The DP Review section: Informal survey, you tell us!

[Gamereviewgod]

Over the past month or so, the review section has really been moving. There's new content nearly every day, whether it's an edit of an old review or a review of a new title, it's been put up. There's always something fresh, and it's impossible to make a post a day about what's been added.

Now, all of this takes time. So, before mistakes are made that need corrected later, I've prepared a small poll. You don't have to answer every question. If you have a specific gripe/complaint/whine/bitch/compliment and want to get that out in the open, that's fine too.

If you don’t read the review section though, it’s probably best to just move on unless you would like to say why… your answers will be the same al the way through! Here we go:

Why do you read the review section?

How often do you visit?

What stops you from visiting?

What makes you go in for a visit?

For a moment, ignore the sites basic “classic” principles… Do you prefer to read reviews of older (previous gen on down) or newer (current gen) games?

Is the section helpful in anyway?

What sections would you like to see expanded?

What’s wrong with the review section, and what do you think should be done to fix it (ignoring proofreading… it sucks, I know, and it’s slowly being fixed)?

Does a scoring system matter to you? Do you have an idea of a better one? Is the one we use fine?

Any suggestions outside of these questions?

Thanks for you time guys!

[TEND]

Why do you read the review section?

Just to look for games that seem interesting, and that I may be interested in picking up if I see them sometime down the line.

How often do you visit?

A few times a month maybe, once a week.

What stops you from visiting?

Very Little.

What makes you go in for a visit?

Generally intelligent reviews for games of all genres and systems.

For a moment, ignore the sites basic “classic” principles… Do you prefer to read reviews of older (previous gen on down) or newer (current gen) games?

Older, because I can generally find reviews of newer games fairly easily. So older unless it's a bit of an ignored title.

Is the section helpful in anyway?

Yes, I have purchased a few games based on reading about them in the review section.

What sections would you like to see expanded?

Just everything, it's always good to peek in and see something new catch my eye.

What’s wrong with the review section, and what do you think should be done to fix it (ignoring proofreading… it sucks, I know, and it’s slowly being fixed)?

No, glaring problems that I have noticed.

Does a scoring system matter to you? Do you have an idea of a better one? Is the one we use fine?

I like the scoring system, if I click on a game taht sounds interesting, I look at the scores if they're relatively high or extremely low I'll read on, if they are low to mid level I usually don't bother reading the review. Yes the scoring system in use is fine.

Any suggestions outside of these questions?

Nope.

EDIT: "Woo 100th post!"

[tylerwillis]

For a moment, ignore the sites basic “classic” principles… Do you prefer to read reviews of older (previous gen on down) or newer (current gen) games?

Older. As aforementioned, it's easier to find reviews of the newer stuff. I come to DP for my retro/hard to find needs.


What’s wrong with the review section, and what do you think should be done to fix it (ignoring proofreading… it
sucks, I know, and it’s slowly being fixed)?

1. It would be nice to take the section out of frames; it's awfully difficult to get a permalink for a link or a bookmark.
2. It would be nice to have a way to submit a second/third/etc review for a game that's already been reviewed.


Does a scoring system matter to you? Do you have an idea of a better one? Is the one we use fine?

Scoring systems = bad. (http://www.tylerwillis.com/2005/07/09/a-simple-note-on-the-reviews/)

[hydr0x]

Why do you read the review section?


because i can't read enough reviews of games ;)



How often do you visit?


not too often, once a month i'd say



What stops you from visiting?


time ;)



What makes you go in for a visit?


interest in certain games, update post on the board



For a moment, ignore the sites basic “classic” principles… Do you prefer to read reviews of older (previous gen on down) or newer (current gen) games?


older, by far



Is the section helpful in anyway?


yep, although i disagree with some reviews and some are too short imho



What’s wrong with the review section, and what do you think should be done to fix it (ignoring proofreading… it sucks, I know, and it’s slowly being fixed)?


well, like i said some reviews are too short, i also found some reviews were i couldn't agree with anything said, but i guess you can't change that :P also more screenshots might be nice LOL



Does a scoring system matter to you? Do you have an idea of a better one? Is the one we use fine?


it's good to me as it is now



Any suggestions outside of these questions?


yeah, a complete list of which reviews were added (one list per month or week) would be very welcome. we (the guide editors) want to link the reviews to the games, and if we don't get a list of what's been added that's not too easy to do :/

[Daltone]

How about a section for PC games?

