The Quicksheet may look familiar because it's based somewhat on Kotaku's current system of having a little card somewhere in their review that tells you whether or not you should play the game with some quick facts.
Except, like scores (which I'll get to), I don't feel like it's exactly fair that this will be looked at as a quick basis for a decision involving money changing hands, large or small, and be specifically told you should play the game. It's still based on the idea that the writer thinks you should play the game, based on his/her feelings feelings. It's a recommendation, sure, but its one that still doesn't go into enough details while trying to be quick, but influences peoples train of thought. Yeah, I'll be saying in the greater reviews if its worth your time, but it'll be after tell you how I feel about the game, and it won't be as pronounced and in your face as Kotaku's card or many sites scores.
So why the Quicksheet?:
When I set out to do this I had the idea in the back of my mind about how the whole world envisions Metacritic as being such a fervent tool to gauge the overall consensus of reviews with a number that influences the monetary gain of a property. In turn, the idea I also had was also that this meant that the reviews, and sources that run them, were more important then other reviews that don't have scores, because they gave point values. So I really wanted my reviews to have a score, because scores = importance. A weird goal of getting on Metacritic.
The thing is, I can't feel right doing that. Not with what scores do to the industries I love. I don't believe scores help anything when it comes down to people losing their jobs because a bunch people with different mindsets or agendas made a score, when all scores don't mean the same things from site to site.
A score is just a quick way to see how a person felt, without actually having to look into why they felt that way. But as with everything in life, everyone feels different about everything, even when they're agreeing. Scores mean nothing in the long run, no matter how much focus was put on them or how damning they can be on a product. I truly believe, in spite of our personal need for them, which is why I still wanted to include them, they hurt any industry they touch and there's too much power and focus there.
If review scores were universally regulated, and every site and person writing had to adhere to that one system while giving their own personal, unique, opinions on what they experienced, the industry would probably be a better place.
But it'd also be socialism (or something). Or a form of censorship. And we can't have that.
Because of all that I had created the Bea Rating system, where I tried to turn serious scores into something fun to the tune of Bea Arthur. But I really didn't like how the only way I could remove the sharp edge that drives review scores was to simply make it silly.
Granted, the system had only been in place for a short time (and may even come back one day), and I didn't really do much with it, I still didn't really like the idea of a set score that specifically cheer or jeered what I was writing about so loosely. And I felt that even the loose guidelines I set within it were, frankly, too restrictive still. So thats why I've come up with a happy medium: The Quicksheet.
Okay, okay, what am I looking at then?:
Then I'm asked, "what's it like?" This is where I try to sum up what the thing is like in the best possible way. This may take the form of comparing it to things in the real world, forming a simile, or comparing it to other pieces of media.
On the bottom we see a bunch of other info that people may want or need to know on the fly. For games, the above is what you'll see. For TV and movies those things with change to things like a short list of important cast members, studio/director/producer info and movie/TV ratings board rating (possibly more).
But wait, what about that big white midsection? I'm not going to just leave that much space unattended, right?
Nope. Actually that gooey center is where the Quicksheet will shine -just not right here.
In that area I will break it down into 3 sections:
Green; or likes/good stuff
Red; or didn't likes/bad stuff
Gray (Possibly, I haven't decided yet); or weird things I can't put my finger on, and things I can't call anything stronger then nitpicks.
What I'll do with these sections is, starting from zero (every section, every piece of media, starts the same) give them a percentage of the area (which I've yet to figure out how I'll lay out), equaling out to 100%, based on how much of them should be filled. Percentage isn't taken off, its gained. Whichever one of those sections take over a bigger percentage gives you an idea on if I thought the game is good or not, but you'll still need to do the important part of reading the review to find out what tipped the scales.
You can still use the sheet for information to help your choice, but its not giving a hard score, its not specifically telling you to buy it, that other reviews put such a sharp punctuation on: It'll still be your choice.
Way I see it, I'll be able to use the Quicksheet no matter how I decide to do reviews, because by the time I'm done writing my review I'll have an idea of how much of a percentage each section will get, since somethings will have greater personal weights to me then others, resulting in differing percentages within the good/bad/eh? sections they fall under, and I can do that without writing a review that specifically breaks it down as good/bad/eh?.
I may even review like that, in the style of good/bad/eh?. Or I'll play around with different review styles to keep it fresh. I haven't decided, and thats sort of the fun part (or I'm telling myself that, because I'm OCD and really do need things set before I go about things.)
So what about the reviews themselves?:
Well, like I said just a moment ago, that's not set in stone. I may do the main body of the review differently from time to time. I may do it a different way from form one form or media to another.
But! I am going to (probably) always going to give you something like this:
Plot: A summery of story or thing you'll be seeing. This may butt up against the "What's it like?" on the Quicksheet, but I'm going to try my best not to do that very often.
Review body: Subject to change, however I decide to do it.
The Back of the Box Quote: I saw this used somewhere shortly a few years ago, it may have even been from Kotaku, and I loved the idea of it. If a quote from a review, on the back of our game boxes, is supposed to get us to buy the game, then why not just serve it up to them instead of having them waste their time combing through our review for just the right one?
Should you spend time with the media?: It's a good question in a world where many of us may have more time on our hands then ever, but so many things are vying for that time. Even a beautiful game or movie may be more annoying then its worth, not warranting such an important investment in it.
I'll try to be as detailed as I can, quickly, to tell you if you should spend whatever few minutes a day with it.
Bias factor: Everyone has their own feelings on things going into it. If you like horror movies, you'll probably be more receptive to watching a horror movie, but a romance movie? Probably not if you don't like romance movies.
If the person doesn't like Super Mario, but is made to play a Super Mario game, and you know he doesn't like those games, then you know to take what he said with a grain of salt. If he loved the game though? Then that's big praise!
This is the sort of thing I feel like its important for people reading (or watching) a review should know, even if its immediately after the fact. Some times (read: many) a reviewer isn't blessed with being only able to play/watch/eat/whatever, the things they truly love, and if they did, would you believe them when they gave a game in a series they love a glowing review? Sometimes a reviewer is also truly willing to go outside of their comfort zones, and they should be able to tell us that.
Disclaimer: If there's one thing in the reviews industry I've learned.. Hell, in life, I've learned.. It's that being upfront and honest usually outweighs being sneaky and trying to pull one over on people. And this is where I'll tell you things like how long I may have played the game, how far in I got before I gave up (should I give up at all)
Sure, this can be a double edge sword, but even the people who get angry at you will at least have some manner of respect for you at the end of the day, even if they decide never to come back. Sometimes respect is more important then anything else. Plus, this is just a personal honor code. It's kind of how I live my life, even if its to my own detriment.
Review Naming: About the review naming scheme, because I don't truly think its a terrible thing that a game review comes late, specially as someone on a budget without contacts to get review copies of things, my more current to launch date reviews will start the title with "Review." When the game may have been out for a while, probably over.. Oh.. 4-6 months, I'll end the title with "A Better Late Then Never Review."
There isn't anything really different to these other then the age of the game or when I happened to get to it. Really, its just a chance to dig at myself in self deprecation.
No comments:
Post a Comment