108
The Sad Unusability of Video Game Reviews
(bottomfeeder.substack.com)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 17 Jun 2026
108 points (91.5% liked)
Games
25443 readers
185 users here now
Video game news oriented community. No NanoUFO is not a bot :)
Posts.
- News oriented content (general reviews, previews or retrospectives allowed).
- Broad discussion posts (preferably not only about a specific game).
- No humor/memes etc..
- No affiliate links
- No advertising.
- No clickbait, editorialized, sensational titles. State the game in question in the title. No all caps.
- No self promotion.
- No duplicate posts, newer post will be deleted unless there is more discussion in one of the posts.
- No politics.
Comments.
- No personal attacks.
- Obey instance rules.
- No low effort comments(one or two words, emoji etc..)
- Please use spoiler tags for spoilers.
My goal is just to have a community where people can go and see what new game news is out for the day and comment on it.
Other communities:
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
Dude discovers tastes are subjective and hard to describe with numbers.
read the article, there's other points raised
The main point seems to be that individual reviewers don't have recognizable voices anymore, but honestly I don't really buy the idea that reviews ever "worked" in the way that this writer seems to want them to. Any individual number was always meaningless except for knowing whether a specific person liked the thing at a specific moment in time. Maybe some people were lucky enough to know a reviewer who reliably predicted how they'd feel about the product, such that they could just look at the number and be good to go, but IMO the "feature list" has always been the most interesting part of the review, and it hasn't gone anywhere.
I do think the author missed an opportunity to study how critics work and how they're perceived in other fields, media literacy is a lot more prevalent in other art forms like cinema or literature, which leads to more value being given to reviews, which is lacking in the video game industry imo
I think a big part of the problem is the time investment and the fact most people really vibe with only a few types of games.
On time investment: in order to say anything interesting about the game, anything you couldn't get from watching someone play it for two minutes, you'd need someone to take the time to finish it, often 50+ hours, and probably more to digest it and to play stuff around the sides (achievements, collecting. Given an 8 hour work day, and reasonable breaks, that's easily a week or more of just playing before you start writing. Then you've got to write with better insight into mechanics, design etc than the average guy, which a lot of critics fail at. Not just what mechanically does the game do, but clearheadedly why is that different, what makes that good and bad, how do they reinforce or work against the games themes.
On subjectivity: I could not review a first person shooter. I could not review an RPG like Skyrim. It's not because I couldn't play those games, or even derive some enjoyment. But rather that I know my mind, and I know that I have a strategic optimizing mind that left alone would rather play spreadsheet simulator stuff like rule the waves or dwarf fortress or football manager. Complexity is my god. But that's not the route to good design for most people. Similarly, guy who only plays CSGO probably shouldn't be reviewing disco Elysium.
All of this put together means an ideal reviewer would be working on a narrow selection of games, taking weeks or more for each one. And they'd be competing with people making excellent video essays for free on YouTube or whatever. Text is already a niche (hence declining film/book reviews also)
Why do you assume I haven’t?
To be fair, you may have read it, but I bet most of us didn't.