewer to finish a bad game? Or finish a game, period?

Most will hinge their opinion on the word “finish.” Just what does “finished” mean? If I finished Max Payne 2 does it mean I played through the game once? Or did I tackle all the extra modes and completely master them? When is Elder Scrolls III: Morrowind finished? What about Knights of the Old Republic? C&C Generals Zero Hour? Counter-Strike? When do you reach the end point and say, “I’m done!”? Is there an end point? As much as the gaming industry would like us to believe otherwise, games aren’t like movies. Even long movies have a definite end – the credits roll and you wade through ankle deep trash to leave the theater. You expect a movie reviewer to have watched right to the end. How trusted would a movie review be if the reviewer watched for 20 minutes then left? If the movie was really bad, it would make sense that he left but he should also make damn sure he tells his readers that he walked out. Should every game review come with a note of how many hours went into it? Then, of course, you have to rely on the reviewer’s honesty and integrity that he’ll actually provide an accurate account.

How many hours have I put into the games I’ve reviewed in the last few months? It varies but when I really think about it, the minimum seems to be 12 – 15 hours, which seems (far) too long for bad games and not long enough for good games. (But then you have to take my word for it, don’t you?) Just don’t ask me to talk intelligently about any of them once the review is posted.

No matter how fast or slow, I eventually forget the details about a game. I’m constantly shoving new information into my brain, sweeping up the stuff that falls out and burying it in the backyard, particularly in this game-heavy time of year. The review is written – I can always consult it if need be. Some games are just unforgettable; with every vivid detail brought to life even at a fleeting mention of its title…

Does anyone remember what games those were?

- Omni

(December 14, 2003)

Advertisement


PC \| Gamecube \| DS \| Wii \| PlayStation 2 \| PlayStation 3 \| PSP \| Xbox \| Xbox 360
News \| Reviews \| Previews \| Features \| Classics \| Goodies \| Anime \| Forums