Even though it's been a few years since I last professionally reviewed a game, I remember how stressful it felt rushing through the game in a matter of days while also leaving enough time to actually draft the review. Squeezing the playthrough amongst my other work commitments wasn't always easy, and I do wonder if this sense of urgency ever colours the opinion of the reviewer.
This is especially difficult as, unlike other mediums, the length of video games varies wildly. I know publishers try their best to provide reviewers with a timeframe that reflects the length of their game, but this is also imperfect.
Great article, though! Keen to see where this series goes.
Imo, the only game reviews that matter these days are those posted on Steam. For a long time, even back in the day of gaming magazines, players read reviews primarily for confirmation bias or morbid entertainment (if the game was bad). I believe that the gameplay videos posted by Youtube and Twitch players have a much bigger influence on game sales.
I'm really really keen to hear how the industry as a whole feels about this. You aren't the first to mention it to me.
A PR rep I talked to actually mentioned as much to me, that Steam ratings as a whole are a huge driver of sales. So will test it out and see what I find!
This might be a hot take, but I believe the "new" review system has moved to social media for the past few years, specifically, YouTubers. Some have a very detailed way of explaining why they recommend or don't recommend the game. Some are vague and only look at what's "important" to them, which can be a double-edged sword. The major outlet reviews do have some impact, but I think players will always take them with a grain of salt and move to a source they think is reliable.
That's just my two cents. But, other than that, good article! :)
I mentioned this, but... this is why I want to chat to streamers and Youtubers about this too, as I believe outside of the mainstream press, there's a significant influence from their work that feeds into this. Now.. if only some of them would check their emails.
There was a model of engagement for gamers. Eight types of them. But I'm unable to find it for some funny reason. I guess it was authored by Mark (Marc ?) LeBlanc? I know where to find it in Polish ;-D
Would love an analysis of it penned by you in comparison to the existing ones.
Didn't find any sources, here's a rough translation:
âš¡Forms of player engagementâš¡
1. Following - the game involves acquiring habits and performing them almost reflexively, e.g., Tetris. In such games, we switch off our brains and do everything almost in a trance.
2. Experience - we engage with the game by experiencing audio-visual stimuli, whether it's the dark atmosphere of a horror game like Bloodborne or the beautiful locations in GRIS. Our senses matter, and the game is like an exhibit at a gallery that we can't tear ourselves away from.
3. Fiction - "the player engages in a consistently conducted thought experiment." This means immersing oneself in a fictional world or an alternate version of history, e.g., WoW, Civilization, etc.
4. Narration - we engage by participating in and following an interesting story that is a source of emotion, e.g., The Last of Us, Final Fantasy. It's the same way of engaging as books or movies.
5. Challenge - the game forces us to be vigilant and attentive because we constantly have to deal with unexpected and new obstacles, e.g., Civilization, Dark Souls, Mario.
6. Bond - a game that engages us by creating bonds between us and other players or characters, e.g., LoL, Baldur, XCOM.
7. Discovery - the game contains secrets and puzzles that we want to uncover. These can be secrets/new lands in an exploration game or secret rules/regulations that are not explained, e.g., Elden Ring, Fez, Zelda.
8. Expression - the game as a means of expression for the player. We have the ability to create or make decisions, e.g., Dragon Age, Minecraft.
One game can combine different methods of engagement, and these determine whether it has a chance of appealing to a specific person. And this is where the role of the reviewer comes in.
I've definitely been alerted to a game through YouTubers and streamers, but (n=1) I don't know if I've based a decision to buy solely on what they are saying. I suspect a lot of people are wary about how honest influencer marketing is (in general), and I have a feeling game devs and publishers know that too. So if anything, YouTubers and streamers are more for eyes on game, which might lead to wishlists, which broadens the reach of their game (especially on a platform like Steam).
I would be curious to see if YouTubers and streamers directly impact game purchases though!
Even though it's been a few years since I last professionally reviewed a game, I remember how stressful it felt rushing through the game in a matter of days while also leaving enough time to actually draft the review. Squeezing the playthrough amongst my other work commitments wasn't always easy, and I do wonder if this sense of urgency ever colours the opinion of the reviewer.
