GAME JOBS
Latest Jobs
spacer View All     Post a Job     RSS spacer
 
June 6, 2013
 
KingsIsle Entertainment, Inc.
Concept Artist
 
Red Storm Entertainment, a Ubisoft Studio
Assistant/Associate Producer
 
Wargaming.net
Build Engineer
 
Gameloft - New York
Programmer
 
Wargaming.net
Build Engineer
 
Virdyne Technologies
Unity Programmer
spacer
Blogs

  Criticizing Video Games - The Basics
by dario silva on 03/04/12 07:04:00 am
4 comments Share on Twitter Share on Facebook RSS
 
 
The following blog was, unless otherwise noted, independently written by a member of Gamasutra's game development community. The thoughts and opinions expressed here are not necessarily those of Gamasutra or its parent company.

Want to write your own blog post on Gamasutra? It's easy! Click here to get started. Your post could be featured on Gamasutra's home page, right alongside our award-winning articles and news stories.
 

Video Game

Performance between a developer and an end user in some kind of pre structured virtual  environment.


Judging Performance

A good game always has a strong performance by the developer. A bad game cannot perform well unless the end user modifies the game to make it perform better. One example is to set respawning enemies in a game where there are none, or modify the opacity of enemy characters so that they are harder to see. 

A games performance must always be judged on what has come before it, how long it took to make, how many people made it, and how much money was spent making it. Unfortunately, there is no reliable data for this in most AAA cases from the 70's onwards.

A game should therefore be judged firstly on its most simplest performance. Name & box art. If it is a digital copy, then it should be judged on the introduction & interface first. After that the game should be judged from the moment players receive control over their characters. If the gameplay is initially poor, whether because of long passages of scrolling text or poor enemy patterns & variety, the game should be sped up/laboriously played through in order to see if and when the game changes pace. If the game continues at the same pace after a number of missions/levels/objectives, merely pallete swapping enemies,  sounds and graphics, it should be taken as a lack of caring on the part of the developer and discarged as poorly performed. 


                                          Turtles 3

But the reviewer hasn't played the whole game! True, but does the reviewer need to? Lets assume that there are some good objectives/weapons/enemies in the later stages of the game, the fact that the game has performed so poorly thus far causes it to lag behind those other games which not only started off well, but got better and better as the player progressed. In that regard the game most likely will never be a better experience, certainly not a 9 or 10. If its not a 9 or 10, why play it?


                                         Gargoyles Quest - Gameboy


Modding


Assuming you modify the games structure to make it perform better. Did it make the game better than its competitors? If not, then was it worth the effort? The GTAIV FPS mod is a good example of effort well spent. It eclipses both the original GTAIV, & Red Ded Redemption by its immersive first person FOV, and thus gives the user what no other game on the market has, a first person, city based sandbox game. It gives the game a completely new perspective, and by virtue of the fact that no other game is doing this, makes the GTA IV Mod one of the most important games of this generation. As it stands, perhaps even a perfect 10.

GTA First Person

 
 
Comments

Rafael Vazquez
profile image
" If its not a 9 or 10, why play it?"

Here I have to disagree with you. There are plenty of great games that would qualify as lower than excelent. Just becasue they have errors and are therefore not perfect, doesn't mean they shouldn't be played. Grimm Fandango has pretty awkward controls (elevator puzzle anyone?) and yet it still is a great playing experience. 9 or 10 means near perfection, and shouldn't be given out as lightly as they are nowadays. Most games have flaws, sometimes even big ones, and still deserve to be experienced

dario silva
profile image
You're right, a 9 or 10 is near perfection, which is what very very few games have achieved. Those games deserve to be played more so than the others, because they are better performances on the part of the developer. Its like, why bother playing Mckids when you can play Super Mario Bros instead? Its a slap in the face of developers, but the truth is that most video games don't have any purpose for existing other than the fact that they gave some people a paycheck for their work and some time to show off their skills.

For me the issue is not whether we should play 9's or 10's, but rather how we judge a 9 or 10 in the first place. Its really really complex, and I would dare anyone to put forward a decent solution.

Joshua Oreskovich
profile image
Yea, I don't see agreeing with this either.

To me a game doesn't have to be better than other games it simply has to be engaging.
the problem is that I see is games are only "half engaging" So your either heading to the movies or off to play in a ball game. Improving the perspective and controls should be important. And not keeping up with the pace of games that have similar qualities is certainly a let down.

But both movie flick games and ball game games have completely lost out on the more interesting lasting qualities. sure you can be moved by interesting flashy UIs, cinematics and competitive gameplay, but where is the discovery? Where is the lasting problem solving that isn't just the combat you master in the first 20 minutes of game, where is the creative choice that isn't summed up at the character creation screen, where is the artistic beauty and deep thoughtful contemplation?

Luis Guimaraes
profile image
Considering some games don't deserve the 9s and 10s they get.


none
 
Comment:
 




 
UBM Tech