No, Games Radar: Your predictable review is the problem

1 07 2011

Edit: after I wrote this, IGN posted a review score of 4. See Games Radar, it isn’t just you.

There’s perhaps no better time to talk about what’s wrong with reviews than the release of a new game in the Dynasty Warriors franchise. I’m about to do something rather unfair, I’m going to pick apart a Games Radar review by Andrew Hayward. It’s unfair because I can sit back and dissect it word for word at my leisure. But hey, it’s my blog and I’ll rant if I want to. I’ll also add emphasis if I want to, though that emphasis is mine, all mine.

Read the rest of this entry »


Meet Scoop

19 06 2011

So, a site built around reviews of the tragically bad needs a different kind of review scale. Since the site is geared toward identifying the worst of the worst, the highest score should mean we’re found something epically bad. We need to convey that visually. That’s where the new ICFAS mascot comes in.

Meet Scoop: 

As far as a scale goes, there’s something that bothers me on many review sites: they don’t use the full range of scores. It is meaningless to have a scale from 1-10 if nothing ever scores lower than a 5 or 6. We’re going to go with a much smaller scale.

The idea is to separate games out into one of three categories. A game is either horrifically bad, not very good (which is pretty much what we expect), or better than expected, maybe even half-decent. So we are using a scale of one to three pile of our buddy scoop. where one would be for a game that actually isn’t nearly as bad as I thought it would be. A single scoop might actually be worth paying money for. A double scoop would indicate a game that isn’t very good, as expected, but isn’t atrocious. A triple scoop represents the very worst of the worst. If you see Scoop, but he’s not on fire, that’s considered a half-scoop.

My best friend proclaimed he would actually visit a website with reviews like that and my wife couldn’t decide if I were truly brilliant or insane. Thoughts? (there I go, talking to myself again…)