CAG Game Review Suggestions Thread
Posted 12 April 2008 - 05:03 PM
Posted 12 April 2008 - 05:05 PM
I like Cheapy's suggestion of Buy, Rent or Avoid it.
As for a numbered score of some sort, Cheapy can can just attach the number that each person selected in the choices above.
(Ie 80 people said Buy it, 50 said Rent and 30 people said avoid)
Cheapy's right about numbered scores, everything gets stuck in that 7-9 range and Buy, Rent, Avoid is good enough as a monetary system. It tells you whether it's worth your money or not and it's simple.
Posted 12 April 2008 - 05:59 PM
And you'd probably need some sort of review score reporting system to keep those spammers out of the system. Or basically some sort of input confirmation.
But in all seriousness, I don't think a review system would be good for this site, atm.
Posted 12 April 2008 - 07:15 PM
please don't do a monetary system, value is very much in the eye of the beholder. Even though we're all "cheap-asses", what is worth $60 to me is different than what is worth $60 to you.
That's the whole point behind review systems in general. Regardless of whether or not we stick a price tag along with our review, we're still saying whether or not a game is worth buying, renting, or avoiding.
But as CAGs, we should take it a step further and say what the game's value is, instead of having to read every detail of a review just to learn "So they really liked the game, but felt $60 was a tad high, and $30 is a good price".
Buying is a very detailed issue in and of itself on CAG. As you said, one CAG might be willing to pay a certain amount while another CAG is not, but both are willing to buy if the price is right.
As a fellow CAG taking game suggestions from other CAGs, I already know the game itself is worth picking up at some point (Buy it, Rent it, Avoid it), but a normal review still leaves me scratching my head as to whether I should buy it right away or wait for the price to drop. On the forums, this is what I'd like advice on, and I feel the review system can do a wonderful job at achieving this in a time efficient manner (displaying overall votes in the Value Evaluation System rather than it's average score on the 1-10 scale).
Posted 12 April 2008 - 08:45 PM
Buy It Full ($60)
Buy It Used/Sale ($25-$50)
Buy It Clearance ($9-$20)
From my collection, here are some examples on how I would rate my own games in the buy it range and some games I would put in the rental/avoid range:
Buy It Full (COD4, Halo 3, Mass Effect, Oblivion, Lost Odyssey, MLB The Show 08)
Buy It Used/Sale (Eye of Judgement, Stranglehold, Blue Dragon, Eternal Sonata, Heavenly Sword, Ratchet and Clank)
Buy It Clearance (Earth Defense Force, Bullet Witch, Elite Beat Agents, The Darkness, Splinter Cell)
Rent It (The Simpsons, Frontlines, TimeShift)
Avoid It (Turning Point, Lair, 90% of the third-party games on the Wii/DS)
Listen to the Checkmate Arcade video game podcast! Also available on ITunes & Stitcher Radio
Posted 12 April 2008 - 08:51 PM
Something along those lines seems to work for CAG in my opinion.
I also like this.
Now this would be helpful because the users would look at the deals thread. They will see a deal with a game. Say Overlord for 19.99. Then they could click the name of the game. A screen pops up and says that 30 CAGs reviewed the game and the CAG Average is $30.50. They would see that this is a good deal. Then if you want you can look over the reviews. This also works for bad games. If Dark Sector was reviewed for a CAG Average of 20.00, people will see this 59.99 is way to high and they will more likely to wait and buy it. You should also show which CAGs own the game.
I would also enjoy reviewing games, should the need arise for any individual reviewers.
Posted 13 April 2008 - 01:19 AM
Posted 13 April 2008 - 06:15 PM
Posted 14 April 2008 - 03:55 AM
Posted 14 April 2008 - 07:27 AM
Posted 14 April 2008 - 08:58 AM
Posted 15 April 2008 - 01:54 PM
I also like the idea of gradeing the game, rental, buy, destroy, .etc. As this helps avoid the trail of every game being between 7-9. Perhaps twist both ideas together? Army of Two is a buy, it's fun and the multiplayer is decent but it's a buy at my recomended vaule of $45.
This may have a flaw of everygame is a buy at a certain price, so maybe two scales? Maybe I like the idea of a price scale to rate a game simply because my friends and myself use it to describe games that we pick up.
Posted 15 April 2008 - 02:14 PM
Posted 15 April 2008 - 02:24 PM
What I don't like about "buy it, rent it, avoid it" is that there are some WONDERFUL rental games. A "rent it" for me doesn't mean the game is worse than a "buy it", its just that the game is concise enough that I can get my fill after 5 days. Like Shenmue; one of my favorite games of all time. I rented it and beat it within 5 days, and after that, there wasn't much to do but wait for Shenmue II. It wasn't a bad game by a long shot, but I didn't need to buy it. Final Fantasy XII, however was not one of my favorite games, but I felt I needed to buy it simply because you get more enjoyment out of the length of a game like that. I personally would have ranked Shenmue higher on some "point scale", but I would have given it a rental based on runtime. The same goes for games like Uncharted or Heavenly Sword.
We would use the rent it for an average on the reviewers expirence.
Not based solely on runtime.
Obviously a 40 hour RPG can't be rented and beaten, but its cheaper to rent a 40 hour RPG that mediocre and find out that you dont like it, then to waste the 50 dollars on it.
