Install Steam
login
|
language
简体中文 (Simplified Chinese)
繁體中文 (Traditional Chinese)
日本語 (Japanese)
한국어 (Korean)
ไทย (Thai)
Български (Bulgarian)
Čeština (Czech)
Dansk (Danish)
Deutsch (German)
Español - España (Spanish - Spain)
Español - Latinoamérica (Spanish - Latin America)
Ελληνικά (Greek)
Français (French)
Italiano (Italian)
Bahasa Indonesia (Indonesian)
Magyar (Hungarian)
Nederlands (Dutch)
Norsk (Norwegian)
Polski (Polish)
Português (Portuguese - Portugal)
Português - Brasil (Portuguese - Brazil)
Română (Romanian)
Русский (Russian)
Suomi (Finnish)
Svenska (Swedish)
Türkçe (Turkish)
Tiếng Việt (Vietnamese)
Українська (Ukrainian)
Report a translation problem
Discussions Rules and Guidelines
2 
Report this post
New or old releases - age doesn't matter
[the amount of games available to ppl these days ie. backlog make the newness of games kind of a lesser point, unless ppl just gotta play the new stuff day 1]
(ii) I prefer to read:
Shorter reviews, with concise descriptions and brief overviews
[there's a reason why page limits are imposed at school for essays - time constraints for the reader, as well as holding their interest while reading xD]
(iii) Extra technical details e.g. supported resolutions, configurable options (not performance/optimization details):
Are sometimes desirable in a review - it depends on the game
[for example: Dead Island had a fixed FOV that gave me terrible motion sickness - I didn't know about this b4 I started playing - found out how to fix it and was able to finish it without too much pain]
(iv) Gameplay Videos:
I would definitely watch some gameplay footage included with a review
[it helps to illustrate what we'll be playing - but also can't be too long-again, back to question 2 :) - an edited video would be appreciated, but not necessary - can just choose to show a few "stages" or "chapters"]
(v) Screenshots:
3-6 is enough for 1 review
[there's no need to inundate with a bunch of pictures - just a few choice ones to illustrate points would be good]
PS: Review scores are handy, but they can be a crutch - you don't need to include em - maybe do a pass/fail thing (buy/pass)
I guess I'll toss in my hat for prize #23 | Hint: Survival, Big Creatures
[update: thanks for the gift, Bobmanbob! :) Looking forward to playing Carnivores: Dinosaur Hunter Reborn!]
Thanks - and thanks for allowing us to shape how you do reviews.
I'll have to look into FOV and other visual effects that induce motion sickness so I can try to understand when they might be a problem for others.
Will add you soon. Just in case you want to, feel free to change your number in the meantime now that they are all listed.
Games released within the last month
Could be interested in older games if I somehow missed them, but that's usually not the case!
Edit : Also, I'd favor games with less or no big review. EG. No Man's Sky came out less than a month ago but I wouldn't read another review, too much already.
(ii) I prefer to read:
Shorter reviews, with concise descriptions and brief overviews
Well, not super short, but being at least a bit concise is always good :)
(iii) Extra technical details e.g. supported resolutions, configurable options (not performance/optimization details):
Should always be included in a review
Stuff like 30fps limits or missing resolution should always be mentionned!
(iv) Gameplay Videos
I might watch some
Though the text review should stand on it's own and not require you to watch the video. Just as a bonus if I wanna see more.
(v) Screenshots
3-6 is enough for 1 review
7-10 is ideal
10+ Seems a bit much but apart from that I don't think the exact number is important.
Very interested in #50 | Hint: VR Required Prize: ??? | Winner: ??? :)
Edit : After reading the above post, I like the buy/pass thing instead of a score too, maybe with something in between (like buy/wait for a sale/pass).
Games released within the last week:
There is thousands of reviewers out there and if you want people to read your reviews you should focus on new and interesting releases.
(ii) I prefer to read:
Shorter reviews, with concise descriptions and brief overviews:
personally i often loose attention or interest if the review is to long and it gets boring fast, focus on some main points of the game that you think would interest your readers and stick to that.
(iii) Extra technical details e.g. supported resolutions, configurable options (not performance/optimization details):
Are not necessary in a review - I can consult manuals/websites/forums for those:
Honestly this info can be found pretty much by googling for 10 seconds, you need to be unique in your reviews, this info can be found elsewere.
(iv) Gameplay Videos:
I might watch some:
i rarely watch gameplay videos because of lame commentary and bad jokes, but if its 100% gameplay i MIGHT watch it, if the video is 5 minutes MAX.
(v) Screenshots
3-6 is enough (if there is video) otherwise i would say that 7-10 is ideal, try to show all aspects of the game without spoiling the story or plot.
would love to get #28 | Hint: RPG, Open World (unless i already own it, if so tell me to pick something else) thanks!
