Are reviewers evil?

[Darrin Drader]

I should mention that I have generally been more happy with the D20 Magazine Rack reviews than most others. The scores mean little to me, but the reviews tend to rate the product based on the preferences that I laid out in my post above.

 

[Umbran]

I think perhaps before we start saying "sour grapes", and "he's taking a pot shot at reviewer X", and "he's callng reviewers evil" we should think about his intended audience.

Who is Mr. Ward trying to instruct? I submit to you that "big time" reviewers, who make a bit of a trade out of reviewing products, are not his intended audience. Quite honestly, such critics are unlikely to take reviewing lessons form a publisher, and I'm sure he's aware of it.

So, that leaves the rest of us shlubs as his target - those folks who may try to sit down and write a review on occasion, just for the heck of it. For that target audience, his points are pretty solid in concept, if not in execution.

Can anyone here really say that for "amateur" reviewers:

-taking care with grammar,
-using specific examples rather than general unsupported statements
-making sure you've actually tried the thing at least a bit
-avoiding long diatribes on art
-and not getting carried away making only negative points

are bad ideas?

Maybe Mr. Ward has had bad experience with reviewers. Maybe Psion's reviews irked him. But that doesn't mean the man cannot try to make a bit of lemonade out of what he sees as lemons.

 

[The Serge]

The biggest problem I have with reviews is when reviewers try to decide for the reader what is and is not useful. For instance, the Gamewyrd review of Plains of Penance, he panned the adventure I wrote because he doesn't like adventures and doesn't think there is a place for adventures in that type of book, not because the adventure was written badly. In fact there is a definite reason that there is an adventure in that book, as well as the other Oathbound setting books. I think that the reviewer should stop short of making an assessment on whether or not a particular element belongs in a book and instead comment on how that section is presented. Let the potential buyer decide whether or not it belongs.

I've seen a particlar reviewer pan nearly every Bastion Press book based on very little other than the reviewer's predisposition to not like them. How do I know its a predisposition? Because they refer back to other products that they panned, and it comes across in their tone and the generally negative langauge that they use. If a product is going to be panned, I want to see solid point by point examples of how the product is lacking. Jim Ward is dead on with this point, though I think that he is being defensive because of the mainly negative reviews his products have gotten. Having looked them over myself, I'm not overly impressed, which is sad considering that I've always respected Jim Ward in the past.

These examples you give reveal that the person "evaluating" the products is not a reviewer. A reviewer should be able to differentiate his/her preferences from the whether or not the material is balanced and usable by gamers at large.

As I said before, I didn't like BoVD's treatment of Arch-Fiends, but I valued virtually everything else. I didn't let that aspect, nor by general distaste for the art impact how the book played.

I've only reviewed a few pieces sent to me as review copies, so in most cases, I buy the material I review. This means that I'm far more likely to be honest about my position. In some ways, I think this may be for the best...,

 

[trancejeremy]

Can anyone here really say that for "amateur" reviewers:

-taking care with grammar,
-using specific examples rather than general unsupported statements
-making sure you've actually tried the thing at least a bit
-avoiding long diatribes on art
-and not getting carried away making only negative points

are bad ideas?

Yes.

While grammar is nice, are reviewers supposed to be only those with English degrees? Heck, I don't even own a word processor and so write my reviews in notepad. I try to check my spelling, but I'm going to end up with typos.

Specific examples are good, but again, we're not writing academic papers. It's okay to give general impressions of the product. That say, the art is terrible, as opposed to citing several specific pieces that are ugly.

I would agree with the trying at least a bit of the book, but many of the problems in FFE products are obvious to those who know the d20 system. I mean, what sort of hit dice does a Ranger have? Anyone who has played d20 knows it's a d10. FFE thinks it's like 1st edition, and they have a d8 (sometimes). If I haven't played that part of the adventure with the bad stats, should I refrain from commenting on it? Heck no.

Art, well, I generally don't go on diatribes about it, unless they have pokemon dolls in the pictures (grrrrrr...that drives me crazy), but it's subjective. Some people really like art in their RPG books. Some don't. It's completely up to the reviewer, I think. Afterall, a review is their opinion of the book.

And sometimes, the only points of the book are bad points. There are really some books that have no redeeming features. Should you lie about them to make the company feel better? No.

Though my point is, people should be encouraged to review stuff. Especially d20 stuff, because there is just so much of it, and so little money (at least in my case) to go around. If you try to turn reviews into painfully detailed academic critiques, no one is going to write them.


Anyway, with only a couple exceptions, I really don't think any reviewer I've read has had an axe to grind with the company or the author. Most game people/companies are very nice (with very few exceptions...even Mr. Ward is nice, as long as you don't criticize him) and no one wants to hurt their feelings.

In 99.99% of cases where a bad review is given, the reviewer just really didn't like the book.

I think any objective judge would agree that most of FFE's products are well, bad (go read all the comments in the threads about the $2000 lifetime product deal they have. Most people pan their products). And they certainly do have certain consistent problems (like d20 stats/OGL compliance, bad maps, ugly art, poor editing, etc). Rather than shooting the messenger, why doesn't FFE spend the time and effort on making better products?

FFE has had a lot of neat ideas. If they implement them better, everyone is a winner.

 

[Darrin Drader]

These examples you give reveal that the person "evaluating" the products is not a reviewer.

