{"id":553,"date":"2009-05-10T23:07:39","date_gmt":"2009-05-10T22:07:39","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/t-machine.org\/?p=553"},"modified":"2009-05-10T23:11:19","modified_gmt":"2009-05-10T22:11:19","slug":"a-better-way-to-review-video-games","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"http:\/\/new.t-machine.org\/index.php\/2009\/05\/10\/a-better-way-to-review-video-games\/","title":{"rendered":"A better way to review video games"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>Reviewing video games is hard. In some ways, it&#8217;s an impossible mission: a reviewer has too many conflicting interests:<\/p>\n<ol>\n<li>please the publishers or else be denied access to the materials they seek to review\n<li>please their editor or else don&#8217;t get paid; but the editor&#8217;s primary source of capital is often advertising &#8230; from the publishers\n<li>answer the consumer&#8217;s main question in a way that earns their trust: should they purchase this game or not?\n<li>stand out from the crowd of a million game players who decide to write about their hobby\n<\/ol>\n<h4>Who&#8217;s your Daddy?<\/h4>\n<p>This has been a problem for as long as I can remember (20+ years of game playing and reading game reviews); the consumer *believes* that the reviewer is answerable to them &#8211; but it has been a very long time (10 years now?) since consumers were the paymaster of reviewers; nowadays, it&#8217;s advertisers (which usually means: game-publishers).<\/p>\n<p>Of course, consumers still wield huge power. The virtuous value circle &#8211; the only circle that matters &#8211; is driven by consumers:<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li>A reviewer has a &#8220;readership&#8221; of consumers who are influenced in their purchasing decisions by those reviews\n<li>Publishers therefore court the reviewer to try and curry favour with the consumers and increase sales of the publishers&#8217; products (to those readers, and anyone they themselves influence &#8211; friends, family, colleagues, etc)\n<li>Reviewers earn more money, and get deeper access to development teams (courtesy of the publishers), so produce more reviews\n<\/ul>\n<p>But that power is &#8211; clearly &#8211; both indirect and hard to quantify. A consumer &#8211; even many of them &#8211; threatening to &#8220;stop reading a reviewer&#8217;s reviews&#8221; is not particularly effective.<\/p>\n<p>Publications like Edge helped along the indirection of consumer-power when they decided to go out of their way to obscure the identities of their individual reviewers, turning reviews into as much of a crap-shoot as buying games was in the first place. Since the web rose to prominence, it&#8217;s been eroded at the other end &#8211; there&#8217;s now so many reviewers around that, well &#8230; who has the time to remember who any individual reviewer is?<\/p>\n<h4>Qui custodet custodes?<\/h4>\n<p>But if journalists\/reviewers are supposedly there as a watchdog on the publishers&#8217; marketing depts, supposedly helping the consumer determine which are the (non-refundable) purchases they ought to be making, then who&#8217;s checking that the journalists themselves are honest?<\/p>\n<p>No-one, really. And that&#8217;s where the rot begins. The storms of outraged public opinion are nothing new: examples of journalists writing reviews of games (reviews both scathing and rejoicing) they hadn&#8217;t even played go way back into the 1980&#8217;s.<\/p>\n<h4>A case study in lies, damn lies, and video game journalism<\/h4>\n<p>In case you hadn&#8217;t heard, this week a &#8220;staff writer&#8221; from Eurogamer (a games review \/ news site) <a href=\"http:\/\/www.eurogamer.net\/articles\/darkfall-online-review\">ripped to pieces one of the most recently-released MMOs &#8211; Darkfall<\/a>. At which point Aventurine, <a href=\"http:\/\/forums.darkfallonline.com\/showthread.php?t=185060\">the developer of Darkfall, responded<\/a> with increasing anger and dismay.<\/p>\n<p>But the really interesting thing here is that Aventurine didn&#8217;t merely rant &#8220;you bastards! Our game is Teh Awesum!!!111! STFU, Beotch!&#8221; (well, they did that as well) &#8230; no, they dropped a little A-bomb in the middle of their reply:<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>\n&#8220;We checked the logs for the 2 accounts we gave Eurogamer and we found that one of them had around 3 minutes playtime, and the other had less than 2 hours spread out in 13 sessions. Most of these 2 hours were spent in the character creator&#8221;\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>Pwned. MMO developers *actually know whether your journalist played the game before reviewing it*. What&#8217;s more &#8230; they have proof&#8230;<\/p>\n<p>The EG reviewer (whose &#8220;references and background are immaculate&#8221;, according to the editor &#8211; but from reading his only two EG reviews, I&#8217;m afraid it does rather sound like he knows little about MMOs),<a