-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
-
We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.
Is it reasonable or unreasonable to expect reviewers to be familiar with long-standing franchises when reviewing games from said franchises?
- Thread starter vestan
- Start date
I think it's wrong of reviewers to claim a game's plot is confusing if the questions they have are answered in previous titles. The exception is when the reviewer comes out and says that they haven't played the earlier games and that they're trying to inform potential players who are in the same boat.
I view it in a similar light to reviewing TV shows, movies, or books. Games tend to be more able to be picked up by new players in later entries, but some series, like Kingdom Hearts, will be impenetrable to new players looking to get the most out of the story. Others, like the Elder Scrolls series, only contain vague references to previous games so it's perfectly fine to start out in Skyrim.
I suspect Kingdom Hearts 3 will get a lot of complaints from those who haven't played the previous entries, or have only played 1 and 2.
I view it in a similar light to reviewing TV shows, movies, or books. Games tend to be more able to be picked up by new players in later entries, but some series, like Kingdom Hearts, will be impenetrable to new players looking to get the most out of the story. Others, like the Elder Scrolls series, only contain vague references to previous games so it's perfectly fine to start out in Skyrim.
I suspect Kingdom Hearts 3 will get a lot of complaints from those who haven't played the previous entries, or have only played 1 and 2.
I think it's better when some are and some aren't. However they should have good knowledge of the genre.
Actually, I don't think a game or movie is obliged to thoroughly update you on what happened before but it is obliged to offer a story you can follow. For example, God of War does a very good job inserting glimpses of the past while offering a brand new story that every newcomer can follow. Uncharted 4 does the same. Even games with more convoluted storylines like MGS5 do the same.
As for infinity war you don't really need to know anything. It's a bad guy against a lot of good guys. All the past movies actually act more as Easter egg material to the movie. Many people feel that previous marvel movies are important as they "build up" to infinity war but the truth is you can go to the theatre without ever watching any other movie.
as long as the reviewer preface his familiarity with the thing he's reviewing. if it's a sequel it's a thing i would take in consideration reading his review
I don't think it matters. Every game is going to be someone's first entry to a franchise, so reading a review from someone else who's new to the series is going to benefit them a lot more than a review from someone super familiar with the series.
For any game in a series both perspectives will surely be out there in the massive pool of reviews so just find what you want and read that.
There doesn't need to be a rule or a fixed expectation.
There doesn't need to be a rule or a fixed expectation.
This is my stance. A critic's authority is a function of their experience. The more relevant experience they have, the more weight their view holds.
Granted, this isn't some rigid formula. There are other factors that influence the value of a critic's perspective. But surely context is important to anyone who means to evaluate the latest entry in a long series.
Why should I care what someone who's played a couple older God of War games thinks about Devil May Cry 5, for example? How insightful is a Tekken 7 review by a casual Virtua Fighter or Mortal Kombat fan going to be? Unless the game is highly accessible and more or less stands alone, prior entries in the series are important to take into account.
This kind of depends on the target audience and the scope and intent of the review though. Like, I'm OK with Girlfriend Reviews not being a Super Smash Bros. or Zelda veteran. She's not exclusively targeting the type of dedicated gamer that's been playing for long enough to remember the first entries of those series.
Last edited:
You ask why you should care like every review should be aimed at you specifically.
Maybe someone purchasing DMCV has only really played a couple of older god of wars. They'd probably care about that review.
Eh. I feel like a newbie's perspective is valid as long as they're upfront about it.
Any critic who went to like, Star Wars Episode 9 and was like "I've never seen any Star Wars movie before in my life, who the fuck is Luke Skywalker, 0/10" would get laughed at.
Any critic who went to like, Star Wars Episode 9 and was like "I've never seen any Star Wars movie before in my life, who the fuck is Luke Skywalker, 0/10" would get laughed at.
The franchise? No and sometimes its interesting to have an outside perspective.
The genre, is another discussion. While it isn't require there are somethings inherent to some genre's first time players wont get immediately. Which in itself isn't inherently good or bad, but a thing.
So my answer is " Depends on what perspective you need "
The genre, is another discussion. While it isn't require there are somethings inherent to some genre's first time players wont get immediately. Which in itself isn't inherently good or bad, but a thing.
So my answer is " Depends on what perspective you need "
Yeah, I considered the issue of target audiences shortly after making my post. See edit.
Depends on the franchise.
In general, I don't think all of the games out there should be expected to perform well as standalone experiences. There are products designed to work together as epic sagas and that's completely fine.
No one expects to be able to jump into the Game of Thrones by starting from season 5, nor is Tolkien's "LoTR: Return of the King" particularly newcomer-friendly. I just don't get how someone's thought process can go "so yeah, I'm pretty interested in this story-heavy franchise that's been going on for 20 years lately, how do I jump in? What do you mean I can't just start with the latest one?"
In general, I don't think all of the games out there should be expected to perform well as standalone experiences. There are products designed to work together as epic sagas and that's completely fine.
No one expects to be able to jump into the Game of Thrones by starting from season 5, nor is Tolkien's "LoTR: Return of the King" particularly newcomer-friendly. I just don't get how someone's thought process can go "so yeah, I'm pretty interested in this story-heavy franchise that's been going on for 20 years lately, how do I jump in? What do you mean I can't just start with the latest one?"
I prefer reviewers be familiar with the franchise.
It's extra important to be familiar with the original when it comes to re-releases and remasters. I hate it when a game has major emulation issues and the reviewer doesn't even mention them because they don't know what the flaws are.
It's extra important to be familiar with the original when it comes to re-releases and remasters. I hate it when a game has major emulation issues and the reviewer doesn't even mention them because they don't know what the flaws are.
It varies. Some games allow for one to easily get into it, even if they've never played an entry in that series, like the latest Zelda and God of War, in which case both perspectives are valuable. But some others require for you to at least be familiar with what happened in prior entries to follow along with everything that's going on in the latest entries so a perspective of someone who's aware of that and has followed along with that series would be more valuable
It seems like it can work both ways honestly. On one hand, you don't want someone who isn't familiar with a series to try and dive in and have them say "This game is too hard!," "It is too repetitive!" or "Is the game about to crash?" when it is almost like a standard of said games. Best way I can put it is have someone who has never played a game like Dynasty Warriors, Earth Defense Force, or a Dark Souls-like title and have them write up a review without looking into the previous titles and see how they can raise concerns or complaints on things that are almost like a staple to said games.
On the other though, we can point to games like Monster Hunter World, Final Fantasy 15 or a Dark Souls-like game like Bloodborne where you have a game that may be come from a well established series, but it can still welcome in newcomers and veterans alike with open arms where a fresh opinion on a game can help to bring in new players who might be on the edge of certain titles.
If anything else, it probably would be better to expect reviewers to have an understanding of the genre they are reviewing than the series. I know if I were to review a sports title, I'd probably be hating on it from start to finish as they aren't my cup of tea, but would have an easier time talking about RPGs, action games, or so forth.
On the other though, we can point to games like Monster Hunter World, Final Fantasy 15 or a Dark Souls-like game like Bloodborne where you have a game that may be come from a well established series, but it can still welcome in newcomers and veterans alike with open arms where a fresh opinion on a game can help to bring in new players who might be on the edge of certain titles.
If anything else, it probably would be better to expect reviewers to have an understanding of the genre they are reviewing than the series. I know if I were to review a sports title, I'd probably be hating on it from start to finish as they aren't my cup of tea, but would have an easier time talking about RPGs, action games, or so forth.