[RCM]

I really don't read the reviews. Since the review section isn't competing with EGM or Gamepro or anyone really why not throw out a rating system all together? I'd prefer it if everyone got rid of stars, numbers, thumbs up...you get the point. F U Matt email me! See ya

[Mangar]

I don't read the review section because i find most of them hastily written, and not overly informative. There are of course exceptions to the rule, but even then they tend to be capsule type reviews and not really in-depth. Which tends to be what i'm looking for in a review.

For what they are, they seem to be ok. Which(at least what i've always thought) is to give people who have never heard of, or don't own a specific game - A brief description. But not a real "review" in the conventional sense.

[Gamereviewgod]

There are of course exceptions to the rule, but even then they tend to be capsule type reviews and not really in-depth. Which tends to be what i'm looking for in a review.

Please elaborate. What is it specifically you feel a review needs to inform you? What are our reviews lacking? Also, see the end of the post.


why not throw out a rating system all together?

That's why the question is up there...


How about a section for PC games?

We have one... with two reviews. The whole computing scene in general needs a boost. No one has really stepped up to do this either. I'd love some PC stuff up there.


yeah, a complete list of which reviews were added

I'll get on that.


1. It would be nice to take the section out of frames; it's awfully difficult to get a permalink for a link or a bookmark.
2. It would be nice to have a way to submit a second/third/etc review for a game that's already been reviewed.

Both are noted. I don't think it's the review frame itself that is the problem. That seems more convienent to me since you can just flip through each system as needed without leaving. It's with the standard frame that causes things to be squished horribly. Dual frames is icky.

As for the second, there is a way to do that now (standard way), though it is discouraged (Contra on the NES for example). We are a database, and the more info we have, the better the database we have. Someone writing a revew for the same game doesn't bring us any closer to a goal. However, if somone writes an even remotely competent review, it always finds a home, and differing opinions are always welcome. So, on a technicality, we do have that feature... or did you have something else in mind?


also more screenshots might be nice

As of right now, EVERY review up until the PS One section has a screen shot (at least one, aside from two or three truly obscure titles). By the end of the month, I hope to have screens in every review here on the site. Not that far off from it now.


Moving on, two people said they want longer reviews. Here's the reason for the general length:

I generally stay within the realm of 500-1000 words. Unless there is some deep, involving gameplay issue, a basic explanation that gets the point across should be enough. General stats from internet site visits show the length of a stay is around 40 seconds. A 5,000 word masterpiece can't be read in that time.

That's not to say they don't have a purpose. However, as it was said, the scoring system tends to do the job instead of the text, and hence why I brought it up. if it was impotant to the majority, then obviously it would stay. If not, we can look into other options. If we're going to expand the average review length, then let us know what it is you expect when you decide to read one.

Thanks for giving us your time to provide valuable feedback guys!

[tylerwillis]

Both are noted. I don't think it's the review frame itself that is the problem. That seems more convienent to me since you can just flip through each system as needed without leaving. It's with the standard frame that causes things to be squished horribly. Dual frames is icky.


Eh, I'm just not a fan of frames in general, but that's me. If there was a good way to get the the permalink in the address bar, that'd be fine.


As for the second, there is a way to do that now (standard way), though it is discouraged (Contra on the NES for example). We are a database, and the more info we have, the better the database we have. Someone writing a revew for the same game doesn't bring us any closer to a goal. However, if somone writes an even remotely competent review, it always finds a home, and differing opinions are always welcome. So, on a technicality, we do have that feature... or did you have something else in mind?