This is especially difficult as, unlike other mediums, the length of video games varies wildly. I know publishers try their best to provide reviewers with a timeframe that reflects the length of their game, but this is also imperfect.
Great article, though! Keen to see where this series goes.
Thanks!
There's a bit of me that's really happy I don't do Day 1 reviews. Sure, it's a LOT less traffic. But it takes a lot of stress out.
I'm aiming to do an article from each perspective: Game dev, reviewer, streamers.
I'm learning -- the hard way -- that finding people to comment is rough in the gaming. But we'll see how we go.
Imo, the only game reviews that matter these days are those posted on Steam. For a long time, even back in the day of gaming magazines, players read reviews primarily for confirmation bias or morbid entertainment (if the game was bad). I believe that the gameplay videos posted by Youtube and Twitch players have a much bigger influence on game sales.
I'm really really keen to hear how the industry as a whole feels about this. You aren't the first to mention it to me.
A PR rep I talked to actually mentioned as much to me, that Steam ratings as a whole are a huge driver of sales. So will test it out and see what I find!
This might be a hot take, but I believe the "new" review system has moved to social media for the past few years, specifically, YouTubers. Some have a very detailed way of explaining why they recommend or don't recommend the game. Some are vague and only look at what's "important" to them, which can be a double-edged sword. The major outlet reviews do have some impact, but I think players will always take them with a grain of salt and move to a source they think is reliable.
That's just my two cents. But, other than that, good article! :)
Hot indeed! But logical!
I mentioned this, but... this is why I want to chat to streamers and Youtubers about this too, as I believe outside of the mainstream press, there's a significant influence from their work that feeds into this. Now.. if only some of them would check their emails.
And that's why I'm interested in seeing the next post! Don't lose hope! But it is a topic that deaerves some discussion.
There was a model of engagement for gamers. Eight types of them. But I'm unable to find it for some funny reason. I guess it was authored by Mark (Marc ?) LeBlanc? I know where to find it in Polish ;-D
Would love an analysis of it penned by you in comparison to the existing ones.
Didn't find any sources, here's a rough translation:
âš¡Forms of player engagementâš¡
1. Following - the game involves acquiring habits and performing them almost reflexively, e.g., Tetris. In such games, we switch off our brains and do everything almost in a trance.
2. Experience - we engage with the game by experiencing audio-visual stimuli, whether it's the dark atmosphere of a horror game like Bloodborne or the beautiful locations in GRIS. Our senses matter, and the game is like an exhibit at a gallery that we can't tear ourselves away from.
3. Fiction - "the player engages in a consistently conducted thought experiment." This means immersing oneself in a fictional world or an alternate version of history, e.g., WoW, Civilization, etc.
4. Narration - we engage by participating in and following an interesting story that is a source of emotion, e.g., The Last of Us, Final Fantasy. It's the same way of engaging as books or movies.
5. Challenge - the game forces us to be vigilant and attentive because we constantly have to deal with unexpected and new obstacles, e.g., Civilization, Dark Souls, Mario.
6. Bond - a game that engages us by creating bonds between us and other players or characters, e.g., LoL, Baldur, XCOM.
7. Discovery - the game contains secrets and puzzles that we want to uncover. These can be secrets/new lands in an exploration game or secret rules/regulations that are not explained, e.g., Elden Ring, Fez, Zelda.
8. Expression - the game as a means of expression for the player. We have the ability to create or make decisions, e.g., Dragon Age, Minecraft.
One game can combine different methods of engagement, and these determine whether it has a chance of appealing to a specific person. And this is where the role of the reviewer comes in.
I've definitely been alerted to a game through YouTubers and streamers, but (n=1) I don't know if I've based a decision to buy solely on what they are saying. I suspect a lot of people are wary about how honest influencer marketing is (in general), and I have a feeling game devs and publishers know that too. So if anything, YouTubers and streamers are more for eyes on game, which might lead to wishlists, which broadens the reach of their game (especially on a platform like Steam).
I would be curious to see if YouTubers and streamers directly impact game purchases though!