href=\"http:\/\/www.eurogamer.net\/articles\/editors-blog-darkfall-aftermath-blog-entry\"> responded (via his editor) with the claim:<br \/>\n<\/a><\/p>\n<blockquote><p>\n&#8220;the logs miss out two crucial days and understate others, &#8230; and he insists he played the game for at least nine hours&#8221;\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>It would seem that someone is lying (and it could be either party). Worse, someone is being particularly stupid. Because the journalist is claiming &#8220;your computers lie&#8221;, and the developer is claiming &#8220;your journalist is a lier&#8221;; either way, it&#8217;s not a subtle, small, mistake &#8211; whoever is wrong, if they get discovered, they&#8217;re going to create themself a good amount of long-term trouble (bad reputation).<\/p>\n<p>Lots of MMO developers write shitty server code, and honestly don&#8217;t know what the hell is going-on inside their own game-world (but fondly imagine that they do &#8211; and proudly boast to the press (in the vaguest terms) that they do). But the rule of thumb is that devs who don&#8217;t know &#8230; don&#8217;t even know what it is they ought to be claiming that they know. The specificity of Aventurine&#8217;s claims suggests that they do have the stats, and those stats are mostly correct.<\/p>\n<p>(I say &#8220;mostly&#8221; because there is a bit of vagueness about what &#8211; precisely &#8211; the reviewer was doing in-game. That reeks of holes in their metrics\/logging. They clearly know when the player was logged-in, and what they did\/said in chat, and how many characters were created &#8211; but apparently not what they were doing in the client, e.g. how long did they spend in character creation? Implicitly: unlogged; unknown)<\/p>\n<p>Whereas it&#8217;s quite likely that a non-knowledgeable journalist, accustomed to buggy games, would assume that they could safely claim &#8220;your server is buggy, those figures are wrong&#8221;.<\/p>\n<p>Unfortunately for any such journalist, server logs are generally either correct, or absent entirely &#8211; there&#8217;s rarely any middle-ground. If he knew a bit more about MMO tech he might know this; very few journos (any of them?) know that much about the games they review, though.<\/p>\n<p>So &#8230; based on nothing but casual observation and intimate knowledge of the tech issues (and several decades of reading game reviews&#8230;), I&#8217;m leaning in favour of Adventurine and against Ed Zelton. My guess (pure *guess*) is that he&#8217;s been caught out being either incompetent or perhaps a bit lazy as a reviewer, and he&#8217;s thought he could get away with blaming it on buggy code. From reading the review, I get the impression he wishes he were Ben &#8220;Yahtzee&#8221; Croshaw (from Zero Punctuation) &#8211; although he clearly isn&#8217;t funny enough &#8211; but he seems to like saying &#8220;it&#8217;s shit; you&#8217;re shit; you&#8217;re all shit; STFU&#8221; instead of reviewing the game, and seems to think that&#8217;s good enough. As an MMO player, my feeling was that the review was, well &#8230; useless &#8211; without even playing the game, there is so much more I would want to hear in a review, and so much of his wanky whining that I couldn&#8217;t care less about. As an MMO developer, it felt downright insulting, as if he&#8217;d made no effort at all to play the game as a game. Actually, it felt like he&#8217;d hardly played MMOs in his life, and didn&#8217;t really know what they were.<\/p>\n<p>(NB, from the review: his apparent ignorance of some of the most important *and best-selling* RPG + MMORPG games of all time &#8211; the Ultima series &#8211; suggests that he really isn&#8217;t much good as a game reviewer. YMMV.)<\/p>\n<h4>Reviewing the reviewers<\/h4>\n<p>Up-front I&#8217;m going to point out that I don&#8217;t believe all MMO developers are currently capable of doing this &#8211; many people would be amazed to discover the true state of metrics collection in this industry &#8211; although *all* modern MMO developers ought to, and it&#8217;s not too hard to add-on later (add it to the list of &#8220;things MMO developers ought to do as standard practice, but many of them don&#8217;t do&#8221;). But it&#8217;s a general thing that I think we should move towards.