Review Writing Questions

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

What I want in a review:

1) Tell me what the product is first. Too many reviews, even by good reviewers, aren't doing this.

2) Explain the contents of the book. If there's something noteworthy, provide examples, whether it's a cool thingy, or an example of humor in the book or whatever. (If you like the art and the publisher has samples online, link to representative ones.)

3) State what you think the product is meant to do, then tell us whether or not it succeeds in that goal, and support the conclusion.

4) Tell me whether or not you think someone should buy the item, and why. And support the conclusion. "It sucks" isn't justification. "There are substantial mechanical problems in how X and Y work" is.

 

[Crothian]

What I want in a review:

1) Tell me what the product is first. Too many reviews, even by good reviewers, aren't doing this.

Well, if you see a review that you need more info about, use the comment section in the review area, that is why it is there.

 

[Prest0]

Okay, here's a publisher pet peeve. I've had adventures reviewed in which the reviewer goes through the entire review without mentioning what the adventure is about. Talking about writing, art, organization, etc. is great, but don't forget the basics.

 

[Man-thing]

I'll keep that in mind. I will be working on my review of Brainwashed, hopefully, this weekend.

 

[DaveMage]

Great product for those that like this stuff. I gave mine away. He never uses it, even though we do use minis and sich. Personally, the cards of rules I found to be the best. The spell templates I perfer the steelqwire stuff to or just drawing it out. It is always easier for me to just do that. But I can see why other people like and use it. Heck, if I had my way I wouldn't be using minis.

And as we see in the above exampole, it also helps if the reviewer has similar tastes to you. I perfer no minis, heavy role playing, players thinking, heavy plot, no true good or bad guys type games. But I also have to run the game my players will play, so a lot of that gets curbed. DMing is a complicated things and books are no less simple.

But I want to KNOW if the reviewer has similar tastes as me. That way I know if the reviewer and I think alike. If we do, chances are that I'll like what he or she liked. For you, the battlebox is not as great a product, and that's fine. But I want to know what you, as a reviewer, are USING.

Again, this is what I (David) want to know from a review.

One thing I like about some of psions reviews is when he talks about how he'll use the products in his games. In his review of the World's Largest Dungeon, he talks about how he would use it for a one-nighter, but not the whole thing. That's exactly the kind of thing I want to know from every review - are you going to actually use this in your game.

Because frankly, one can say all the nice things they want about a product, but if they're not using it (and if I seem to like the same things they do), chances are that I won't use it either. That has value to me.

 

[DaveMage]

Let me step into this and say that comparing a book being reviewed to another product is usually a bad idea. For starters, you are trying to review each book on its own merits and not against another's. Secondly, when comparisons are made, it is a lot easier for the person reading the review to develop misconceptions about the product being reviewed based entirely on the context in which you are using to make the comparison. In other words, he may feel that book X is inferior to book Y because you (the reviewer) have stated that you like Z mechanic better. This can lead to getting your proverbial head thwacked off by fans who think you gave the book an unfair grade or comment.

But why review a book on its own merits only? Everything is about camparison. That's why we have different ratings. If the only magic books on the market were those from Fast Forward, how would we know that others could do any better?

As for getting criticism, that goes with posting an opinion on the internet. I don't think you should be doing reviews with the expectation that everyone will like what you have to say. If you praise a book that others hate then you'll be ridiculed for that too.

I think that reviewers are in a unique position to really give us informed opinions on what the best products are in a genre.

Which is the best book about water adventures? Is it Stormwrack from WotC? Is it The Deep from MEG? Is it Into the Blue from Bastion? Is it Seafarer's Handbook from FFG? Is it Dead Man's Chest from Necromancer? Something else? I'd love to know what book (or combination of books, or parts of books) that reviewers use for their own gaming experience. And if they never use any sea books, I'd like to know that too.

I can understand publishers wanting a book to be reviewed on its own merits, but frankly, if there's nothing to compare it to, then how does a publisher know if they really succeeded or not? If their product *is* better, I'm sure they'd like to know that.

 

[Crothian]

One problem with the compairing is its going to be incomplete. In a review of Path of Shadow, I can mention Complete Adventurer and that I think it is better, but I can't go inbto the full reasons because it is not a review if complete adventurer; its a reveiew of Path of Shadows. Also, it really adds a lot of time to doing a review if I have to look through and compaire and contrast a feew books together for only a small paragraph in the review. I was going to do a nice big review dealing with all the planar book but it was just to complicated and too time consuming for the results. So, I might mention some books that similar in theme and say which is better but to do more is rarely worth it to me.

 

[DaveMage]

I dunno, as a writer, when I read a review of one of my books, Id like the review to be *about* that book.

A review is a chance for a book to be judged on its own merits, not a billboard to funnel the reader to one product that has a similar goal.

As an example, I wrote a book called Legends of Excalibur that was released about the same time as the Sword and Sorcery Relics and Rituals: Excalibur. From what you're saying every reviewer should decide which was better, and then when he wrote a review of either one point the reader to the one he thought was better.

I dont really think that's necessary. Assuming both books get reviews, then people can READ both reviews and make up their minds from there which suits their needs, or even perhaps buy both.

Chuck

But there can also be a happy medium. A reviewer in this case could say that they use things from each book. And if that reviewer says that they like one better, that doesn't mean that other reviewers won't like yours better. I have found that some reviewers are completely opposite of my tastes - and that's fine - I don't follow their recommendations. But for the reviewers who seem to have similar tastes to mine, I want to know what they recommend.

Also, I should clarify and say that while I want this in a review, this is not the *only* thing I want in a review - just a part (although I seem to have spent a ridiculous amount of time harping on this issue).

 

[Crothian]

Don;t forget the comment section of the reviews. If you see a review posted by someone with simliar tastes, ask them how this book compaires with other books of the same theme.

 

[DaveMage]

One problem with the compairing is its going to be incomplete. In a review of Path of Shadow, I can mention Complete Adventurer and that I think it is better, but I can't go inbto the full reasons because it is not a review if complete adventurer; its a reveiew of Path of Shadows. Also, it really adds a lot of time to doing a review if I have to look through and compaire and contrast a feew books together for only a small paragraph in the review. I was going to do a nice big review dealing with all the planar book but it was just to complicated and too time consuming for the results. So, I might mention some books that similar in theme and say which is better but to do more is rarely worth it to me.

I know I've spent alot of time posting about this, but I really did mean that this subject should be a part of any review - not the whole of it. I'm not suggesting that a full compare-and-contrast should be done, because, yes, I think that would take too long. (And besides, that's what message board threads are for. ) Merely, that if two books are doing the same thing - such as books on mass combat - that the reviewer should comment on the one he or she likes best (and why - briefly, if possible).

I agree with you, that any comparison is going to be incomplete, since no two products will have the exact same makeup, but reviews are all about opinions, and when I find a reviewer who seems to share my gaming opinions, I'm very interested in their thoughts on different products, and especially which they use in their own game.