Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="AaronLoeb" data-source="post: 399714" data-attributes="member: 4382">I'm not a publisher, but I do write stuff for one... don't know if my opinion is of interest, Croth, but I'm happy to chime in.I've been an avid reader and lurker at ENWorld for over a year and I read most of the reviews, particularly of new stuff I'm interested in (like I've been fascinated by the back and forth on the MMII).I read reviews of game products for three reasons: 1, as a consumer; 2, as an author; and 3, as a former critic.The third one is why I'm replying because I thought it might be interesting to someone, somewhere, sometime (maybe). I'm really interested to see the language of RPG criticism get off the ground. I think it can't be stated enough (as it was recently by Monte Cook on his site) that while paper & pencil RPGs have been around for a really long time, actual criticism of them has not been. Historically, most publications about our hobby were house organs and only reviewed house products or a scant selection of other products, if they offered reviews at all.Mass availability of serious reviews of RPG products really seems to be one of the many new wonders of the Internet. As such, it's really cool to watch the form of RPG reviews developing before our very eyes. Here are some things I've noticed that are, I think, unique to RPG reviews:1) Value per page. I've seen this done in a lot of forms; sometimes actually dividing the retail cost by the number of pages to come up with actual pennies-per-page analysis. It seems vital in an RPG review to analyze how much value you're getting out of the product. In computer games, we would only note this if it were exceptionally poor (e.g. only 5 hours of gameplay for $60). But in computer games, this often is ignored. For instance, Metal Gear Solid was notoriously short, but it got sky high reviews. I can’t imagine a $40 RPG product that’s 120 pages getting sky high reviews even if it were written by <insert your favorite author’s name here>.2) Text Density. I don't see this in any other type of reviewing. It’s an actual analysis of how jam-packed the layout is! I know my surprise at this will seem positively provincial, since it’s so commonplace. But honestly, I can’t imagine any other printed form being reviewed in this regard – most consumers don’t notice things like font size or typeface (unless it’s truly awful and draws attention). Analysis of these factors seems a requirement for an RPG review. That fascinates me. 3) Raw Facts over Analysis. I've seen numerous comments and posts about reviews to the effect of: "I prefer objective reviews." What's clear is that a lot of people prefer an RPG review with little opinion, comparison to other products, value judgment or anything else that is actually (in my mind) the hallmark of critical analysis. The "best" RPG reviews list the chapters, their contents, and explain whether the art, writing and system work in those chapters is good – in as objective terms as possible. This is unlike most other forms of criticism; for instance, with a videogame, you really have to focus on whether the game is actually fun, a subjective assessment. Film reviews only point out the nuts and bolts of the film (camera work, lighting, number of scenes) if they are exceptionally good or bad (or if the review is for a technical journal). But there is a definite negative response (I think), on most RPG sites, to reviews that blow off going into details about the product and instead dwell on the opinions and reactions of the reviewer to the product.4) Substance vs. Style. The biggest "feud" in RPG reviewing that I've seen, I think (and not so much on this site), is whether anything that can be called "stylistic" even matters. I often see reviews that say "the art is bad" or "there are tons of typos" get responses of "that doesn't matter; only idiots care about that stuff. Are the rules good?" I think this may be an extension of 3 above. To some extent, rules compliance/balance can be at least sort-of objectively measured. It's clear if a spell is totally out of whack, balance-wise. People, I guess, don't want to hear the reviewer's opinion on totally subjective things. Or, rather, they think stylistic "flourishes" like beautiful art by Brom, is just there to appeal to casual consumers and that such considerations are beneath them. I find this attitude toward reviewing fascinating, and I'm really curious to see how it develops over the coming years. Having been an RPG consumer since the 70s, I'm still so happy to see a book that isn't mimeographed with line drawings done by the author's gaming buddies, that I perceive the industry as having undergone a stylistic explosion. Were I reviewing products, it would be one of the foremost points of my reviews -- it's one of the many ways in which our hobby is growing up, expanding, and furthering the form. I’m not a dummy (or at least, my mom says I’m not <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink    ;)"  data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" />), and yet the art in an RPG book really, really matters to me. I really want to read more analysis of the aesthetics of these books and I am surprised to see people openly disparage aesthetical analysis of RPGs. Between these four things, it seems that the form of RPG reviews is more completely consumption-oriented than any other form of literary criticism I can think of. It seems more similar to auto or consumer electronics criticism than to film or fiction criticism. It’s not even very similar to criticism of other games (namely electronic); the form is currently dedicated to analyzing value for money rather than more intangible concepts like how entertaining it is.At least, that’s what I think. Am I crazy? What do you think?AJL</blockquote>

Verification