(ii) I prefer to read: It depends on the game (Sometimes all you need is a small confirmation that the game looks good enough for you, sometimes you want to think it more, sometimes you wanna read cause someone is writting nicely)
(iii) Extra technical details: Are not necessary in a review - I can consult manuals/websites/forums for those (Every PC is sooooo different with so many different possible problems that it would only make the review boring)
(iv) Gameplay Videos: I might watch some
(v) Screenshots: 3-6 is enough for 1 review (Few and good)
Any adventure #14-#18 would be fine for me if I dont have it :)
Cheers for the oportunity and hope the results are to your satisfaction :D
New or old releases - age doesn't matter
(ii) I prefer to read:
In-depth, lengthy reviews with detailed descriptions and opinions
(iii) Extra technical details e.g. supported resolutions, configurable options (not performance/optimization details):
Are not necessary in a review - I can consult manuals/websites/forums for those
(iv) Gameplay Videos
I might watch some
(v) Screenshots
3-6 is enough for 1 review
'Thank You' Prizes: #49
Thanks for the chance. I am already in your friendlist.
(I) I prefer to read: Shorter reviews, with concise descriptions and brief overviews
(III) Extra technical details e.g. supported resolutions, configurable options (not performance/optimization details): Are sometimes desirable in a review (like it shouldn't be mention but if the game is good but the bad side is ..... (here is the optimization and quick say the things that are wrong) then it should be said.Also if it can be fixed by a mod,it would be cooler to let the others know.
(IV) Gameplay Videos: It depends on the game (please elaborate or give examples if possible)
Here it comes to the game.If it's a top down then i wouldn't watch it. 2D rpg ? no thank you.I would mostly watch a gameplay video just to see how the gameplay is feeling and responsive it is.
(V)Screenshots: 3-6 is enough for 1 review
They dont tell much about the game (besides the setting),a gameplay video will do much greater than screenshots.
My note: i usually don't read it reviews, only when i see them on facebook from big companies like PCGamer and such but i see you guys are trying so i try to look into your reviews more.Also,try to get the best man to do the review, here i mean the man who loves RPGs do to the review for them and such.I heard that IGN did this thing with Fallout 4 and gave minus points because "i didn't like the settlement building.i am not into building" for a settlement DLC.What the hell ? that's just dumb trying to get a guy who doesn't like building to review a building DLC..
*I guess here i will select my prize ? i will take a shot in the dark for #17
It depends on the game
I usually read reviews for games I'm interested in and that I can run on my current rig, age of the game doesn't matter.
(ii) I prefer to read:
Shorter reviews, with concise descriptions and brief overviews
They are usually better, not too much spoilers as you can find in lengthy reviews.
(iii) Extra technical details e.g. supported resolutions, configurable options (not performance/optimization details):
Are sometimes desirable in a review - it depends on the game
Only if it's something that can affect a game in a bad way.
(iv) Gameplay Videos
I definitely would not watch any
I like to take my time playing and enjoy the game as much as possible. I don't like to spoil anything ahead of time.
(v) Screenshots
3-6 is enough for 1 review
Screenshots aren't really necessary, but some of them might be appreciated. Not too much though.
I'll give #30 | Hint: RPG, Action a try.
New or old releases - age doesn't matter
-I like more when I find a review of a game "uncommon" but good, so the age of the game I do not care.
(ii) I prefer to read:
It depends on the game (please elaborate or give examples if possible)
-If i see for example a "Review of the binding of isaac" (game that i like it) y preffer some more deep >_<, but in general terms shorts reviews are the MVP for the majority of games for me.
(iii) Extra technical details e.g. supported resolutions, configurable options (not performance/optimization details):
Should always be included in a review
-The requeriments for the game run.
(iv) Gameplay Videos:
I would definitely watch some gameplay footage included with a review
-Gameplay, no cinematics xD
(v) Screenshots:
3-6 is enough for 1 review
-Its okay with some of them i guess
I hope thats be useful :3
PS: i want the #30 xD or #31 :3
New or old releases - age doesn't matter (I play games from all over the years, so, I'd really appreceiate that :D).
(ii) I prefer to read:
It depends on the game (I would rather read short reviews for most of the games, but that is just not enough for some other games. Anyway, the shorter the better I think, but don't be obsessed with length).
(iii) Extra technical details e.g. supported resolutions, configurable options (not performance/optimization details):
Are sometimes desirable in a review - it depends on the game (well, if there is a particular reason to include all those technical details, go on with that, specially if there are any issues with some technical stuff. For example, a review of Batman Arkham Knight when the game was released should include at least some warning about how bad the game was regarding technical matters)
(iv) Gameplay Videos
I might watch some (There are plenty of gameplay videos of games out there, so, if someone wants to check a gameplay they will probably go to youtube ant that's it. Anyway, if it takes you a lot of time I wouldn't recommend doing that, but if you are ok with that, it is always good to see some video completing the review. Not sure about this as you can see)
(v) Screenshots
3-6 is enough for 1 review (it depends on the length, but 3-6 should be fine).
As for the game you are offering, well, I'm not sure! All I want is that I don't have the game already. I suppose I prefer one of the action, platformers, shooters or horror games in the list. Is that possible or should I just choose one?