As for a suggestion, why not switch it from
Contra
Contra

to something like:
Contra, 2, 3

With each number going to a new review.


We are a database, and the more info we have, the better the database we have.

I understand that DP doesn't want repeats necessarily, but not everyone is writing with the intention of filling DP holes. I write whatever I'm playing; there's a few reviews that I've written that I have not sent in because they already have reviews. Whether or not there's already a review has a little bearing on whether I write or not; I'd rather see the acceptaince of alternate opinions become not only tolerated but encouraged.


As a random note - have you though about trying to get the reviews indexed by a ranking compiler - metacritic or gamerankings? I know they may be oriented toward the newer stuff, which we have some of, but they might do older stuff too - which would drive more people here. Hopefully. Just a thought.

[Mianrtcv]

If you don’t read the review section though, it’s probably best to just move on unless you would like to say why… your answers will be the same al the way through! Here we go:

Why do you read the review section?

How often do you visit?

What stops you from visiting?

What makes you go in for a visit?

For a moment, ignore the sites basic “classic” principles… Do you prefer to read reviews of older (previous gen on down) or newer (current gen) games?

Is the section helpful in anyway?

What sections would you like to see expanded?

What’s wrong with the review section, and what do you think should be done to fix it (ignoring proofreading… it sucks, I know, and it’s slowly being fixed)?

Does a scoring system matter to you? Do you have an idea of a better one? Is the one we use fine?

Any suggestions outside of these questions?

Thanks for you time guys!

I read the review section because this is one of the few video game sites I hit. I get some magazines, but I like to see what games are reviewed and how they rate.

I visit probably about once a week or slightly more. Time issues.

Time issues stop more frequent visits.

I go in for a visit because in general I have usually been in agreement with the reviews. So I tend to trust the content. I get some magazines, but I like to see what games are reviewed and how they rate.

I like reading reviews for the older systems.

I like this section, at times it does influence my choice of purchase or what to play.

As far as expanding I'm not sure. Maybe have more than one writer per review when possible (not sure if that is a suggestion you're thinking of).

I don't find much wrong. Reviews will always be a touchy subject for fans and fanboys.

I do like to see a scoring system for a review.

I have no idea for a better one. Unless of course you count the visions of the swedish bikini team as the rating for games. The scale would be fully clothed=game sucks, less clothes=higher rating. :D

During certain reviews it may become a little ambigous whether a reviewer is a fan or not. Not all reviews will be cut and dried. Many will have to fall in between love/hate. The rating system should provide clarification whether a game is mediocre or better than average, very good, etc.

Outside suggestions... Hmmm. The guidelines for reviews basically point out what content I want in a review so nothing comes to mind.

[jdc]

I'll just sum it up like this.

When I decided to make the move to buying retro games, I was directed to come here and join DP. As a person who NEVER touched an older system before a few years ago, I found the review section invaluable. It "trained" me as to what to go for and what to stay away from.

I found reviews with descriptions of a game's difficulty level to be what I liked, as well as any "waste of time" or "must have" comments.

I'm no expert, but BECAUSE of the DP review section, I can at least join in on a classic gaming conversation down at the local shop, and know what is being discussed!!

[Daltone]

How about a section for PC games?

We have one... with two reviews. The whole computing scene in general needs a boost. No one has really stepped up to do this either. I'd love some PC stuff up there.



Oh, I'd never noticed the "Computers" section before. I'd always sort of expected it to be under "PC". But hey, now I know there is one I'll have something to do on those long, sleepless nights.

Just generally though - I like the review section. I think that it's a really good idea and would love it were it to expand, with both new and easy to find games and more obscure stuff. I know a lot of people have japanese games, and it would be great to hear how import friendly they are etc (there was a really wonderful thread in Import Mania like this)

I can live with the numbering. In the end it's all about personal opinion and while I don't think my idea of a 6 and some people's match up exactly I still think that having an overall rating is more of a help than a hinderance.

