-
The VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX is LIVE! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Quality of Linked Reviews
- Thread starter Welrain
- Start date
Merova
First Post
Review Quality
Hi all!
I think that the purpose behind the links is to offer additional options for information. There isn't any "quality control" in this process; the value of such reviews can only be determined by the reader. For instance, IIRC, the Stargate SG-1 was written by one of ENworld's most prolific reviewers, trancejeremy. For the most part, I find his reviews helpful, but sometimes he can be a bit off.
It's up to the reader to be informed of the source, as with any "news media." For instance, there seems to be a fannish degree of kindness that goes into judging products here at ENworld; often times products that should have gotten a lower score end up with threes or fours. But this is something that an informed reader can compensate for and mentally adjust. Likewise on RPGnet, there's a spirit of cynicism and showmanship that encourages mean-spirited and biting "cleverness" in the reviews.
Every site and every poster has their strengths and weaknesses. I've been told that my reviews here are pedantic in the extreme. However, that's a subjective opinion. Others have found my reviews insightful. The front page links aren't here to make that decision for us. They simply indicate the existence of off-site reviews. I think this works out just fine.
Thanks for reading.
---Merova
Hi all!
I think that the purpose behind the links is to offer additional options for information. There isn't any "quality control" in this process; the value of such reviews can only be determined by the reader. For instance, IIRC, the Stargate SG-1 was written by one of ENworld's most prolific reviewers, trancejeremy. For the most part, I find his reviews helpful, but sometimes he can be a bit off.
It's up to the reader to be informed of the source, as with any "news media." For instance, there seems to be a fannish degree of kindness that goes into judging products here at ENworld; often times products that should have gotten a lower score end up with threes or fours. But this is something that an informed reader can compensate for and mentally adjust. Likewise on RPGnet, there's a spirit of cynicism and showmanship that encourages mean-spirited and biting "cleverness" in the reviews.
Every site and every poster has their strengths and weaknesses. I've been told that my reviews here are pedantic in the extreme. However, that's a subjective opinion. Others have found my reviews insightful. The front page links aren't here to make that decision for us. They simply indicate the existence of off-site reviews. I think this works out just fine.
Thanks for reading.
---Merova
Merova
First Post
Valid Critique
Hi all!
Alan, you give a fine example of subjective bias. I assume that you're referring to Wayne Tonje's review at the Gaming Report, which gives the mod a nearly perfect rating, BTW. He make the valid point that the scenario is designed specifically for the AU setting, limiting its utility beyond this specific game. Yes, this is an obvious point, but one that can bear repeating in a descriptive review; if you like the sound of this plot but don't play AU, you'll need to do extensive reworking because every NPC is tailored to the system. This is a fair point to make when helping consumers wisely spend their money.
Compare this review to Bruce Boughner's review at d20 Mag Rack. Bruce's excessive fawning over this product is tedious to me. If I just took his advice, I'd be rushing to my FLGS this instant to buy MEG's best product yet!!
Needless to say, I found the GR review to be better overall. YMMV, and obviously does. This illustrates he situation; we are both correct in our appraisals. Heck, what would somebody like Matt Colville from RPGnet say about these non-playtest reviews? (This is a rhetorical question.)
However, the point here isn't to "quality control" our information sources. We can decide for ourselves if a review has utility.
Thanks for reading.
---Merova
Psion said:
Hi all!
Alan, you give a fine example of subjective bias. I assume that you're referring to Wayne Tonje's review at the Gaming Report, which gives the mod a nearly perfect rating, BTW. He make the valid point that the scenario is designed specifically for the AU setting, limiting its utility beyond this specific game. Yes, this is an obvious point, but one that can bear repeating in a descriptive review; if you like the sound of this plot but don't play AU, you'll need to do extensive reworking because every NPC is tailored to the system. This is a fair point to make when helping consumers wisely spend their money.
Compare this review to Bruce Boughner's review at d20 Mag Rack. Bruce's excessive fawning over this product is tedious to me. If I just took his advice, I'd be rushing to my FLGS this instant to buy MEG's best product yet!!
Needless to say, I found the GR review to be better overall. YMMV, and obviously does. This illustrates he situation; we are both correct in our appraisals. Heck, what would somebody like Matt Colville from RPGnet say about these non-playtest reviews? (This is a rhetorical question.)
However, the point here isn't to "quality control" our information sources. We can decide for ourselves if a review has utility.
Thanks for reading.
---Merova
LightPhoenix
First Post
Merova, I just want to say I think those were the most well-thought, logical, and intelligent arguments I have ever read about a review on this board. You seriously need to post more.
Your money's in the mail...
Your money's in the mail...
Welrain
First Post
I was under the impression that the review links provided were due to some sort of affliation between the sites involved rather than simply a catalogue of a different sites new reviews and therefore expected a better level of quality.
Sorry for the misunderstanding.
In any case I've read through a number of the reviewers other pieces and have found them to be of a much better quality, which makes the outright lazyness of the SG-1 review all the more bizarre.
Sorry for the misunderstanding.
In any case I've read through a number of the reviewers other pieces and have found them to be of a much better quality, which makes the outright lazyness of the SG-1 review all the more bizarre.
trancejeremy
Adventurer
Awful? Ouch. (BTW, thanks merova)
I thought it was fair. I read the book, I tried it out, I reported what it was like, and tried to give the major changes from regular d20. I liked it, for the most part.
Maybe I should have taken out some of the jokes, but bear in mind, I mostly write reviews for my own entertainment. If I pay $50 for a book, my review is going to be very picky (and very silly).
Anyway, most of the real complaints on RPG.net about my review seem to be that I didn't use the names of half the characters, and I was disrespectful to the show because I pointed out that the Asgard really really really look like the props from the Showtime Roswell movie. But they do.
Anyway, I did revise my review on some of those points (though Richard Dean Anderson will always be MacGuyver to me), and will post it on ENWorld whenever they add SG-1 to their database.
I thought it was fair. I read the book, I tried it out, I reported what it was like, and tried to give the major changes from regular d20. I liked it, for the most part.
Maybe I should have taken out some of the jokes, but bear in mind, I mostly write reviews for my own entertainment. If I pay $50 for a book, my review is going to be very picky (and very silly).
Anyway, most of the real complaints on RPG.net about my review seem to be that I didn't use the names of half the characters, and I was disrespectful to the show because I pointed out that the Asgard really really really look like the props from the Showtime Roswell movie. But they do.
Anyway, I did revise my review on some of those points (though Richard Dean Anderson will always be MacGuyver to me), and will post it on ENWorld whenever they add SG-1 to their database.
