Simplicity
Explorer
I missed the "900 Words" article by James Ward of Fastforward games, but now that it was pointed out for me on
the front page, I really can't believe someone would print such
so foolish.
It really sounds like the writer received a poor review, and was
lashing out in frustration. To him, I say, "Too bad. Cry much?"
A reviewer has a right to their opinion. If they want to give a product a 1 out of 10 because the colors chosen on the front cover hurt their eyes... Great. If they don't like the art or borders, and they don't have something more specific to say, fine.
Each of the points that Mr. Ward makes is incorrect, as I see it.
More than that, they just make him sound immature.
"1) Critic, have you experienced the product?"
Yes, a movie reviewer sees a whole movie before reviewing a product. What does that take him? A whole 2 hours? It takes a lot longer to alter a campaign to fit in random things from every d20 book you purchase. Experienced DMs don't need to work things from books into their campaign to determine whether or not a book is useful to them. Reading the book is generally sufficient. It's also a heck of a lot faster, which allows reviewers to review multiple products, and develop a reputation as a long time reviewer. As long as the reviewer states the context of their opinion (i.e. I wasn't able to use this book in my campaign or I couldn't bring myself to read past page 10 because the book was so bad), the reader of the review must be able to judge for themselves the accuracy of the reviewer.
"2) Critic, how do I know if you are knowledgeable and your point of view has worth?"
This is a good point, but very badly argued. A reviewer should state the context of their review, as I said above, but Mr. Ward then goes on to talk about how spelling and grammar are important to have correct in a review. This is bull. A web reviewer, who volunteers their own time, for no money, cannot and should not be held to the same editorial standards as the writer of a finished, published product. Reviewers do not have editors, while one would hope that the writer does.
Yes, there should be a means of determining whether the reviewer is competent. This is often done on review boards through the use of "Top reviewers" and "Was this review useful to you?" polls. The reviewer themself can help by stating their arguments clearly and pointing out precise flaws... But if a reviewer reads a product, sees no precise flaws, but comes away with a vaguely bad feeling about the product, nothing should prevent a reviewer from saying so.
"3) General statements contribute little value toward the worth of the product review. "
Often, web reviewers have little time to precisely mark every problem they see with a product, and so general reviews are all you're going to get from an unpaid reviewer. Are such general comments worthless? No, they're not. Especially when taken in combination with the reviews of other reviewers. Mr. Ward may not believe a reviewer when the reviewer says that a product is "full of errors" without backing it up, but when three reviewers say the same thing without backing it up... It starts to paint a pretty clear picture of the product. That's how reviews work. You don't take the words of one reviewer as gospel, unless you really respect that reviewer (a rare situation in a web setting). But you can generally believe the words of multiple reviewers.
"4) Art and borders are rarely part of the problem. "
With such a lack of consideration towards the art within a product, I'm hardly surprised that Mr. Ward is upset about
reviewers treatment of art within his products. Art can be
an extremely important part of a role playing product. One
of the best examples of this is the old Dark Sun product line.
Dark Sun was a highly art-centric product (even came with flipcards to show the players what a particular scene looked
like), and was very popular. The art contributed significantly
to the Dark Sun experience.
With such a disdain for art, why does Mr. Ward bother to
put art in his products at all? If the writer of a published
product decides to put art in their published product, he should not be surprised if that art is judged on its merits just as well as the text. Yes, art is subjective... But so is writing.
"Art concepts are rarely if ever covered in a game review. When a reviewer says they didn't like the art in one of my products, they had better say why or they are just as bad as the art they didn't like. "
Unfortunately, most reviewers are not artists... They're just people who can read, look at pictures, and form their own opinions. You do not have to be an art critic to critique art. Does this quote sound familiar?
"I don't know anything about art, but I know what I like."
Everyone has likes and dislikes in art. Mr. Ward seems to think that only people who can point out artistic flaws should be able to speak their opinions. While Mr. Ward is entitled to his opinion, like everyone else, to me his words are garbage in my browser.
"5) If you don't have something nice to say, don't say anything."
I cannot believe he actually said this. If the critics of the world are too harsh on you, the solution is not to silence the critics. There is such a thing as striving for improvement, and critics are a vital part of that. To a reader, a reviewer's statements are useful. To a writer, they're solid gold, even if the review is filled with "general statements". It's HARD for a writer to get honest reviews of a product. A review can provide valuable insight on how to better oneself. You can either take what was said, and improve your next offering, or you can cover your ears and pretend that the world just doesn't want to understand you.
A reviewer has no obligation to find something good about what they are reviewing. Mr. Ward is correct that sometimes people let their cynicism get the better of them. Sometimes a piece of writing may force someone to go off on a "this is just a piece of crap" tirade of a review... You may have noticed that you have just read one.
the front page, I really can't believe someone would print such
so foolish.