Sorry for my english :)
New or old releases - age doesn't matter **i've missed the games between 1990-1998 and 2005-2012, i'd like to discover that era****
(ii) I prefer to read:
Shorter reviews, with concise descriptions and brief overviews **i usually read shorter reviews completely****
(iii) Extra technical details e.g. supported resolutions, configurable options (not performance/optimization details):
Should always be included in a review
(iv) Gameplay Videos
I definitely would not watch any **really. i don't want to see ant hints accidentally.
(v) Screenshots
3-6 is enough for 1 review ** same issue here. a few samples should be good, but should be limited for me.
I agree with JC about the review scores.
It's easy to answer some questions but hard to decide the prize. 28, 30 or 31 would be fine. which one is available. Thanks :)
EDIT: 15, 20, 47 or 48 would be fine also.
Games released within the last month
It depends on the game (please elaborate or give examples if possible)
I guess if you do any review, then yes, released last month.
Otherwise you can make review series - so from any age, which allows you to compare games of the smae type.
(ii) I prefer to read:
Shorter reviews, with concise descriptions and brief overviews
(iii) Extra technical details e.g. supported resolutions, configurable options (not performance/optimization details):
Are not necessary in a review - I can consult manuals/websites/forums for those
(iv) Gameplay Videos
I might watch some by exception
(v) Screenshots
3-6 is enough for 1 review
I'd go for #41 | Hint: Hidden Object, Orange Bird Prize: ??? | Winner: ???, whatever this is.
(i) I would read reviews for:
New or old releases - age doesn't matter
[I'd personally lean a bit more towards old releases, since I'm mainly an oldschool gamer, but new games are nice too.]
(ii) I prefer to read:
Something in between the above or some other type of review
[This largely depends on what game you're reviewing at the time. I think many games could probably work well with a shorter review, but some here and there might need longer to explain certain hard points or elements of a game.]
(iii) Extra technical details e.g. supported resolutions, configurable options:
Are sometimes desirable in a review - it depends on the game
[Any games so big and new or so old that they wouldn't fit into the majority of gamer computers' specs would need this. Outside of that, if a game you review has some really odd thing(s) needed to get it working, it'd need to include extra info of this sort.]
(iv) Gameplay Videos
I would definitely watch some gameplay footage included with a review
[A gameplay video included with a review is a big touch.]
(v) Screenshots
7-10 is ideal
Hmm for game pick, I think #15 | Hint: Adventure, Classic would do nicely. Thanks for doing this!
(P.S. I own a lot of games, so if something could be done in case I'd already own a game, that'd be great.)
New or old releases - age doesn't matter
[Maybe reviews of the newest games, but also reviews of the so-called "classics"? As a special feature of sorts.]
(ii) I prefer to read:
Shorter reviews, with concise descriptions and brief overviews
(iii) Extra technical details e.g. supported resolutions, configurable options (not performance/optimization details):
Are sometimes desirable in a review - it depends on the game (please elaborate or give examples if possible)
[It may be vital for the game in question. For example, No Man's Sky certainly needed a review of the optimisation issues. Other than those (hopefully) rare cases, I don't think it'd be a requirement.]
(iv) Gameplay Videos
I would definitely watch some gameplay footage included with a review
[A short video review, with a concise summary of the review in question, would complement it well.]
(v) Screenshots
3-6 is enough for 1 review
[The said video would be more than enough, if it was included. Maybe one or two screenshots would be nice as well though, but for the sake of the layout of the review or to illustrate any relevant points in the actual text.]
As for the "prize", you may pick one at random, as long as you think I'd deserve one, of course. :)
It depends on the game (please elaborate or give examples if possible)
I'm someone with a limited budget who formerly owned a potato. My laptop had an Nvidia GPU (albeit a laptop one) but even games it played well enough tended to overheat my laptop. Now I have a much better desktop with a newer GPU, but new $60 AAA titles are still out of my budget. There are a number of games that are two or more years old that WERE AAA games BitD. They go on sale pretty regularly. Civ 5, Skyrim, Xcom and the like. There are other older games that remain popular as well as the "hidden gems." The various Endless games aren't so well-known, but have great reviews and go on sale a couple times a year.
(ii) I prefer to read:
Something in between the above or some other type of review (please elaborate or give examples if possible)
(iii) Extra technical details e.g. supported resolutions, configurable options (not performance/optimization details):
Are sometimes desirable in a review - it depends on the game (please elaborate or give examples if possible)
If the limitations don't support wide-screen or modern resolutions, I want to know that. Lots of games players review with "Won't run on Win 10" actually run fine in compatibility mode (usually XP SP2). Past that, folks with outdated potatoes can't run the handful of (mostly console port) games that require 64 bit Windows. Given how games and system RAM keep getting larger, I see devs moving to a 64 bit standard. Worth knowing for those of us with modern PCs with 8-16GB RAM and 64 bit CPUs (we want the performance our PC is capable of) as well as folks with potatoes who want something they can play.
(iv) Gameplay Videos
It depends on the game (please elaborate or give examples if possible)
(v) Screenshots
3-6 is enough for 1 review
'Thank You' Prizes:
[SLOTS + HINTS UNDER CONSTRUCTION]
#19 | Hint: Strategy, Hex| Prize: ??? | Winner: ???