Game Reviews Don't Scratch My Niche

Something I have been noticing with all game reviews is that there is a problem. Either there is too much information in the review or there is not enough.

Why do we read reviews? Some of us are in the market and want to see if we should spend our hard earned cash on a certain title, while others are wanting to see if a reviewer shared in our views of a game. Either way, game reviews are getting read and sites are making a lot of money off writing them. But I want to break this system down and build it back up. So let's start with Ars Technica.

Ars Technica is of the "journalistic" breed of writing a review. All of their reviews are multiple pages and written like magazine articles or columns in a newspaper. While they have some talented writers, the problem with this is that it gets very boring very quickly. If I am reading a review of a game that I have been playing I don't need a synopsis of the story line or the game mechanics.

The idea behind a long winded review I can understand. Some people are reading this review and debating whether or not to buy the game. I mean Ars practically tells you that's why they are writing reviews that way by ending their articles with a "buy verdict". But hats off to Ars. They write damn good reviews and fill the long review niche better than any other site I have seen in the past decade.

The next end of the our gaming review spectrum is someone like gamespot. While they try and provide in-depth reviews, they fall short by posting the (paid off) score they gave the game at the top of the review. I go there, I look at the score, and I assume what the entire review has to say based on that. Let's face it, we are a "need it now" kind of society when it comes to anything and especially games.

I personally don't like either method. I don't want to read a giant three page article on a game I am thinking about buying or have already purchased. I also don't want a paid off biased score like gamespot gives. But what or where is the middle ground? Sadly, I don't think there is one. You would think smaller independent review sites, like this one, would be able to give an unbiased and "down to earth" review of games. The fact of the matter is that sites like us don't have the time, people, or money to accomplish such a task. There is also a lack of motivation among all gamers, and myself, to keep providing articles and new ways of reviewing that don't get noticed or lost in the vastness of the cluttered internet.

So what do we do? I am not sure how to answer this question, but I think I am going to start by changing the site's format...yet again.

The perfect review system that I so desperately want to find doesn't exist. In fact, I don't think it ever could. I, personally, don't like reviews. Games are a lot like opinions and assholes. Everyone has them and they come in all different shapes, sizes, and colors.

Review sites should be about community. The 'reviewers' don't need to be holding consumers hands and telling them what to buy. They should be sharing experiences with people and then letting people decide on their own...much like the social responsibility theory (google it or go to college if you don't know what I am talking about). I apologize for us doing this on LGR Nexus.

Here is what I am going to do, and if you are still reading I am surprised you actually give a shit. I am going to share my gaming experiences with you. I think you all are big enough to do a little research on your own and not wait for some site to tell you whether or not to buy a game. Have an opinion people! And with that said, I am think I am done for now. Good day and thanks for reading.

- Tyler Sanders (Chiko)

No votes yet