[Gamereviewgod]

to something like:
Contra, 2, 3

With each number going to a new review.

I like the idea, but we'd have to find a different way. Say if we had reviews of Double Dragon on the NES, and two people wrote reviews. It would look like this:

Double Dragon 2, 3

Obviously that's a problem given the sequels. If we put them in parentheses (2, 3) I'm not sure if that would work either. For games wihtout sequels it's great, but we would need something more universal. So, we need a system in place to make this suitable.


If there was a good way to get the the permalink in the address bar, that'd be fine

Agreed.


there's a few reviews that I've written that I have not sent in because they already have reviews

Send 'em. We'll never reject new content unless it's duplicated, and I'm guessing your reviews aren't copies. ;)


have you though about trying to get the reviews indexed by a ranking compiler - metacritic or gamerankings?

I've seen a few pop up in Game Rankings. I'm not sure of how they work or what needs to be done for them to show up. I looked at Rotten Tomatoes, and their requirements are ridiculous. if anyone has ideas, shoot.


I'm no expert, but BECAUSE of the DP review section, I can at least join in on a classic gaming conversation down at the local shop, and know what is being discussed!!

That's great to hear.

Now, everyone is saying "old game reviews" instead of new. I kinda/sorta worded the question wrong. I'm perfectly in agreement with that though as far as classics and obsucre stuff. The more the better.

However, these current consoles will be "retro" at some point. In other words, in five years from now, would a huge Xbox section be beneficial if we write the reviews now? Are reviews better for you if they were written then or now? In other words, in five years from now, do reviews work better for you if they're written the day they release or eight years after?

Take a look at the PSP section. Tons of reviews already. Look at the N64. The PSP section already trounces the 64 (which will be fixed in a few weeks ;) ).

Basically, we're ready for when the console becomes obsolete or dead, and we're current at the same time. But, as the question asks, do you the reader actually care? Do you think you'll want a huge PSP/DS/GC/PS2/Xbox section down the road? Should we focus on keeping up or beefing up (older sections)?

Thanks guys!

[tylerwillis]

I like the idea, but we'd have to find a different way. Say if we had reviews of Double Dragon on the NES, and two people wrote reviews. It would look like this:

Double Dragon 2, 3

Obviously that's a problem given the sequels. If we put them in parentheses (2, 3) I'm not sure if that would work either. For games wihtout sequels it's great, but we would need something more universal. So, we need a system in place to make this suitable.

That's why I wrote:
Contra, 2, 3

intead of
Contra 2, 3

But it still could be confusing.
The parantheses might work. Maybe a dash?

Contra - 2, 3
Double Dragon - 2
Double Dragon 2 - 2, 3
Double Dragon 3


Send 'em. We'll never reject new content unless it's duplicated, and I'm guessing your reviews aren't copies.

By duplicated, I assume you mean plagarized. Not duplicated within DP itself. If that's the case, I'll see which ones I didn't send in and get those to ya. I am also trying to write enough to have a theme week at my blog, so I do have more to send ya, but I'm holdin off until I get enough to do an actual week of reviews. :)


I've seen a few pop up in Game Rankings. I'm not sure of how they work or what needs to be done for them to show up.

You can add them manually through a form on the website, but that'd be a heck of a lot of work. Maybe contact one of the people listed on the contacts page and ask if they're an automatic way to do it? Surely IGN/Gamepro and the other major sites don't simply add themselves manually?


However, these current consoles will be "retro" at some point. In other words, in five years from now, would a huge Xbox section be beneficial if we write the reviews now? Are reviews better for you if they were written then or now? In other words, in five years from now, do reviews work better for you if they're written the day they release or eight years after?

