What do you look for in a gaming website?

Caporegime
Joined
8 Sep 2006
Posts
38,053
Location
On Ocuk
I tend to ignore the gamers responses to be honest. As with all things online they must be taken with a pinch of salt. People are quick to moan when they do not like something when the majority just get on and play it if they do. I refer you to the BF3 thread as a point of reference. ;)

You say " gamers "

But there has been a number of instances namely EA/Bioware of upping the scores as it was not looking to good previously :eek:
 
Soldato
Joined
8 Apr 2009
Posts
12,702
I tend to exclusively read RPS now. They don't score just impressions. Most scores seem a bit off - SWTOR and Mass Effect 3 standing out for me as highly suspect.
 
Soldato
Joined
16 Apr 2007
Posts
23,415
Location
UK
As many here have said - Honesty mostly... it seems more and more review sites are falling to companies and giving biased reviews etc.

To be honest, I don't visit many gaming sites nowadays, I just have a couple of RSS news feeds added to my Google Reader to keep me up to date.
 
Associate
Joined
21 Sep 2008
Posts
1,592
Watch a bit of TotalBiscuit for his Indie stuff (none AAA stuff), but haven't used/trusted a review site in years. The sheer amount of 'bought' reviews I used to see put a bitter taste in my mouth.

Honestly I cant see much future in written review sites. Its much easier to just watch some youtube vid and get all the information you want, while watching actual gameplay.

The only gaming sort of sites could see myself reading are just plain news sites, those cant really mislead you.
 
Associate
Joined
10 Feb 2009
Posts
1,893
Location
Leicester
I used to read Kotaku all the time but don't anymore. I just watch youtube vids / totalhailbut and read user comments on meta critic or whatever its called then make a decision from there
 
Soldato
OP
Joined
7 Mar 2005
Posts
4,789
Location
Arkham
Interesting. So some look for honesty and humour - I guess people prefer more editorials and features around gaming culture than just outright reviews.

Metacritic is the reason why so many sites continue to use a numerical score. I personally find attaching numbers to a game the hardest part of a review.

Out of the thousands of people making gaming videos on YouTube, why is it so many people gravitate to TotalBiscuit? What is it you like about that style? I've watched a few in my time but it's like having an mildly irritating radio DJ talking at you constantly. IMO naturally.

So a site that features more 'human' articles about gaming rather than just the same old reviews/previews? What about interviews with developers, does anyone read those?
 
Soldato
Joined
30 Jun 2006
Posts
4,839
i think people like totalbiscuit for how indepth some of his wteff are, he really shows you more than the usual 5 second splash screen from each platform you get on gamespot etc.
And i.ve never been overly fussed about dev interviews, i.d much rather read or hear about their games than them :p
 
Caporegime
Joined
18 Oct 2002
Posts
37,804
Location
block 16, cell 12
Don't like video reviews. Just give me text. Be clear and concis.

Insight. Do most reviewers complete the game and consider the online part properly? Most sites don't list the real bugs in or issues or sound like they have played the game in enough depth.
 
Associate
Joined
8 May 2004
Posts
1,488
Location
Kent,UK
I havn't read a review in about 10 years I normaly just see what ppl say in here :)
only things I use sites for these days is just Gaming and Hardware news and bluesnews covers that well and its been around for yonks :)
 
Man of Honour
Joined
25 Oct 2002
Posts
31,734
Location
Hampshire
I thought about the best way to answer this question, and decided that a good place to start would be to list the websites that I have frequented over the years, with reasons why I started reading them, and reasons why I stopped:

Bluesnews: This was in some ways like an early RSS feed, but with good editorial. It brought a lot of things together in one place, from standard 'news' about upcoming games, to community news (it was heavily Quake oriented), to .plan (oldschool blogs, basically) updates from developers, to some great articles about benchmark performance, guides to different games etc. I stopped reading it because it got to mainstream and my interest in mainstream gaming was waning.

Firingsquad: I started reading this because it was founded by one of the original 'progamers', Thresh. It had some great editorial content, such as the early "Face Off" articles where different writers would argue the toss over a given issue. It evolved over the years into something of a hardware site, but with heavy gaming focus, which was what I was looking for. So I could I go there, and not only read game reviews, but also see benchmarks for the latest and greatest cpus, graphics cards etc. I stopped reading it because it stopped being updated frequently - it would no longer be posting articles the moment the NDA lifted. To be fair I was a fairly frequent visitor for about 10 years, which (google and ocuk forums aside) probably makes it the longest serving website I have.

