- Posts: 8735
- Thank you received: 7349
Bugs: Recent Topics Paging, Uploading Images & Preview (11 Dec 2020)
Recent Topics paging, uploading images and preview bugs require a patch which has not yet been released.
Right to Reply - When Reviews are "Wrong"
- Sagrilarus
- Offline
- D20
- Pull the Goalie
Gary Sax wrote:
Sagrilarus wrote: I know y'all like Tom Vasel, and he seems like a nice guy. But seriously, he's Mayor McCheese. He's bringing as safe, as dependable a product as can be had while keeping costs down. Most of the wannabes are looking to duplicate him instead our guys here, because he's slicky enough to generate traffic in as short a period of time as possible.
God damn dude, shots fired.
But yes, I agree with you.
I'm not certain Tom would argue the point, at least not the heart of it. I don't think he's a game reviewer anymore, I think he's a broadcaster that specializes in board gaming. Much of his most-watched material isn't reviews, and I'd wager he sees his core competency as board game entertainer, not board game reviewer. He needs to maintain the latter to keep his street cred, but that's just his lower third. He's on your screen because he's entertaining. He's providing board game content, not board game reviews. There's a real market for that stuff.
He might be less enamored with the Mayor McCheese epithet. But honestly, he's the baseline. He's the benchmark for the work he's in. He industrialized the genre.
As to game designers and publishers responding to reviews, they're best not to. I think the only time it makes sense to do that is if the reviewer really boots a detail of the game that grossly misrepresents it, such as how it's played. There was a review for Rallyman that everyone requested be taken down because the reviewer completely misunderstood how to play the game (and to his credit he did remove it.) But even in that case, were I the publisher, I would send a scout. I'd let someone else issue the clarification. "Don't punch down" is the political phrase for the concept.
That said, the reviewer could work that exact same concept to the responses his review generates.
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
Erik Twice wrote: It's no surprise, either. Just playing them takes a long time and you need other people to do so. It has proven difficult for me and I have the advantage of not writing reviews weekly. Like you say, you can sometimes tell when details are wrong. For example, I remember a review of a videogame called A-Train 9 that said you couldn't build curved track. Erm, yes you can and it's impossible not to see how unless you haven't even tried to because it bends like spagetthi.
This is why I rarely write reviews and instead just comment on games in the forums. Unless a game is really bad, I don't think I can post an honest review based on a single play. And if the game can't be played properly in solitaire, it might take me months just to get in a few plays with friends. By then, the industry has already churned out a thousand new games and a late review is less relevant to readers. Compared to almost any other product that gets reviewed, board games potentially require more people just to do a single review.
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
- Jackwraith
- Offline
- Ninja
- Maim! Kill! Burn!
- Posts: 4365
- Thank you received: 5686
Shellhead wrote: And if the game can't be played properly in solitaire, it might take me months just to get in a few plays with friends. By then, the industry has already churned out a thousand new games and a late review is less relevant to readers. Compared to almost any other product that gets reviewed, board games potentially require more people just to do a single review.
I think those reviews can still be relevant BECAUSE of that constant churn of thousands. I know that I've been tuned into games that I'd never heard of from both comments on this forum and reviews (often from Wade.) I don't think it's a detriment that you're writing about something that isn't the latest hot thing or which won't attract readers as much as a one-time play review of Latest Hot Thing. No one can keep up with the constant, frenetic pace of the current time. If it takes you a year to to write something about a game you like, do it, anyway. I can almost guarantee that someone will read it and have no idea that the game existed and might be excited to discover it because of what you write.
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
Working with newer, smaller, less experienced publishers is so much more difficult. They act they are sending you their first born when sending out a review copy. Like the wholesale cost of the game (which is usually like $10 -$20) plus shipping is going to break them. Plus, what most of them are "shopping" around for isn't a review, it's someone to produce a uncritical, slick video for them for free. Iain's "David & Goliath" article that is up today touches on this.
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
I require honesty and integrity for professional reviewers of life and safety products like cars, power tools, and food, not really luxury items for the affluent. If I get suckered by a reviewer and drop $60 on a shit game with pretty minis, well, I really can't complain too much. It's a bit different when I buy crap nails that have a poor tensile strength and my staircase collapses with my kids on it. Perspective, which is why games specifically marketed for kids are so much more regulated and publisher limited.
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
fightcitymayor wrote: .
Some people applaud the internet age for "getting rid of the gatekeepers" and all you have to do is look at the amount of wannabe "boardgame reviewers" polluting the world to see maybe "getting rid of the gatekeepers" was a bad idea. (See also: Music, movies, food, books, magazines, print journalism, political commentary, and a million other arenas formerly occupied by capable, knowledgeable folks now occupied by shills, dorks, morons, and grifters.)
