The Video Game Critic is one of the best review sites. Check it out.

[retroman]

Just as the title says. This site is awesome for those of you who do not know about it. It reviews everything from retro to modern, games and systems and more. One of my favorite sites. Just google it. Trust me you will love it.

[OldSchoolGamer]

Just as the title says. This site is awesome for those of you who do not know about it. It reviews everything from retro to modern, games and systems and more. One of my favorite sites. Just google it. Trust me you will love it.

Yep I have enjoyed him for years,! Here is link

http://videogamecritic.com/

[celerystalker]

After being recommended to check it out when I was planning a tournament, I really started enjoying this site. While I often disagree with his opinion, I like that he rates games in comparison to other games on the same system to keep perspective. It is all pretty clearly honest opinions of a real enthusiast, and he's pretty concise. I keep it bookmarked on my phone now.

[JSoup]

I like that the reviews are basically one or two paragraph blurbs that get right to the point.
Poking around the site, I'm surprised I never seen it before. It's been around since forever and has way more reviews and lists than I thought I was going to find.

[Greg2600]

His site is well organized, a rarity in game reviewing. Writes well, and hits a lot of points succinctly. Unfortunately he's no without controversy. I've found some of his reviews way off, perhaps because he didn't spend enough time playing them? He's very harsh on Atari VCS homebrew, which is both correct (many are not good) and a little unfair (they're homebrew after all).

[T]

One of my favorite sites. I go there and poke around
at least twice a month.

[wizardofwor1975]

One of my favorite sites. I go there and poke around
at least twice a month.

Definitely one of my favorites as well. I really like the fact that he includes some classic computers like the the C64 and the Atari A8. I wish he would review the Apple IIGS, Atari ST, Amiga, and the Vic-20. :)

[Leo_A]

I like that the reviews are basically one or two paragraph blurbs that get right to the point.

Sadly, some of his modern gaming reviews are much longer. And since he refuses to use paragraphs, it results in a wall of text.

I prefer him as a source for classic gaming reviews. Our taste are more in alignment in that area than they are with modern gaming and he rarely misses the target that I'd likely score a particular game. Only a few reviews are way out of alignment with my own thoughts, such as giving the showcase of the Atari Lynx a mere D.

[MachineGex]

I have used this site for years to help me grow my collections. I almost passed on Power Drive Rally on Jaguar several years ago. I looked it up and bought the game solely on their review. It is one of my favorite games on the system. Definately a great site to visit when deciding what to buy or play.

I also use this site when I was building my SNES collection
I think I have read almost the entire site so I dont hit www.rvgfanatic.com as much as I use to anymore.
Great site, great guy!

[goldenband]

The VGC sometimes dislikes games I think are great (e.g. Gain Ground), but very seldom does he praise games I think are garbage. Neither of those things bothers me, though; it's easy enough to factor in his quirks and biases and come up with a useful guide. I can usually read between the lines and figure out whether I might like a game even though he hates it, which is a sign of a good review site.

[PizzaKat]

I remember his site from 2008 I think. He's got a lot of games reviewed. I'd like to see his collection, it must be massive.

[Emperor Megas]

So I've spent a few minutes with his site and I really like it, mainly because the reviews are really short and to the point, which I appreciate. But it seems like he doesn't spend very much time with some of the games that he reviews. Others he gives terrible scores to that surprise me.

I've really only read through some of his SEGA Master System reviews, and while not a lot of people like Ghost House (I'm one of the few who really does), he didn't seem to even realize that there are intentional floor traps -- it's not a bad control thing -- and the reason the screen 'freezes' is because YOU HIT THE OVERHEAD LIGHT. It's not random or anything, it's a feature. This is stuff you'd realize if you only spend 5 minutes playing it.

He also gave Golvellius: Valley of Doom an 'F'. Weird, because Golvellius is awesome. And Kenseiden, one of my absolute favorite Master System games (which absolutely deserves a modern update) he gave a D+ to.

In any event, it's a great site!

[Emperor Megas]

He gave Penguin Land an 'F'? This is madness! :beaten:

[Daria]

This is why I don't like ratings and grades, point out your reasons and reactions and let the audience come to their own conclusions. But these are less reviews than summaries with a quick assessment of whether or not you should play the game.

[Alianger]

He's a wacko.

Edit: Fine, fairly misguided and problematic.

[Greg2600]

This is why I don't like ratings and grades, point out your reasons and reactions and let the audience come to their own conclusions. But these are less reviews than summaries with a quick assessment of whether or not you should play the game.

Precisely, which appeals to many people it seems. Several years ago, before YouTube game reviews became rampant, I used VGC a lot. I was buying a lot of games off ebay and in used game stores. Many times I would spot something I hadn't thought about before, and needed a FAST review. I would first go to Moby Games, and they had the list of contemporary reviews. The historic magazine reviews I never liked, always too fluffy, too much industry favoritism. His were short and to the point. They usually represented the view of someone who picked up the game for the first time, and this was their impression in the first 20 minutes. Perhaps not advised, but I was more collecting/hoarding than I was playing each game, so the first impression meant a lot to me.


