Quote:
War_Oberst said:
I think this hard because there are many peopel who write reviews out there. Is it not their opinion that is posting? It is fair to assume that if a game come out and five hundred buy it. Then say fifty hate it awful and four hundred fifty love it. One of fifty that hate it is the reviewer and writes as such.
Balance of being a good objective writer is knowing you are not the only one who play it and if you hate it there may be peopel that love it. Or other way round. Say you hate the game but ask why can be done to make it better and good. Not telling peopel who make it why they are stupid. 
When you read opinion of gamer reviewer it is a measure of thier publisher who post reviews as to if they let such garbage out there or not or if they make writer temper it.
As for special interest it would be high prase for gamesite to be owned by publisher and make it have fair review ESPECALLY Of games that compettitors make.
|
I’m sure I’ll take some heat for this, but I’m going to play devil’s advocate. The quotes below are the documentation portion of two pc game reviews published on the same review website within a two week period. Both games would be considered wargames from independent publishers. Although written by different authors, one would assume the reviews were held to one editorial policy by one editorial staff. I’ve noted the reviews’ publication dates in relation to the games’ release dates but obviously cannot say when the review copies were made available. I feel safe assuming Game A was not sent seven months prior to release and that Game B was not sent seven months past release. I have removed the games’ titles and replaced them with Game A and Game B respectively.
Game A, reviewed same day as game’s release:
Quote:
Installation, Documentation, and Tutorials[/i]
The game installed without fault and consumed approximately 520 MB of hard disk space.
The manual is large – approximately 120 pages - and comprehensive. It’s logically laid out and makes ample use of screenshots to help explain the game’s features. It covers initial set up; game controls; tutorials; and provides thorough explanations of the units – how they move, attack, are researched and produced – as well as how supply works and offers some sound strategic advice for each of the playable powers. Having a detailed manual helps enormously. Although Game A may look like an easy game to play, it actually requires more cerebral input than expected to play the game to its full potential.
The game ships with two tutorials, covering the principal components of a game turn: movement/attack and production/research.
|
Game B, reviewed 7 months after game’s release :
Quote:
Nothing like a Wargame with a Big Manual to put the Fear of God into You
Game B is a mere 80MB install, and the game runs smooth as a polished wood panel; the area of difficulty for many may come in that the game operates its briefings through an internet browser, which can cause problems for those running tight firewalls not overly fond of OOB’s.
The manual is necessarily 130 pages and is crammed full of essential detail. Game B is a game which requires a very thorough read through unless one wishes to become completely and utterly lost from the first moment.
|
Now, if I told you that one of these games was published by the company which owned the review site, would you believe both reviews were written objectively and without bias?