Loaded Couch Potatoes

Master Black pulls a headshot.

Video game reviews, as they exist today, are one of the most misguided forms of journalism I have encountered. If I sound harsh, it’s because I intend to, for reasons I will explain.

A new video game is, for me and most gamers I know both an exciting prospect and a fairly big investment. $60-70 is at least one full day’s worth of pay for most teenagers and twenty-somethings working an hourly job; similarly, a good single-player experience should run at least 15-20 hours, and multiplayer components only add to that total. That’s money and time not being spent on/with friends, significant others, family, or other hobbies like reading, art, movies, etc. Don’t get me wrong, I’m not saying video gamers aren’t aware of these expenditures, or that it’s not worth it for a great new game.

What I am saying is that the experience, for most, is completely removed from that of a reviewer; someone who usually gets a free review copy, often weeks early, which they then play at a breakneck pace in order to meet a deadline. What are the chances that they have the time to fully examine all possibilities of side-missions or replay value? How much multiplayer can they have really delved into if 99% of gamers don’t have the game yet? Finally, whatever they do get out of this is distilled down into some form of “quantity,” be that a number, a letter-grade, or some other arbitrary system like gold stars or old hats: “Based on it’s gameplay, I’d definitely give GTA IV a pinstriped fedora with blue trim.” While I know not all outlets run their reviews this way, enough of them have at least some of these practices in place to make my arguments valid.

What arguments, you say? After all, I have just been making accusations at this point; there hasn’t really been a legitimate effort to form a logical series of analyses.* So I have comprised a neat little series of bullet-points to illustrate some of the issues I feel separate reviewers from the general gaming public:

• Pre-Orders and The Midnight Release: What’s the first thing most gamers do these days when something is announced they really want to play? Check their favorite distributor for a pre-order date and make sure they put a deposit down. That way, on the day the game hits the streets, they can make damn sure they’re going to get a copy. This can be especially fortuitous when stores have a midnight release; standing in line with other fans, possibly getting cool game-related swag, and rushing home to play as much as possible before you pass out from exhaustion are great experiences. Now considering that most media outlets want their reviews out before the game release, I’m guessing they take measures to secure copies, most likely eliminating the above activities.
• The All-Nighter and “Just One or Two Missions”: Gaming at this point reaches across several generations, and as such the amount of time available for enjoying a new purchase varies for everyone. But those people I’ve talked to about the subject tend to do it one of two ways. One is to sit down at the end of the day’s activities and run a marathon-session for several hours, which is usually reserved for a really enjoyable, big-name title released during winter or summer holidays. The other is to play here-and-there whenever some free time presents itself, and happens when the game is being played as a way to relax a little during busy times of the year. The point is, both of these happen as a way to play games we really want to play, otherwise we wouldn’t waste that time. I feel like reviews are antithetical to this process, as those games have to be played.
• The Human Element: I don’t know what it means to play a game “by myself” anymore, considering I haven’t done it much in my entire life, and haven’t done it at all since starting college and getting consoles with online capabilities almost six years ago. I grew up with a brother, so if the game didn’t have multiplayer, it most likely was not purchased; in college I was either playing with people or was somewhere with people watching me play; finally, with some of the new advances in online systems, I can play a single-player game while talking to numerous other players who might be playing something completely different or maybe not even playing anything at all. So it seems odd to me that a reviewer can assign quantity to these experiences without as many people to play with or talk to, the former because no one else has the game yet and the latter because reviewers are generally signed to non-disclosure agreements.
• The Audio / Visual Factor: While possibly not as important to some, this final note is something I think more and more gamers are becoming aware of. For console gamers, it’s generally a given that the game will play, but what they get out of any graphical or audio specifications depends on their home entertainment setup. The ante is even higher in the PC realm, where without the proper equipment the game just won’t play. Either way, most media outlets do include “presentation” as one of their review categories. Hearing about how the Dolby effects “really give the game its whole atmosphere”, for example, can be a little disheartening when I’m not playing on a 7.1 system that my company built into the office.

There’s a lot more to be said on the issue than just four bullet points; I know because I have spent hours talking with friends and other gamers about the issue, and other people have written books worth of articles on the subject. But seeing as this website exists as a forum for the exchange of ideas, a forum in which I will probably post some of my own “reviews” of games, I feel like it’s good enough to get people talking.

Because the real issue here is that I don’t feel like a reviewer’s experience with a game in the time they spend before writing an article can in any way compare to that of an average gamer who reads that review as a way of deciding whether to buy and play the title. I fully realize that there is some fault with gamers on this issue; I don’t in any way condone the purchase of games strictly based on reviews. Nor do I (generally) blame the journalists writing them, and have been known to read some reviews myself. *gasp*

Gamers need want a way to judge games before making the big investments I mention above; publishers and media outlets want need a way to reach gamers and provide that information. Such it is that the system we now have has come into being; a system which I feel is fundamentally broken, even though it seems necessary. It’s at this point that most gamers on the internet would end, having bitched plenty without offering any solutions. I’ve got a better idea:

OMGitsTFC Gaming Posts on Loaded Couch Potatoes

Reviews written by a gamer – and a damn good one, trust me – with absolutely no financial stake in the matter, for no other reason than a genuine love of the experience. You want change? Make it.

*Quick side-note for people who post on gaming forums: “infamus is a PSGaye xclusiv so its got to suck totle ballz” is not an argument. It is a statement of a single-minded, biased viewpoint with no evidence to back it up. Just a heads-up.