Upcoming Re-Reviews

[VideoGameCritic]

I'm nearing the end of my time-consuming project of reformatting of all the reviews into paragraphs. It's be a bit exhausting but definitely worth it. In the process I've made a running list of reviews that need to be revisited.

One thing I noticed is that I reviewed a lot of the most common games in the early 2000's, and these tended to be very brief. Meanwhile as the years progressed my reviews got longer and the games got more obscure. So now I have very in-depth reviews about rare games and shallow reviews about the games that really mattered.

So you can expect to see a lot of "new" reviews for very common games from classic systems. Don't worry, I'll do my best to retain the best parts of the original review (if there are any)! The good news is, since I'm already familiar with the games, they don't require much effort, so I should be able to pump them out pretty easily.

As always, I'm open to suggestions.

[goldenband]

Sounds good! Just two thoughts: first, be sure not to fix what ain't broke (sounds like you already are thinking along those lines).

And second, the more you can pair these re-reviews with new reviews, the better, as I can't say I get as excited about seeing a front page update with all re-reviews as I do when at least one of the reviews is new.

My favorite thing about your site is the ambition to cover all the games from all the systems -- not just the greatest hits -- so seeing well-known games receive renewed coverage isn't really a priority for me, though I can appreciate that it would mean something to others.

(Of course I'm still eager to see a re-review of Destination Earthstar... Seriously, that's about the only review you've ever done that's made me think, "Hmmm, that one needs a re-do.")

[MSR1701]

Looking forward to the "new" reviews!

[Gentlegamer]

You can save time by skipping all the shovelware sports games.

[MSR1701]

You can save time by skipping all the shovelware sports games.

How do you define shovelware sports games?
For instance, in the 16-bit Madden games, there are enough differences each year (gameplay, controls, AI tendencies, etc.) to justify a look.

[MSR1701]

You can save time by skipping all the shovelware sports games.

How do you define shovelware sports games?
For instance, in the 16-bit Madden games, there are enough differences each year (gameplay, controls, AI tendencies, etc.) to justify a look.

Also, I do use this site's sport reviews to see what I want to sample, good and bad

[ThePixelatedGenocide]

You can save time by skipping all the shovelware sports games.

The sports sims reviews are my favorites. And I don't even play sports games.

Each sport represents decades of genre refinement, for better and for worse. And the struggles the development teams faced, against hardware limitations and publisher deadlines, as well as their priorities, are a time capsule of the industry as a whole.

[Gentlegamer]

Do you need Dave to tell you that the majority of sports games are trash? Do you need more in depth reviews to go with their D to F scores?

[MSR1701]

Do you need Dave to tell you that the majority of sports games are trash? Do you need more in depth reviews to go with their D to F scores?

Actually, yes.

"Most" is a very big generalization, and the VGCs insight has resulted in me picking up more than a few sports games I otherwise would not have touched. Also, fairly certain there was a football game I picked up because of a rules quirk he brought up that made for a different game.

[goldenband]

Do you need Dave to tell you that the majority of sports games are trash? Do you need more in depth reviews to go with their D to F scores?

I mean, the majority of all games in all genres are trash -- RPGs, shmups, dating sims, sports games, 3D platformers, whatever -- just like the majority of all entertainment products are trash (hence Sturgeon's law). Sports games aren't really worse in that department, just more self-similar as a category.

I don't think any of us "needs" Dave or any critic to tell us anything. Reviews are useful and entertaining, not a "need". The crucial thing is that the reviewer plays the games in question, rather than just parroting some received wisdom that "everyone knows".

Anyway, Dave likes sports games and doesn't seem to like RPGs -- makes sense, since sports games are basically RPGs for jocks and sports fans -- so he reviews the former and not the latter, and generally does a spot-on job with the sports titles.

I'd say that sports game reviews, specifically, are a big part of what he does -- a big part of his personality, his brand, as a reviewer. So if you resent seeing sports reviews or have contempt for the genre, this is a funny place to hang out!