My thoughts on reviews and reviewers [AAP]

[mroberon1972]

Hmnnn, who to get to review your products...

Depends on what you want...

I, myself, offer open calls to untried reviewers.

Why?

Because everybody deserves a start, and because, to be honest, they try harder.

The truth about using professional reviewers is:

1. If you send a review to a professional reviewer, he might not have WANTED your product. My hackles rise every time a see a phrase like: "This product is not something I'm really into, but here's my review anyway..."

2. A professional reviewer is usually swamped, and many don't have time to give your product the full look it deserves. It's not that they don't try, but it's hard to linger over a product when you see fifty more screaming for a review on your desk...

Both of these issues are resolved if the reviewer REQUESTED the product for review, or purchased it on his own.


On the other hand, new reviewers:

1. Answered your open call because they WANTED to see your product. This means that they will be more receptive to the ideas in it. It also means if you made a bugger-poor product, then he will likely kill you in the review for inflicting it on him. Which way your product lies is up to you.

2. Others will note the enthusiasim of the reviewer (if they liked it), and will make it their own.


Now, on to some rules for dealing with new reviewers:

1. Ask for an HONEST and QUALITY review, never a GOOD one. A review is a relativly unbiased opinion.

2. Do not offer the reviewers rewards in any form for a review, beyond the product he is reviewing. In ANY FORM! Don't offer more reviews "if you like this one"... Don't bias the reviewer in any way. A biased review from an untried reviewer can be smelled a mile off. Trust me.

3. Don't openly correct the reviewer. If he was just plain wrong about something (there were actually 5 feats in the book, not 3), then e-mail him in private to correct the issue quietly. If you say ANYTHING openly, you get to sound like a jerk. Really, you ARE being a jerk...

4. If a review actually fails to be a review of a product (he writes three sentences saying "Great/Bad product. Buy/Avoid it!") then explain to him again what a review is. If he still will/can not understand what a review is about, then call it a loss. Nobody will take the review seriously anyway, so it won't really effect sales. UNLESS YOU MAKE A BIG DEAL OF IT! Then expect a poor reaction.

5. Thank the reviewer for his review. I don't care if he said it smelled like yesterday's cheese, THANK HIM. PERIOD. You asked for the review, and you got a review.

6. Take the negative parts of the review and LEARN FROM THEM. Fix what is wrong with your product in the way of errors, and note his opinion on things that he did not like (I didn't say change them. Tastes may vary).

This won't get you perfect reviews, but it will get you honest ones. And that's what we deserve, even if sometimes we don't want it...

All of the above is my opinion,
John Bowden

 

[Morrus]

The flipside of that is that certain reviewers develop a reputation and a following; people deliberately read their reviews, because they know what to expect. I'd imagine that someone like Psion, Joe Kushner, etc., get a substantially higher number of hits to their reviews than anyone else. And no publicity is bad publicity!

 

[Cergorach]

Hmm... I find that certain reviewers have roughly the same tastes as i have, find the same things important, etc. For example, Psion's opinion often equals my own...

 

[Crothian]

For PDFs I'd actually suggest doing both. You aren't loosing anything by sending them out to the staff reviewers. So, it would be getting best of both worlds.

 

[FoolishFrost]

All of these are true... In fact, I agree with them all to some degree...

I just like to give underdogs a chance, myself... And you have to admit, they are an untapped source of reviews by most people...

Of course, enventually new reviewers become experienced reviewers... The circle of life, so-to-speak...

 

[jmucchiello]

3. Don't openly correct the reviewer. If he was just plain wrong about something (there were actually 5 feats in the book, not 3), then e-mail him in private to correct the issue quietly. If you say ANYTHING openly, you get to sound like a jerk. Really, you ARE being a jerk...

This is untrue and foolish. A demonstratably wrong fact in a review should be refuted by the correct fact. Just make sure you are refuting a fact and not an opinion. "Actually there are 5 feats in the book of 5 feats" is a perfectly valid response to a review. "Actual the feats in the book of 5 feats are perfectly balanced and properly playtested" is not a good response to a review. If you look at reviews of my products I'll ask lots of questions about a review. Nobody has told me I was being a jerk and even the reviewer has given me a useful answer to my questions: useful meaning given the reader more proper info about my book than if I hadn't asked the question.

Granted, not all publishers/writers can keep their egos in check over reviews. But if you can, there is no reason not to respond to a review that has factual mistakes. Just don't say anything about the reviewer's opinion.

 

[Mark]

This is untrue and foolish.

That seems harsh and I disagree anyway. Better to exchange that information by email and allow the reviewer to make a retraction or correction on their own, IMO. Alternately, if for some reason you cannot reach the reviewer or the site (or magazine) where the review appears (or in the extreme when misinformation is being blatantly proffered), I feel it would be better to work through a neutral third party (or at least a proxy of some sort). Just my opinion.

 

[FoolishFrost]

Actually, Mark, I think he was making a referance to my more common moniker: The Fool.

Anyway, I feel that I've touched on a raw nerve somehow... My point was to show that new reviewers have a place in addition to 'name' reviewers. I feel they are equally viable as platforms for the display of a product in a neutral environment.

That does not mean that I will not offer my products to name reviewers that wish to review it, just that I feel it serves them poorly to stuff products down their throat and demand a review in exchange... Regardless of whether they want the product or not.

Did that make my position clearer?

Thanks,

 

[trancejeremy]

The flipside of that is that certain reviewers develop a reputation and a following; people deliberately read their reviews, because they know what to expect. I'd imagine that someone like Psion, Joe Kushner, etc., get a substantially higher number of hits to their reviews than anyone else. And no publicity is bad publicity!

I can't speak for ENWorld, since it doesn't have public hit counters, but over at RPG.net, I'm not sure that is the case.


For instance, there were something like 5 reviews of the new World of Darkness on the same day. The most popular one was by a guy who had only done 12 or so reviews. Someone who had done about 40 or so is the 4th most popular.

(Though obviously it matters here, since when a staff reviewer reviews something it makes the news here, while if a peon does it, it doesn't...)

 

[Crothian]

(Though obviously it matters here, since when a staff reviewer reviews something it makes the news here, while if a peon does it, it doesn't...)

Not true, while just today there are two reviews done by non staff reviewers that made the news. Also, the news hounds are busy people, there have been times my own reviews didn't make the front page. The best way to make sure that news hits the front page is to submit it yourself. Too many people think that it just magically appears there.

edit: And I highly disagree with you calling the non staff reviewers peons. There really is not much of a dofference between them and staff reviewers.