Old Vs. New Critic

[VideoGameCritic]

Recently I re-reviewed Sled Storm for the PS1, since it's a great game and I was playing it a lot.  I wrote the new review from scratch without looking at the old one.  When I did go back and look, I liked the old one much better!  That made me kind of sad!  And it's not the first time it's happened!

The new review was longer and more comprehensive.  It was well written and really analyzed all aspects of the game.  The old version is kind of goofy and shallow, but it's funny and you still get the gist of the game.

I know a lot of you come here to read "average Joe" reviews coming from someone who doesn't play games for a living.  I'm wondering if I need to loosen up a little and not care so much about what people think.

I'd like to hear your opinion.

PS: The new Sled Storm review will probably include the best parts of both reviews.

[darkrage61]

I personally like more detailed and comprehensive reviews, so i'd say you should probably go with the new one.

[Rev1]

I haven't noticed too much of a difference except for the more comprehensive part, and I actually like that. Your style of reviews is  bound to change as time progresses, and I still get a lot of enjoyment out of reading them. As long as you are having fun with what you are doing, it'll reflect in your work.

[txsizzler1]

Perhaps you should keep a link available to your "old" review, so that people can not only see what you originally thought, but how your perceptions have changed over time. Further, it could add to the overall scope of the review, and give one a better understanding of the game.

[goldenband1]

Keeping a link to the "old" review would be great.  In addition to the reasons txsizzler gave, it's not always clear when a game has been re-reviewed, and sometimes that's a little confusing.  I've found myself asking "Wait, was this one covered before?"  Knowing the context of the review helps the reader to understand where you're coming from, e.g. "I'm re-evaluating this old favorite" vs. "I'm reviewing this since it's a clear gap in my coverage of the system library" vs. "Hey, this game is great! Where have you been all my life?"

You could keep the old review inline below the new one, but hidden until you click on a "Show old review" link.  It'd probably be worth using a smaller font size and different color to make it clear that it's old.

[Rev1]

[QUOTE=txsizzler]Perhaps you should keep a link available to your "old" review, so that people can not only see what you originally thought, but how your perceptions have changed over time. Further, it could add to the overall scope of the review, and give one a better understanding of the game.[/QUOTE]

I actually have been wondering for a while why he has never done this. I'm not sure if he has held onto his old reviews but it would be really interesting to see how the most current review compares to the original.

[Pacman0001]

Would the Internet Archive have copies of the old site with it's reviews?  That might be a place to start if he hasn't kept copies.  I would be rather sad if the old stuff was lost to time.

[Roperious1]

[QUOTE=txsizzler]Perhaps you should keep a link available to your "old" review, so that people can not only see what you originally thought, but how your perceptions have changed over time. Further, it could add to the overall scope of the review, and give one a better understanding of the game.[/QUOTE]



Agreed. 

[Paul1231]

As long as you don't start saying "I know, right?" I have no problem with you evolving.