...and bad ones I do!
As I've stopped reading boardgame mailing lists, I've been paying a bit more attention to game reviews. Not to determine which games to buy--you'd think that's the main purpose of game reviews, but I'm beginning to think not--but rather just for opinions. And that's the most important part of a review: the opinions. Seems obvious, but there are an awful lot of game reviews out there that spend almost all of their time and text on a general description and rules explanation, with precious little left for real opinions.
Curmudgeon and game show winner Peter Sarrett outlines this with precision in his Review Manifesto. I've written a few reviews myself now, and I know it isn't easy. Actually, writing the description+mechanics sort of reviews are easy. Forming some distinct opinions and trying to back them up with facts, observations, comparisons, or anecdotes is not. Not for me, anyway.
What made me think about this recently were a few reviews written by M. Barnes in the latest Boulder Games newsletter, Game Notes. What I noticed was that I didn't agree with his conclusions or opinions, but they made for good reading (and thinking) just the same. Somewhere along the way I know I've read other reviews that are more aligned with my own opinions . . . but don't make their points well (if they attempt to make points at all). So it's funny--you think a good review would be one that reaches the same conclusions I do, possibly convincing me to buy a game I'd like or avoid one I won't. However, that's not the case at all.
I actually succeeded recently. An acquaintance of mine agreed with my latest review, of the very excellent St. Petersburg, even though I rated the game as 5-star game and he spared just one star. I consider that a great success!
Posted by: Mikko at July 29, 2004 10:00 PM