It really sounds like the writer received a poor review, and was
lashing out in frustration. To him, I say, "Too bad. Cry much?"
A reviewer has a right to their opinion. If they want to give a product a 1 out of 10 because the colors chosen on the front cover hurt their eyes... Great. If they don't like the art or borders, and they don't have something more specific to say, fine.
Each of the points that Mr. Ward makes is incorrect, as I see it.
More than that, they just make him sound immature.
"1) Critic, have you experienced the product?"
Yes, a movie reviewer sees a whole movie before reviewing a product. What does that take him? A whole 2 hours? It takes a lot longer to alter a campaign to fit in random things from every d20 book you purchase. Experienced DMs don't need to work things from books into their campaign to determine whether or not a book is useful to them. Reading the book is generally sufficient. It's also a heck of a lot faster, which allows reviewers to review multiple products, and develop a reputation as a long time reviewer. As long as the reviewer states the context of their opinion (i.e. I wasn't able to use this book in my campaign or I couldn't bring myself to read past page 10 because the book was so bad), the reader of the review must be able to judge for themselves the accuracy of the reviewer.
"2) Critic, how do I know if you are knowledgeable and your point of view has worth?"
This is a good point, but very badly argued. A reviewer should state the context of their review, as I said above, but Mr. Ward then goes on to talk about how spelling and grammar are important to have correct in a review. This is bull. A web reviewer, who volunteers their own time, for no money, cannot and should not be held to the same editorial standards as the writer of a finished, published product. Reviewers do not have editors, while one would hope that the writer does.
Yes, there should be a means of determining whether the reviewer is competent. This is often done on review boards through the use of "Top reviewers" and "Was this review useful to you?" polls. The reviewer themself can help by stating their arguments clearly and pointing out precise flaws... But if a reviewer reads a product, sees no precise flaws, but comes away with a vaguely bad feeling about the product, nothing should prevent a reviewer from saying so.
"3) General statements contribute little value toward the worth of the product review. "
Often, web reviewers have little time to precisely mark every problem they see with a product, and so general reviews are all you're going to get from an unpaid reviewer. Are such general comments worthless? No, they're not. Especially when taken in combination with the reviews of other reviewers. Mr. Ward may not believe a reviewer when the reviewer says that a product is "full of errors" without backing it up, but when three reviewers say the same thing without backing it up... It starts to paint a pretty clear picture of the product. That's how reviews work. You don't take the words of one reviewer as gospel, unless you really respect that reviewer (a rare situation in a web setting). But you can generally believe the words of multiple reviewers.
"4) Art and borders are rarely part of the problem. "
With such a lack of consideration towards the art within a product, I'm hardly surprised that Mr. Ward is upset about
reviewers treatment of art within his products. Art can be
an extremely important part of a role playing product. One
of the best examples of this is the old Dark Sun product line.
Dark Sun was a highly art-centric product (even came with flipcards to show the players what a particular scene looked
like), and was very popular. The art contributed significantly
to the Dark Sun experience.
With such a disdain for art, why does Mr. Ward bother to
put art in his products at all? If the writer of a published
product decides to put art in their published product, he should not be surprised if that art is judged on its merits just as well as the text. Yes, art is subjective... But so is writing.
"Art concepts are rarely if ever covered in a game review. When a reviewer says they didn't like the art in one of my products, they had better say why or they are just as bad as the art they didn't like. "
Unfortunately, most reviewers are not artists... They're just people who can read, look at pictures, and form their own opinions. You do not have to be an art critic to critique art. Does this quote sound familiar?
"I don't know anything about art, but I know what I like."
Everyone has likes and dislikes in art. Mr. Ward seems to think that only people who can point out artistic flaws should be able to speak their opinions. While Mr. Ward is entitled to his opinion, like everyone else, to me his words are garbage in my browser.
"5) If you don't have something nice to say, don't say anything."
I cannot believe he actually said this. If the critics of the world are too harsh on you, the solution is not to silence the critics. There is such a thing as striving for improvement, and critics are a vital part of that. To a reader, a reviewer's statements are useful. To a writer, they're solid gold, even if the review is filled with "general statements". It's HARD for a writer to get honest reviews of a product. A review can provide valuable insight on how to better oneself. You can either take what was said, and improve your next offering, or you can cover your ears and pretend that the world just doesn't want to understand you.
A reviewer has no obligation to find something good about what they are reviewing. Mr. Ward is correct that sometimes people let their cynicism get the better of them. Sometimes a piece of writing may force someone to go off on a "this is just a piece of crap" tirade of a review... You may have noticed that you have just read one.
