Game reviews generally suck.  But, it’s entirely not our fault.  Here’s why, and here’s why it’s important.

We do what we can.  We write, we delete, we write some more, we tear at our hair, and we make a futile effort to shoehorn our experiences into what’s fundamentally a broken descriptive system.  When you get right down to it, what does an “A” really mean?  How comparable is Pathologic, with a score of 67 on Metacritic, to Rock Band, with a score of 92? Does the higher score mean one has greater objective worth than the other or that you should avoid Pathologic because “it’s a bad game”? Where does Wii Fit fit in, and what the hell do we do with Jam Sessions?

This rampant obsession with a single number as a representation of “worth” is probably the single most damning influence in experiential gaming today; it’s our personal albatross, willingly carried around our neck despite our knowing better.  I’m as guilty as the next person of relying on Metacritic to guide my dollar spend, but I know that it’s not right.  For every Braid that slips through the system by the skin of its teeth on sheer novelty value, there’s an enclave of amazing indie games that are supposedly not worth playing. Continue reading →