<\/p>\n<p>MMO developers (well, actually, the Operators, but that&#8217;s getting pedantic) are in an excellent position to help guard journalistic honesty, in a way that traditional game developers have never been able to. I would like to start seeing the following published by *every* MMO developer each time their game is reviewed:<\/p>\n<ol>\n<li>What level the account(s) started at\n<li>What level the account(s) peaked at\n<li>How many hours the reviewer spent at the lowest levels, levelling-up manually\n<li>How many hours the reviewer spent at the highest levels\n<li>What percentage of time was spent on each of the different primary character classes and factions\n<li>Which areas of the game \/ aspects the reviewer actually engaged in (hours of combat, hours of crafting, hours of chat, etc)\n<\/ol>\n<p>&#8230;but, honestly, this isn&#8217;t so much about &#8220;journalistic honesty&#8221; (I used that phrase tongue-in-cheek above) as it is about starting a virtuous cycle of developers being more cognizant of what, actually, players &#8220;do&#8221; in their games &#8211; preferably *before* gold launch. In particular, if publishers (developers) started supplementing reviews with this info (as a matter of course), I think we&#8217;d see a sea-change in industry staff appreciating three key things about metrics:<\/p>\n<ol>\n<li>How little metrics they&#8217;re actually collecting compared to how much they think they&#8217;re collecting\n<li>What metrics actually matter, and\/or are useful?\n<li>How players actually play the game; by extension: how fun is the game, really, and which parts suck horribly?\n<\/ol>\n<h4>Does this work \/ matter?<\/h4>\n<p>At NCsoft, I got into the habit of asking prospective partners, hires\/employees, and external studios which MMO&#8217;s they played (fair enough) &#8230; and how many characters they&#8217;d got to the level-cap with \/ what level their characters had reached. It started as an innocent question, but I quickly noticed how often it gave early warning of failures of honesty among individuals, and how much it presaged the problems they would have in the future.<\/p>\n<p>The two worst problems were &#8220;complete ignorance of the MMO industry (either of pre-existing design practices, or tech practices)&#8221; and &#8220;personal self-deceit about what the person knows, and what they don&#8217;t know&#8221;. The latter tended to be a far worse problem: when someone is deceiving *themself*, it&#8217;s doubly hard to re-educate them, because first you have to get them to accept their own deception.<\/p>\n<p>Of course, it turned out to lead to a lot of defensive responses and a spew of self-justification, which made us both uncomfortable. In those situations, it can easily lead to making assumptions that certain people&#8217;s opinions are &#8220;worth less&#8221; because, say, you know for a fact they&#8217;ve never really played an MMO &#8211; at least, not in the way that most of that MMO&#8217;s players would\/will\/do play it. I hate that tendency, since it&#8217;s part of a snobbishness that lies at the root of a lot of oyster-like, head-in-sand behaviour in our industry. On the other hand, it&#8217;s important and useful to know when someone&#8217;s ideas are random conjecture and when they&#8217;re based on fact (and very few people in a design meeting or publisher\/developer meeting will honestly tell you their ideas are conjecture :)).<\/p>\n<p>On the whole, though, it turned out to be a really useful line of questioning &#8211; even bearing in mind the additional (smaller) problems it created. There are obvious problems that come from the statistical supplementing of free-form prose game-reviews &#8211; but I&#8217;m confident that these will be outweighed by the advantages (and the problems that will be shrunk).<\/p>\n<h4>PS:<\/h4>\n<p>Despite the TLC of good friends, I&#8217;m still weak and sapped of all energy from my month of illness. I&#8217;m triaging like mad to deal with urgent issues, but there&#8217;s plenty of highly important stuff that&#8217;s been pending on me for a while that I still haven&#8217;t had the time + energy to deal with. So, if you&#8217;re still waiting &#8230; I&#8217;m sorry.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Reviewing video games is hard. In some ways, it&#8217;s an impossible mission: a reviewer has too many conflicting interests: please the publishers or else be denied access to the materials they seek to review please their editor or else don&#8217;t get paid; but the editor&#8217;s primary source of capital is often advertising &#8230; from the [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[13,9,14,53,24],"tags":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"http:\/\/new.t-machine.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/553"}],"collection":[{"href":"http:\/\/new.t-machine.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"http:\/\/new.t-machine.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/new.t-machine.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/new.t-machine.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=553"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"http:\/\/new.t-machine.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/553\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"http:\/\/new.t-machine.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=553"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/new.t-machine.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=553"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/new.t-machine.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=553"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}