Front Page

Content

Authors

Game Index

Forums

Site Tools

Submissions

About

B
BradHB
January 21, 2022
351 0

Hoth Ice Planet Adventure Game

Podcasts & Videos
D
DavidNorris
January 20, 2022
438 0
T
thegiantbrain
January 19, 2022
215 0
T
thegiantbrain
January 17, 2022
955 0
W
We-reNotWizards
January 12, 2022
748 0

Ten: The Card Game - Review

Board Game Reviews
T
thegiantbrain
January 11, 2022
304 0
O
oliverkinne
January 11, 2022
573 0
MT
Matt Thrower
January 10, 2022
1079 0
J
Jackwraith
January 10, 2022
582 1
MB
Michael Barnes
January 07, 2022
2570 0
B
BradHB
January 07, 2022
434 0
W
We-reNotWizards
January 05, 2022
699 0
J
Jackwraith
December 30, 2021
802 0
MB
Michael Barnes
December 30, 2021
1212 0
O
oliverkinne
December 28, 2021
559 0
×
Bugs: Recent Topics Paging, Uploading Images & Preview (11 Dec 2020)

Recent Topics paging, uploading images and preview bugs require a patch which has not yet been released.

Critical Reviews - What's the Difference Between a Reviewer and a Critic

More
25 Aug 2020 00:00 #313473 by oliverkinne
Let me start with review and critique, which I think...

I always wondered what the difference is between a reviewer and a critic, or even a review and a critique. These terms are sometimes used interchangeably, sometimes they're describing two different things, but very often they seem to be used for things that have a lot of overlap and are very similar in many ways. In this article, I'm trying to grapple with those terms and decide for myself what I think they mean.

Read more...

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
25 Aug 2020 09:48 #313474 by fightcitymayor
When they write the history of "The Rise & Fall Of Boardgaming from 1990 to 2020" I hope they do a chapter on how every boardgaming nitwit suddenly felt empowered enough to consider themselves a "reviewer." In the good old days people self-policed their area of expertise & didn't attempt to present themselves as almighty scions of knowledge across all aspects of human endeavor. In the 90's I wrote punk rock record reviews because in the 90's I was punk as fuck. But I never decided to deem myself a reviewer of jazz just because I bought Miles Davis Birth of the Cool.

Tom Vasel's enthusiasm for gaming & cheery demeanor has gone a long way towards propagating the BGG mentality of "just say something nice!" where generally genial people decide to "review" what they buy, and SURPRISE, it's all super duper awesome! Like O.K. wrote above, there is unfortunately no professional licensing agent for reviewers with actual critical experience, so we live in an age of "reviewers" who are far more aptly described as "enthusiasts with time on their hands."
The following user(s) said Thank You: allismom3, Msample, Frohike, Pugnax555, Vysetron

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
25 Aug 2020 10:57 #313475 by Shellhead
One reason that I rarely visit BGG anymore is the rampant hostility there towards negative reviews. The prevailing attitude there is that you should either say something nice or nothing at all, and that's just one more big reason why their site is of limited utility. Sometimes a game deserves a negative review because it has significant problems or even just fails to offer any particular reason to be on the gaming table.
The following user(s) said Thank You: Msample, SuperflyPete, Frohike

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
25 Aug 2020 11:08 #313476 by SuperflyPete
I think the phrase should be "influencer" versus "critic" because that's more accurate for 99% of the field. That shouldn't be pejorative, either. An influencer serves a role as long as they are honorable and put their preconditions out front, easily accessible and understandable, so you know where they are coming from.

But..... there are also entertainers. The gentleman who posts those throwback-motif videos here (whose name escapes me, my apologies) is an example of that. Super entertaining and also has good information. Same with that guy who did the Dragon Strike video (et al), Board James.

Meh, I don't care anymore. At this point the critics have lost and have all gone PODCAST (see: So Totally Wrong...) and the video guys are mostly all influencer/salesmen. And that's fine. I'm glad they can make money doing what they love, and I wish them all the luck in the world. I just don't think I'd take a recommendation; I could mute the video and watch it and get the information I seek.
The following user(s) said Thank You: Frohike, birdman37, DarthJoJo

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
25 Aug 2020 16:45 #313487 by mc
I'm not sure how universal the use of those terms are.

For me - review = consumer advice, critique = analysis (which will involve usually putting the work in a wider contextual analysis too).

There are probably a handful of people writing boardgame critique. And of the reviewers there are a very large proportion who are essentially shills - consciously orbs unconsciously.
The following user(s) said Thank You: Vysetron

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
25 Aug 2020 17:22 #313490 by DukeofChutney
In my view a critic should have something more significant to say than whether the product is good or bad. The critic should be making an artistic or cultural judgement. I think its hard to pin down what that may look like precisely. This is fairly common in film or videogames. In boardgames because it is a lower value market the product review is still the dominant form.
The following user(s) said Thank You: Shellhead, Frohike, Pugnax555

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
25 Aug 2020 18:25 #313491 by dysjunct
To me:

Review: analysis of the thing itself and how or poorly well it meets its goals.