So I've spent a few minutes with his site and I really like it, mainly because the reviews are really short and to the point, which I appreciate. But it seems like he doesn't spend very much time with some of the games that he reviews. Others he gives terrible scores to that surprise me.

I've really only read through some of his SEGA Master System reviews, and while not a lot of people like Ghost House (I'm one of the few who really does), he didn't seem to even realize that there are intentional floor traps -- it's not a bad control thing -- and the reason the screen 'freezes' is because YOU HIT THE OVERHEAD LIGHT. It's not random or anything, it's a feature. This is stuff you'd realize if you only spend 5 minutes playing it.

He also gave Golvellius: Valley of Doom an 'F'. Weird, because Golvellius is awesome. And Kenseiden, one of my absolute favorite Master System games (which absolutely deserves a modern update) he gave a D+ to.

In any event, it's a great site!

Yea as I said, often he doesn't review the games that thoroughly, which is problematic. He finally instituted a grading system for users, so if a review gets critiqued badly enough, he'll go back and review the game again. It's probably not the best approach editorially, but he's not a magazine, just a gamer. Sometimes, in the case of Kenseiden for instance, the first impression is bad enough where you just don't want to keep playing the game. I personally have it, and I tried it, and felt it was terrible (like VGC), and simply had no interest playing it. This is sort of how I dealt with renting games way back when. If I thought it was bad after 20 minutes, I'd run back to the store, and swap it for another. The rental shop was 2 blocks from my house, and they had a 30-minute or 1 hour (I forget) thing where you could do that!

He's also been bashed on AtariAge frequently for being harsh on homebrews. I felt it was unfair to be that harsh, given they were homebrew after all, but many of the games had serious flaws and were just not fun to play. He called them out on that, which is a sore subject at AA because most of the homebrewers "live" there.


He's a wacko.

Allllllright.....

[Tanooki]

Well I've known of this place I think it popped up in the earlier 00s or end of the 90s and the format clearly has stayed consistent. My problem goes with the comments in the last 24 hours~ really with these small flurry of posts on his style. I don't think he's out of his mind, but I think he's sadly fairly misguided in enough cases to really not take his opinions seriously. I think he has a bad case of making snap decisions about many games, some he'll stick with a little to see if it's just a bad start, or he's goo goo over it from the beginning and the grades and commentary back it up. In all I don't think he plays much of any of them all that long before making comments though which isn't professional, but he's not one so it goes with the territory. Golvellious isn't an A game, a decent B for the system/era though, and Kenseiden isn't awesome, but it's not D terrible either as it has issues but it has some nice parts too so it kind of middles out in the B-/C range.

[rmaerz]

He's also been bashed on AtariAge frequently for being harsh on homebrews. I felt it was unfair to be that harsh, given they were homebrew after all, but many of the games had serious flaws and were just not fun to play. He called them out on that, which is a sore subject at AA because most of the homebrewers "live" there.


Here's my thought: if you are going to sell a home brew then people have purchased the right to critique the game. If the game sucks then the reviewer should just tell it like it is.

I do some videos of works in progress on my YT channel, and I have a rule that if the game sucks I won't do a video of it. But if I buy a home brew and it sucks then I'll tell it like it is. I got a lot of crap for bashing Bagman for the ColecoVision but in my mind the game was rushed and with some polish it could've been a great game. But what was released was a huge disappointment.

[Emperor Megas]

Kenseiden isn't awesome...You're right; 'Golvellius' is awesome. Kenseiden on the other hand is freakin' amazing! :D

[sfchakan]

Wow, this guy's still around and plucking away -- with no sign of a Patreon even!

[Cafeman]

I've been perusing VGC online for years! The site has so, so much content. I love to kick back with a drink and read down through various paragraph-length reviews for a particular console or two. I don't care that I disagree just as much as I agree - he did a great improvement by allowing user votes, as well as being able to sort by title and also sort by review Grade. I actually laugh at how quick VGC gives a game an F. There are so many F's across all the console games on his site. I mean, I'm not sure I ever played a game that I felt deserved an F.

I was going to give 1 example, but after checking it out ... one of the strangest of bad reviews was his Atari 5200 Star Raiders review ... originally he gave it an F ! An F, this game which was so beloved on the Atari 8bits and ported with a superior version to 5200! But I see that now he lists it as C+ and notes that he was too harsh originally.

[fergojisan]

I admire his site for its longevity and the sheer amount of games he's reviewed, but we obviously do not like the same kinds of games.

If you want to build your collections with reviews, you would do well to check out this page. Very few (if any) stinkers here.

http://www.digitpress.com/archives/arc00050.htm

[Gentlegamer]

I've been enjoying and posting at Dave's site for almost ten years. My signature here use to have a banner link to it.

I'm glad more have found it. What I like about Dave's reviews and the community there is that they get just as excited learning about a new old game as a modern new game.

He also uses the whole grade scale, with plenty of Ds and a few Fs, although some of those Fs are head scratchers, like NES Metal Storm.

Dave definitely has a narrow tolerance for what he perceives as difficulty in games and grades accordingly.