Ah the halcyon days of yore, famously free of shills, morons and grifters.
Also, before you get too wound up bemoaning the lack of gatekeepers I assure you we still have plenty
Erik Twice wrote: I've ran into reviewers who haven't played Magic: The Gathering or a single roleplaying game. People who, most importantly, don't believe not having played these games impairs their ability to review and analyze games.
"Oh you like games? Name every game, idiot. Pfft that's what I thought."
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
- Erik Twice
- Offline
- D8
- Needs explosions
- Posts: 2300
- Thank you received: 2650
I simply believe critics should be knowledgeable about the medium they write about. That's not "gatekeeping", it's having standards. If you are going to put yourself on a pedestal and judge the work of others as a professional, the least you can do is do so from a position of knowledge, not ignorance. It's part of the job description.Ah_Pook wrote: "Oh you like games? Name every game, idiot. Pfft that's what I thought."
The whole point of criticism is to be insightful. If you are ignorant about what you write about, you cannot do the job It's not even a high bar. D&D and Magic are the two most influential games ever made. They have shaped the whole art form. If you care about the quality of your work, your insight into the medium and the recommendations you make to your audience, you should know about them.
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
- Erik Twice
- Offline
- D8
- Needs explosions
- Posts: 2300
- Thank you received: 2650
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
Gregarius wrote: Do you actually read reviews for nails?
Yup. Build something with the wrong ones or at least substandard ones and you will as well. There is a DEEP well to dive on every single topic imaginable.
Im not saying they are particularly fun or exciting though
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
- Posts: 134
- Thank you received: 206
I'm one of them.Erik Twice wrote: I've ran into reviewers who haven't played Magic: The Gathering or a single roleplaying game. People who, most importantly, don't believe not having played these games impairs their ability to review and analyze games.
I haven't played Magic: the Gathering and I do not believe that fact impairs my ability to review and analyze games one iota.
Feel free to peruse any of my reviews/articles (they're mostly at www.thegamesjournal.com ) and let me know if you find them lacking. While there are no doubt many criticisms that can be fairly levelled at them, "the author hasn't played Magic" is not one of them.
Your statement is a form of gatekeeping and I think you should re-examine your belief in it.
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
- Erik Twice
- Offline
- D8
- Needs explosions
- Posts: 2300
- Thank you received: 2650
Is it gatekeeping for doctors to know medicine? Is it gatekeeping for translators to speak the language they work on? Is it gatekeeping for teachers to be qualified to teach?Greg Aleknevicus wrote: Your statement is a form of gatekeeping and I think you should re-examine your belief in it.
"Gatekeeping" is not an excuse for a lack of standards. Critics should be knowledgeable about their own field and that includes playing influential games like D&D, Magic or Settlers of Catan. If you haven't, I'm sorry, but you are less able to provide insightful criticism than if you had. Ignorance is not as equally valid as knowledge.
Again, these games have shaped the whole art form. If you care about the quality of your job, why wouldn't you put time to understand them? Knowing about Magic has been a massive help for me to understand the art form, more than any other game I can think of. And it has helped me to become a better critic and explain games better to others.
At the end of the day, being a critic is a responsability. The entire point of the job is to help. How can I do that if I'm not willing to play the world's most popular and influential boardgame? If I ask others to trust me and listen to my judgment, the least I can do is to do so from a place of expertise. This is not "gatekeeping", it's taking your job seriously.
Learning how to actually play trick-taking games was big for me. While I had played them as a kid, I didn't feel I understand the genre well-enough. I don't think I would have been able to review The Crew if I hadn't played other trick-taking games at my club.Jexik wrote: To be fair, I’d put stuff like Chess and at least one traditional trick taking game as something people should at least try...
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
- Posts: 134
- Thank you received: 206
All three of those questions do not correspond with your thesis. Your original assertion ("you can't be an effective reviewer of games if you haven't played Magic") requires someone to know about a specific field/item in order to write about anything part of the greater subject. It's equivalent to making the following statements:Erik Twice wrote: Is it gatekeeping for doctors to know medicine? Is it gatekeeping for translators to speak the language they work on? Is it gatekeeping for teachers to be qualified to teach?
- You can't be a good brain surgeon if you know little of podiatry.
- You can't accurately translate French if you don't know German.
- You can't effectively teach history if you're unfamiliar with calculus.
Your assertion has nothing to do with ignorance vs. knowledge, a lack of standards, or taking a job seriously -- it's the fact that you've chosen what constitutes the required minimum for these. And that IS gatekeeping.
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.