Critique: much broader in scope. Analysis of the thing, how the thing fits into the historical and cultural context of similar things which have come before, how well or poorly it meets its goals, whether its goals are worth meeting or not, and why. Et cetera.
The following user(s) said Thank You: Frohike, Pugnax555

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
26 Aug 2020 10:37 #313495 by Vysetron
There's not concrete definitions, otherwise we wouldn't have this conversation in the first place, but:

review: information about the thing that ascertains the quality of it, generally presented to assist prospective purchasers/consumers

critique: offers more than the above, often using review as a springboard to a specific point

I'm dumb as hell though so idk
The following user(s) said Thank You: Frohike

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
26 Aug 2020 15:46 #313506 by jason10mm
So is there any game that merits "critique" using dysjunct's definition? Is there any boardgame that has the reach, cultural impact, and social commentary like a film, book, or documentary?

I'd guess chess, go, maybe DnD? Poker? Something that reflects the culture from which is was created and can change the player and the audience. Probably not Power Grid or Tiny Epic Tactics. Not to say those are bad games, far from it, but if "critique" has a loftier aim than just "is it any good?" and should inform and appeal to folks outside of the game clique, then I'm not sure many games qualify.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
26 Aug 2020 15:51 #313507 by Sagrilarus
I think games like An Infamous Traffic or Angola open the opportunity for a broader discussion. You can question whether they bring insight into the moment in history they present, but that question, regardless of answer, is warranted.
The following user(s) said Thank You: Gary Sax, Frohike

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
26 Aug 2020 16:27 #313514 by Gary Sax
You could also include something like Greed Inc. in that, or Food Chain Magnate. There are a number of games that I would argue are a critique of their subject. John Company implictly is, as well, but Sagrilarius brings up the similar Infamous Traffic.

Games can be good at answering the question of "why?" for things that tend to be inexplicable if viewed from outside the system or from the future.
The following user(s) said Thank You: Frohike

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
26 Aug 2020 16:33 - 26 Aug 2020 16:34 #313516 by mc
I mean, the wider context can still be the context of boardgaming - it doesn't have to be like, where does the game fit into humanity or whatever (not that it can't include that either). I think that you can critique a souless euro with no trouble, you can critique a party game, and absolutely, you can critique games like Wehrle's which are trying to make a statement/argument - particularly has he has been quite vocal about that.

Review of the next deluxified soulless euro game: there's a few things to like here; there are so many different ways to get those points and the components, wow. If you like a point salad this one is for you, etc etc.

Critique of the next deluxified soulless euro game: we've been here before - what's new? Nothing here is pushing the boundaries - it's just like the last one. nothing much. And why are we so slavishly beholden to deluxe components? What does that say about boargaming today, really? Is this papering over the cracks of a lack of innovation? Let's compare this game to the much maligned XXXX which has arguably the same basic structure but was released 10 years ago.... now, 10 years ago, this designer was designing games like YYYYY, so why have they taken a backward step here?
Last edit: 26 Aug 2020 16:34 by mc.
The following user(s) said Thank You: Frohike, DarthJoJo

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
26 Aug 2020 16:45 - 26 Aug 2020 16:46 #313517 by ubarose

dysjunct wrote: To me:

Analysis of the thing, how the thing fits into the historical and cultural context of similar things which have come before


The "similar things" in this context is other games, not necessarily any kind of broad cultural context. Discussing the game design within the history of game design and the current state of game design. Often by deconstructing it to determine its influences and what makes it tick. Then assessing whether aspects of its design are innovative, derivative, a variant, an iteration...Assessing its importance in the evolution of game design and its potential influence on current and future design. Then reconstruct it and assess if the whole is great than the parts or less than, and why.

Ask and answer the "why." Why is it better or worse, more or less popular than the designs that influenced it? Or is it something completely new? Or is it just more of the same? Will people still be playing it or discovering it 5 years from now, 10 years from now. Or will it be forgotten in 5-10 months?
Last edit: 26 Aug 2020 16:46 by ubarose.
The following user(s) said Thank You: Shellhead, Frohike, birdman37, mc, DarthJoJo

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
26 Aug 2020 18:55 #313524 by mc
Yes.

I do think that there are opportunities for the wider context to come into it as well at times. I think that it's possible to do that for any games, but I understand why that doesn't happen and that most people probably aren't interested. But there has been some terrific critique of games written that do it - there were a great series of articles written last year on the back of the "Struggle for Africa" game that GMT dropped, for example, which looked at how the medium has treated colonialism over time and asked questions about what that all means for us as a society.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

Moderators: Gary Sax
Time to create page: 0.301 seconds