I’m sure we all look to Game reviews or criticisms when we’re thinking about picking up a new game, be that through official avenues such as Kotaku or IGN, or places like Steam User Reviews. Heck even asking someone at your local Games store. We all do it from time to time. I personally see these articles as Subjective rather than Objective, as a review/criticism is something that is suppose to tell others about an experience with a game itself as a whole. Criticism, on the other hand, is usually VERY Objective. This is because criticism is largely thought to not take into account a person’s experience with a game and only what the game has to offer should matter.
I disagree with that and I will tell you why.
Firstly we must talk about the most important thing that comes to gaming, or any media in general really, the player’s experience. The experiences that the player both brings to the game and those that the player has while inside the game.
Each person’s experience will wildly differ therefore each person’s experience will be different. This leads to reviews/criticism being severely individualized, which in my point of view is a good thing. Subjective reviews/criticism allow for players to understand a person’s mindset and their own comprehension of a game. Although this does mean that a certain article mightn’t conform to any given person, but this allows that the sheer abundance of reviews/criticisms that exist in this day and age will surely cater to someone’s viewpoint.
Going into more what subjectivity is, people have different life experiences and mindsets that affect their play experience and style. Any given person can fit into one or more of the following psychological categories:
- Killers
- Achievers
- Explorers
- Socializers
Killers are people who play games that look to cause mayhem and havoc among a given game. They’ll go through a server destroying their opponents through either legitimate or illegitimate means.
Achievers are the people that look to do everything and everything in a game. This goes from completing the achievements for the game, finishing all the side-quests or even just completing self-imposed challenges. They seek a challenge of any sort.
Explorers will go far and wide to see everything a game has to offer. See every nook and cranny of a game world, see every line of dialogue an NPC has to say, even understanding the finer details of the game’s mechanics themselves.
Socializers are the extroverts of gaming so to speak. They go into a game and look to communicate and make relationships with other players in the game more so than playing the game itself. This can be through in-game methods (e.g. Guilds or Friend lists) or fan communities (e.g. Subreddits or Facebook groups).
The type of player alone will contribute to a given review/criticism if subjectivity is involved. A review/criticism from a player who is more of a killer while playing a game, is not necessarily going to engage a player that is more of an explorer.
But this is exactly why Subjectivity is needed in games. A person’s experience with a game is directly influenced by their play-style. This is important to a review/criticism as a person can really get a feel for what a game is.
With Objective reviews/criticism, the game is broken down to simply narrative, gameplay and visuals for the most part. This gives the reader a sense for what the game looks like and plays like to an extent. But NOT to the extent a Subjective review/criticism would do.
Take Rainbow Six: Siege for example, I have played an immense amount since early 2017, just before the release of it’s Velvet Shell expansion. I currently have around 850 hours played on Steam and love it to death, sure I have my gripes with it but it is truly a fantastic game.
However, if I were to give a review on it Objectively I couldn’t truly show what the game feels like to play. I would mention that the gun play and mechanics are spectacular, the feel of almost every gun is great and the ability to out skill an opponent (or out luck an opponent) and kill them with a ‘one-shot headshot’ is super satisfying each and every time. The breaching and rappelling mechanics were new to me and definitely took some getting used to but I love the uniqueness of it and the amount of versatility added to the game utilizing these mechanics.
If I were to give a Subjective review though, I would mention that dominating people is the single most satisfying bit in the game. Somehow clutching a 1-5 is a moment of pure hype and excitement among the whole team (be these people you know or not). But the game’s players can lean into the Killer category a lot. You see, R6: Siege has a friendly-fire mechanic, this means that teammates can damage each other. This leads to a lot of toxicity if a person gets annoyed with another. Over the time I’ve played I couldn’t count the amount of times I’ve been team-killed for seemingly no reason on both my hands and feet. It certainly ruins the experience sometimes.
That is the difference between the two types of reviews/criticism. albeit to a smaller extent. Someone could read my Subjective review and be enticed to play the game more so than they otherwise would be, the possibility to just murder teammates that are annoying definitely talks to some people. In that same vein, it might very well turn some people off the game entirely.
This is why Subjective reviews/criticism are needed. They give a reader a more comprehensive feel for what the game is like to play and therefore can make a more informed decision .
Another reason we need Subjectivity in game’s reviews/criticism is because it gives a voice to the people that need it. In an Objective look at a game it doesn’t matter who you are, you are just a piece of meat tapping keys and talking about a game. Whereas a Subjective look brings your personality into account and really brings forward who YOU are. To relate to another post of mine (Diversity of LGBTQIA+ Characters in Video Games), I for one would love to point out the sexual orientation of the characters I encountered on my journey throughout a game. This mightn’t matter to some people but it does to me and a lot of other people.
All in all, I believe we need Subjectivity because it shows the game for what it truly is. An experience for the player. The player plays the game for the experience, be that as a Killer, Achiever, Explorer, Socializer or a mixture of the lot.
The player’s experience is moulded by their entire being, who they are, what they find important and how they play. Subjective criticism and reviews show this in a brighter light than an Objective view could ever.
Thanks again for reading!
– Nathan “Naff” Hibbert
Naff's Gaming Blog 