Posted 16 April 2008 - 12:50 PM
Full Price Buy
I think this sort of thing gives a little more detail without resorting to just numbers. A great game is worth putting money down for now (and perhaps getting the LE/CE), where a game that's great but has some big flaws might be worth picking up for full price after a patch. A CAG buy (always a good idea), means that it's worth buying when it has a discount, where a game that may be extremely short or have a narrow audience might be in the Rent category. Something that is briefly amusing would be worth borrowing from someone, but not actually worth paying money for. Finally, Avoid means the game isn't worth your time at all.
Posted 16 April 2008 - 05:44 PM
Zelda:TP is a good example. About 40 hours of time for $50? Sounds like a good play. But, if you don't like that kind of game, you probably wouldn't pick it up at any price.
I recently picked up Magical Starsign (DS) at CC for less than 10 bucks. I spent 30 hours playing through the game. The review scores didn't give it much respect, but the game was fun and getting a huge value for the game is important. I don't want to spend too much money on a game that I won't play much, but if I can get it cheap and try it out, I might consider it.
Posted 17 April 2008 - 09:34 PM
All three have basically the same flaws, but to be fair... they are problems with every review system. You have an issue of grade inflation (via fanbois), catching yourself in the 7-9/3-5 stars area. That idea of assigning a $ amount is an extremely nice idea and sort of avoids that problem.
A games "worth" is not really determined by the actual monetary value of a game, rather what people would be willing to pay (consumer market). If a game drops to 30$ and you get 1000 reviews averaging 40$, then you definitely get the idea the game is definitely worth the deflated price.
One option you could do is have a review over the specific aspects, but avoid giving grades to prevent people from focusing on a 7-10 range. Then have give some suggestion at the end of each section/review, obviously with better/more eloquent gradations.
Buy it Used
Wait for Clearance
Babies died to bring you this crap
Then also put up a poll-style review for users. This will allow people to see if the reviewer and fans see eye-to-eye. Two sources saying "Buy it" rings that it is a great game, two sources putting it between rentable and clearance ringer... would allow people to see that it's okay. Then people will actually look at the review as to why, rather than say "oh! Another 3! Forget that."
The only problem with not offering a numerical value is that it makes the site incapable of using places like metacritic.com that averages scores for people (for the time challenged). Sadly, in today's world most people are simply looking to get information as fast as possible because of time constraints. At any rate, good luck with whatever you guys decide
Posted 17 April 2008 - 10:39 PM
On the Cheap
My friends and I have discussions like this all the time; "I'd pay full price for that." or "I'd pick that up if it was $20" or "That game sucks".
I like your suggestion of ranking the game based on how CAGs rated it e.g. 80% said "Full Price", 15% said "On the Cheap" & 5% said "Forget it".
The 10 point scale is too detailed and loses it's meaning. I don't like the dollar amount idea because values change over time.
Posted 17 April 2008 - 10:50 PM
So basically, I think a letter grade system should be the reviewer's final decision on a game, but there should be a blurb that says "well, it's probably worth this much if you like the genre, but for everyone else, either steal it or don't bother." Or something.
it was probably in there because I'm a flaming homosexual.
Posted 17 April 2008 - 11:16 PM
All 6/10 games are pretty comparable and are always going to be merely mediocre no matter what the price. That 6/10 score won't change.
But game prices do change. An average game at $60 is still average at $30. A great game at $60 is still a great game at $30. When you have the choice, you buy the great game. And that game you said was only worth $30 when it launched suddenly becomes a "Wait till $20 game" and then it becomes a "Wait till $10 game" because the good/great games are dropping in price right alongside it. It isn't as if only crappy games drop in price and every $30 game is going to be average. Great games drop too.
Games rated 6/10 are generally of comparable quality. Games priced at $30 are absolutely not all of comparable quality.
Posted 18 April 2008 - 12:57 AM
These are the kind of deicisons we make all the time. Dark Sector at $60? No thanks, but is it worth it at $40 on the Amazon Dotd or as a rental? Culdcept Saga for $40, um no. It doesn't really work as a rental. Hmmm.... Amazon Dotd for $26, very tempting... PGR4 for $60 when there are 20 other racing titles for the 360? Not happening. PGR4 for $15 on clearance at Target? I'm thinking really hard about it.
You'll end up with a large number of games getting similar scores, but I think that is fine. Who the cares if CoD 4 is better than Halo3 or Orange Box? It also solves the problem of the mediocre scores. Crappy games are going to get values in the $0-$10 range out of a normal retail of $50-$60 in most cases. There are going to be a TON of games that get scores below 50% if you try to convert the scale to a number ranking.
Posted 18 April 2008 - 01:08 AM
Who the cares if CoD 4 is better than Halo3 or Orange Box?
Errr.... people trying to make a decision?
it was probably in there because I'm a flaming homosexual.
Posted 18 April 2008 - 01:11 AM
If not that, a 1-10 scale is perfect.
Posted 18 April 2008 - 01:50 PM
seems like you're putting too much thought into this.
Posted 18 April 2008 - 06:10 PM
Errr.... people trying to make a decision?
The distinction between those three games is entirely subjective, so using a review score to differentiate the three is retarded. They all achieve the highest level of quality that you can expect from a console title and anyone interested in the game is not going to be disappointed paying full price. If you can only afford to get one of the titles and you are using a review to pick one to purchase, your decision should be based on the content contained within the full review, not the score.
Posted 18 April 2008 - 11:48 PM
Posted 18 April 2008 - 11:52 PM