XSReality (later became ESReality): Kinda like the above, this was founded by a couple of legendary Quake players (Sujoy and Xenon). Had more of a hardcore focus, very in depth hardware reviews from a gamer perspective (the sort of detail you couldn't find on mainstream sites). Stopped reading because the focus shifted towards modern games that I wasn't really interested in.

IGN: At one stage (around 10 years ago) this was quite a good site as it had a good range of content about games, and was my 'go to' site for game reviews. Stopped reading as their integrity started to come under scrutiny, and the focus was shifting more towards consoles.

This is of course ignoring any game-specific websites like quakeworld.nu.

Anyway, so the next step is to actually answer your question! I think to make me a regular visitor, rather than just following google links, the following would be appealing to me:

-Writers that I respect making frequent updates of a reasonable size (at least 3-4 times per month - not regurgitated news but original editorial content)
-High-quality, vetted bloggers (i.e. not just a soapbox where people can spew whatever they want - not that I don't think there is a place for such things...)
-Age-agnostic i.e. not purely focussing on the latest/future release but also writing about games that came out last month, last year, last decade.
-Game walkthroughs - I find these useful. I quite like the www.visualwalkthroughs.com site, even though it is very dated - the concept is sound and is writing in a good, simple style highlighting key points rather than the "trying to sound cool" style that many adopt in walkthroughs.
-Simple homepage that isn't in my face with auto-playing videos and pictures of female editors.
-Easy way to identify new content, whether it be blogs, news, articles, forum posts etc
-Some sort of 'hardcore' stance. Now I don't mean walls of text using acroynms and phrases nobody understands unless they've played game XYZ for 5 years, but just a general attitude that takes certain things VERY seriously and goes overboard with the level of detail and depth of analysis. The type of stuff you simply wouldn't find on the mainstream sites. The type of article that might have over a thousand words just talking about tactics for using a single weapon/unit rather than 500 words about tactics for an entire game.

Overall, my advice for any new gaming site is do not simply become yet another site posting news, reviews, videos etc. Other people will have far more resources and existing readership base. Get yourself some kind of USP, find a niche in the market (sometimes this may mean focussing on a particular game, or genre), go extremely in depth into one particular facet of gaming (hardware, configuration... whatever!) - do something original.
 
Associate
Joined
10 Feb 2009
Posts
1,893
Location
Leicester
Interesting. So some look for honesty and humour - I guess people prefer more editorials and features around gaming culture than just outright reviews.

Metacritic is the reason why so many sites continue to use a numerical score. I personally find attaching numbers to a game the hardest part of a review.

Out of the thousands of people making gaming videos on YouTube, why is it so many people gravitate to TotalBiscuit? What is it you like about that style? I've watched a few in my time but it's like having an mildly irritating radio DJ talking at you constantly. IMO naturally.

So a site that features more 'human' articles about gaming rather than just the same old reviews/previews? What about interviews with developers, does anyone read those?

Tbf, I don't watch TB's videos all the way through I just wait for the good and bad points then switch if off which allows to see some gameplay too, also I don't look at the numbers on metacritic, I just see what people have said
 
Soldato
Joined
12 Aug 2008
Posts
3,043
Location
London
Zero punctuation + adverts for the game itself + forum chat (here) is what I use for game info. Zero punctuation does well to highlight the real honest flaws while also being hilarious entertainment. You know if he gives it a good review its probably fantastic.

Then just the usual forum research and convocation.
 
Soldato
Joined
13 Sep 2008
Posts
5,448
Nah, they are the FOX News of videogame journalism. Little to no integrity.

Surely you're talking about Eurogamer here?

Anyway.. for me personally I go by chat on forums (mostly this one or the game in question if it has one). Also keep my eye on Edge as whilst its not the great publication it once was its still reassuring to know that its not written by some talentless teenage geek who somehow believes he's a journalist because he's written some 2 bit review on some 2 bit website.
 
Back
Top Bottom