This post illustrates what types of reviews are to be expected, sets standard reviewer-developer guidelines, and explains the DOs and DON'Ts of reviews.
If there is any one type of reviewer that I aspire to emulate when I write, it is George Weidman (also known as Super BunnyHop). His reviews not only offer insightful commentary on a game-by-game basis, but he is also well versed in technical, gameplay, etc. details to make his reviews distinct. Something digestible, personal and thoughtful that will speak to the audience not only how the game plays but explain why a game works as well as why it may turn him away, yet not for others.
Reviews that I write generally answer two main questions, "Do I recommend the title?" and "Why?" This is usually how I approach the system as some games, in spite of many issues--gameplay or technical--may be deserving its time if approached with a level-headed attitude. Whenever I write, I often try to frame a review by playing to each game's strengths and then touching on faults, or if it's a negative review explaining what led it to being considered not worthy recommendation. Not every game is thought-provoking, and yours doesn't have to be, but I may approach it in a way that explains how the game evoked these thoughts and feelings.
As a general guideline, I stray from rating games with numerical or alphabetical scales on purpose because quantitative measurements do not convey the reasons why to the audience, only a perspective on how a reviewer would rate it. Written reviews, on average, are between 5000 to 8000 characters (words and spaces) divided into three sections with headers to narrow focus. As I've learned from journalism, the only way to engage an audience is finding a hook to grab their attention, to answer the question, "So what?", and to make the content relatable. If you wish to compile a quote from any of my reviews, feel free to use them; if you ask for a rating/score, I will try to accommodate with a 1 - 10 scale with a 5 being average.
On the subject of reviewer-developer guidelines, full disclosure on reviewers are always important to mention at the header as well as on curator pages. Technical issues are something I try to be more lenient with as I am not well-versed, but if it's a persistent problem it could result in a negative impression or a delay of the review. Links to reviews will be posted on both curator pages for wider coverage and links to the pages will be listed in the comment sections.
In the interest of gaining new followers and striking with the most kairosity, reviews will try to target hotspots to garner the most likely possibility of purchase. Ordering from most likely to least likely: Preview Review Copies, Release Week, Individual/Publisher Specials, Steam Sales, and Early Access (Early Access reviews will get its own section). In-between deader moments, I will post reviews on classics and hidden gems to make up any backlogs. Without making a binding agreement due to any influx of copies or time to complete the game, expect no later than two weeks for a review after I accept the code unless I state in an email why it will take longer.
Comments