Caltrops - Reviews





	[quote name="skip"][quote name="Ice Cream Jonsey"]I feel like numbers from a site with many reviewers (like this one) won't have any sort of consistency, but for a single person reviewing games it can mean something. Back when I was still passionate about this sort of thing, I feel like I could explain why X-COM is a 99% and Civilization II was a 97% to me. I think the 0-50 part of the scale is very important, and something can be a 47% and still do some cool things worth checking into in an age where all games eventually become $7. [/quote] That's true. I'm using board games as a metric because most of those sites are reviews by 1 person and you get to know their taste pretty well. Most of them put out a list of their top 100 favorite board games, often yearly, so it's easy to see how well their tastes line up with yours or if their slanted a certain direction and you can account for that in their reviews. I'm wondering if a similar feature would be helpful for most video game review sites. Instead of linking to a writer's worthless Twitter which is going to be 99% anti-Trump screeching, link to a page where they list their top 100, or even 50, video games. There's almost no reason not to do this other than it'll make the audience happy and the writers forced to reveal their terrible tastes. For example: Reviewer 1: 1. Ocarina of Time 2. Who the fuck cares? This reviewer can be safely avoided. Reviewer 2: 1. GTA San Andreas 2. Civilization 4 2. Half Life 2 4. Grim Fandango 5. Gone Home This person is likely an RPS reviewer. Reviewer 3: Only makes it to 36 games. This person likely writes for IGN. And so on. In fact, I'm adding that to my bullet points of what professional reviewers should have. - If your site uses many reviewers, I want a link to their top 100 (50 minimum) favorites, in order, so I can understand their taste or lack thereof. The list can be updated or changed as often as they want but it should always be available and easy to find.[/quote]