It's probably easier to review games when they're current; people are playing them now and can easily compare to the past. Trying to set oneself in the frame of mind of what the techs and gameplays that had developed at a particular point in time can be somewhat frustruating.

It's fine that we have a big current gen section. DP is here for the long haul (I assume), so they're gonna matter to collectors who don't start collecting for another decade.

A good review is a good review no matter when it's written. Unless you're talking about direction for yourself (and other DP staff reviewers?), then I'd say to just encourage people to send in anything and everything. Atari to Xbox.

[Gamereviewgod]

Contra - 2, 3
Double Dragon - 2
Double Dragon 2 - 2, 3
Double Dragon 3

I've been sitting on this one for a while and I finally have an idea. What if we put the name of the writer next to the title for duplicates? As of now, most of the sections have the writers names cut which is an ongoing process, but if we kept them just for dual/triples, it won't look like we just screwed up and listed the same thing twice. It would stand out too since none of the other review have names. For example:

Old way w/ names:
http://www.digitpress.com/reviews/index_atari7800.htm

New way w/o names:
http://www.digitpress.com/reviews/index_psp.htm


A good review is a good review no matter when it's written. Unless you're talking about direction for yourself (and other DP staff reviewers?), then I'd say to just encourage people to send in anything and everything. Atari to Xbox.

Everyone in general. If I put a call out for some reviews because a section is crappy or limited, I want to know where we should focus. I write on current stuff regardless for other sites and it might as well end up on DP too. I mean, if we had a lot of people come in here and say they wanted Xbox 360 stuff at launch, I'd try to recruit some people to give me a hand.

Since that's not happening, we'll look for sections that need work (like the PC stuff) and I'll make a post at some point about wanting them.

Oh, and your latest batch is up Tyler.


I know a lot of people have japanese games, and it would be great to hear how import friendly they are etc

Dire 51 doesn't write enmasse, but when he does, he finds some of the most oddball games we have features on and looks at them from every view possible. His stuff rocks. Check the NES section for some like this:

http://www.digitpress.com/reviews/biomiraclebokutte.htm

[tylerwillis]

I've been sitting on this one for a while and I finally have an idea. What if we put the name of the writer next to the title for duplicates? As of now, most of the sections have the writers names cut which is an ongoing process, but if we kept them just for dual/triples, it won't look like we just screwed up and listed the same thing twice. It would stand out too since none of the other review have names. For example:

Old way w/ names:
http://www.digitpress.com/reviews/index_atari7800.htm

New way w/o names:
http://www.digitpress.com/reviews/index_psp.htm

Names could work; it is nice for author recognition. :)
The only thing is that a popular game might innundate the section - 4 or 5 reviews on a single game would look a bit odd and make navigation (long-term) unwieldy.

[Gamereviewgod]

Names could work; it is nice for author recognition. :)
The only thing is that a popular game might innundate the section - 4 or 5 reviews on a single game would look a bit odd and make navigation (long-term) unwieldy.

Well, the author still gets recognition either way. Their name still appears in the review header.

As for the 4-5 reviews, that's why I don't think it's a good idea to start accepting mulitple reviews, at least not reguarly. I don't mind having two, or even three. The problem we then have is if we do have multiples, how do we decide what stays and what goes? I'm not for deleting anyones work, and if they took the time to write, we should take the time to post it.

What's the cut-off point?

[tylerwillis]

Well, the author still gets recognition either way. Their name still appears in the review header.

As for the 4-5 reviews, that's why I don't think it's a good idea to start accepting mulitple reviews, at least not reguarly. I don't mind having two, or even three. The problem we then have is if we do have multiples, how do we decide what stays and what goes? I'm not for deleting anyones work, and if they took the time to write, we should take the time to post it.

What's the cut-off point?

Yes, I meant that it would be easier to tell who wrote an article without having to actually click on it; if you're looking for a particular person's reviews, then it would be much easier.

As for the number... you could just declare a hard number and stick with it. I dunno.