I assure you that these examples come from reviewers who are generally well respected here. I'm not going to name names since I don't personally have an axe to grind here (you can do the research yourself if you want to) but I do believe these to be valid concerns about real issues.

 

[WayneLigon]

I cannot say that I've ever really looked at a FFE product closely - mostly I see Rings of Power , Swords of Power and the like at the FLGS. I don't have a pressing need for a book of magic items, so I've never given them more than a glance. Same thing for the book of devils and whatnot; demons and devils are such a rare encounter in the games I've run to date that the stuff in the MM is more than I'll probably ever use.

I have to say I was surprised by the extremely negative reactions to FFE products in another thread, so I might take a look at some this week. (I guess even negative publicity is good publicity ).

I'm not sure what to think about the article itself. I've done a couple of reviews for D20 Weekly, and tried to mention points of concern if I found any. I did a lot of COC reviews for Inphobia (Anyone remember that magazine?) but I rarely had to give even a lukewarm review to Chaosium products of that day.

I will usually give a positive review to something these days simply because I'm pretty selective in what I buy. I look through most books several times before I buy it, noting several things:

• Does it contain things I need for my campaign, or might need in the near future?
• Does it have a good balance between crunchy things and flavor?

...and more besides that. Then I take it home and read it a few more times. If I'm running something, I'll try to incorporate some of the ideas I might have questions about and see if they fly. I'm not infallible, and what I think might be a cool item might be torn to bits by the slavering jaws of my players.

I think the 'borders' comment bears looking at. Borders are something I check, after seeing a few products where there seemed to be a great deal of white space or overly-large borders. The perception (not nessesarily the same as reality, obviously) is that borders set off an alarm in my head that says 'look closer and see if it's padding'.

Just some random thoughts

 

[am181d]

Huh.

Never having bought or read any FFE books, that rant gives me the impression that all their work is crap. And yesterday, based on their inability to follow the OGL, I got the impression that they were kind of dumb. And they want to people to give them large sums of money for lifetime subscriptions?

Now, FFE may have some great material and some great guys working for them--I have no clue--but they are doing crap-all to their reputation this week.

In the interest of not burying the poor guys, can somebody please start a thread to talk about something cool FFE has done?

 

[Gizzard]

One thing I thought really odd in Ward's mini-rant was that he's sure that various other reviewers are better than RPG critics - and that he goes out of his way to particularly mention video game reviewers as an example of this - "They spend 40 to 120 hours playing the game..."

I wonder why he would think this?

Having seen the process from the video game development side, I was frustrated by the number of reviewers got forwarded to my office asking for "cheats". "Um, dude, I've got like 3 more hours before my deadline and I just started the first mission. Do you have like an "invulnerable code" or something?" Lol. And these are serious reviewers for print magazines, not J. Random's Kewl Review Website.

Am I venting because I'm bitter as Monte warned me not to? I hope not, I hope I'm just telling some stories about some things that happened so everyone can see better into how these things work.

Now the following is opinion: The proliferation of the web has lowered the bar for reviewers. Anyone with a keyboard can write a review and get it posted on a 'board, a website or at least a message group. There are some great reviewers out there devoting their time to helping others with useful reviews for little or no compensation. But there are a lot of truly terrible reviewers out there who are reviewing for ego-boost or one of the other side-benefits of reviewing.

Side-benefits of reviewing? Whatever could I mean? Any savvy company realizes how much effect a good review can have on the sales of their product. At the small end a company will send influential reviewers a free copy of their product. In the middle, companies will throw "preview partys" where influential or loyal reviewers are invited to share in the insider feeling and good times. At the extreme, good reviews are bought with either advertising or outright cash under the table.

Note these are stories from a different industry, so this is just general thoughts - I am NOT saying this applies to anyone particular in the RPG industry.

But, reviewers are human. They review for a reason. Sometimes it's because they love the game and want to give back to it. Sometimes it's because they want recognition and status. Sometimes it's because they like the mountain of free stuff that comes to their door.

The sad fact is that Ward's rant isn't as off-base as I wish it was. I don't agree with the tone of his article, but that's different than whether I think its true at its core.

 

[ced1106]

Ward sounds bitter, despite some of his more salient points. He's obviously tired of reading poor reviews, and would probably like to believe that their biased or unfair reviews. Clearly, he's irritated at some not-so-well-written reviews, and he's possibly looking for criticism to improve his products, and not finding useful feedback.

Well, if FFE put up a wad of cash so RPG sites could afford editors, sure, there would be better reviews. I mean, even those who receive complimentary review copies end up writing for less than the three-cents-per-word standard (and retail product sure isn't the same as cash). "Bad advertising is better than no advertising", and reviews are the cheapest advertising a company can get.

Is anyone willing to be an RPG reviews editor? There's no pay, you don't get the complimentary product, you are, however, expected to correct the reviewer if he's wrong, and you'll be to blame if the review isn't on time.

Rants (like this one are cheap. Staff isn't.


Cedric.
aka. Washu! ^O^

 

[Psion]

Is anyone willing to be an RPG reviews editor? There's no pay, you don't get the complimentary product, you are, however, expected to correct the reviewer if he's wrong, and you'll be to blame if the review isn't on time.

I used to employ one. Mike Johnstone (of Fiery Dragon fame, also did lots of Sword & Sorcery label stuff) used to take a hack at my reviews before they went up. He sorta got busy and I got more careful, but I am sure more mistakes slip throught nowadays...