Variety, Please Don’t Rate Video Games
Mass media has been key to Nintendo’s wild success with their Wii console - to reach adult and non-gamers, you must have the CNNs of the world carry coverage of your product. This is exactly what has happened. However, sometimes those general media sources find themselves a little over their heads. Case in point: Variety.
It’s all fine and dandy to carry news and such, but when outlets like Variety start trying to review games - particularly of the “hardcore” nature - matters sort of hit the fan. This is where they often prove themselves to be inept and less than equipped to handle the endeavor they’re undertaking. A good case study for this is Variety.com’s August 30th review of Metroid Prime 3: Corruption for the Wii. I’m not familiar with the reviewer, Tom Chick, and I probably won’t become familiar with him, either. While he’s done his homework and he possesses some knowledge of the franchise, the reader can’t really tell if this is through true experience or more of a Wikipedia job. While I’ve warned against ingrained game industry journalists taking a haughty stance with the mass media, there’s a difference between fearing their intrusion and rightly noting the deficiencies in their ability, at times, to opine on actual game design.
Chick is right with some of his points - for instance, pointing out the general dearth of hardcore experiences on the Wii up until Metroid (and obviously excluding such games as Twilight Princess), and noting that many of the Wii’s crowd may not appreciate Metroid. All the same, his justifications for such go too far, are subject to hyperbole, or simply miss the point of the game’s structuring altogether.
In his teaser opener, Chick proclaims that “Halo this ain’t”, and that those gamers “looking for a well paced, thrill-a-minute shooter with a compelling narrative are going to be disappointed”. Granted, Metroid is not Halo and it is not thrill-a-minute, but how one can pair “well paced” and “thrill-a-minute” is beyond me. Thrill-a-minute would constitute the equivalent of, say, running at a full sprint through your neighborhood. Well paced is more a measured jog. Outside of semantics, his assertion of a “lack of a compelling narrative” is also off track. While Metroid’s story is not overtly told, those willing to look through the game world and investigate information that can be gleaned from scanning with Aran’s visor - a critical, not secondary or tertiary, part of the experience - will find there is a rich backdrop and mythology surrounding the origins of phazon, the Chozos, and the universe. There are ways of conveying a story outside of cut-scenes.
Chick finds Corruption too difficult and the story “borderline nonsensical”. That’s fine, that’s sheer opinion based upon his play experience. But later in his review, Chick again betrays his inadequacy as a games reviewer, again dishing opinion which lies outside his own play experience. He provides conjecture that denotes a certain, marked misunderstanding of current video game culture. Chick says that boss battles often make the game too tedious, but the problem lies in his reasoning. “[Boss battles] are exhaustive affairs requiring dedication, patience, and most importantly, a familiarity with the vocabulary of videogames: double jumping, circle strafing, shooting weak points for massive damage, etc. Those who previously used the Wii only for party games will need a 13 year-old boy to explain it all”.
“Double jumping” is a concept that lies outside the realm of comprehension for many Wii owners? Circle strafing, sure, but double jumping? You’d figure folks could put that much together. More important to question though is Chick’s last line - the 13 year-old boy quip. This is a paramount example of the hyperbole mentioned earlier. Chick may find himself as witty here, but really it’s just an askew exaggeration that is unfortunately unprofessional and inaccurate at the same time.
I’m not sure of Chick’s past game journalism experience, but whether it’s impressive or not on paper is besides the point. Variety should revamp their game review department - if they can’t grant a marquee title like Metroid Prime 3 an accomplished and intelligent critique, then they shouldn’t be rating games.
on September 27th, 2007 at 9:40 pm
Tom Chick is a respected freelancer who has a monthly column in Games For Windows Magazine and he runs the popular with industry folks forum QT3.
on September 27th, 2007 at 10:14 pm
How can you write for Video Game Media Watch and not be familiar with Tom Chick? A Google search would have spared you a little embarrassment.
on September 28th, 2007 at 1:09 am
Did you consider that the reviewer is targeting his review at Variety readers and not typical gamers? Whether or not he is prone to hyperbole, I don’t think that you can expect a publication like that to really have you in mind when writing a game review. Anybody “in the know” is likely to turn to a professional site focused on video games, so I think that his review serves its purpose.
on September 28th, 2007 at 3:17 am
Tom Chick runs the Quarter to Three forums, a haven for many developers and game journalists alike. While his reviews often fly in the face of conventional wisdom (he actually panned Halo 3 and wrote up a list of all the things wrong with BioShock), I don’t think he’s someone to point to as an example of what is wrong with mainstream coverage of gaming.
It looks like he just didn’t care for Metroid Prime 3. He and you may differ on what constitutes a reasonable critique, but I assure you, he is not some freelancer off the street picking up a controller for the first time and smearing the entire industry with the same ill-informed brush.
I for one appreciate and even applaud the mainstream media like Variety for taking the time to find known quantities in gaming journalism to cover the industry for them. They may wind up replicating many of the same problems already inherent in the field, but it’s still better than bringing in an utter novice to critique games on the national stage.
Also, it wouldn’t have taken much Google research at all to discover who Tom Chick was. I really, really love the idea of this site, but you guys absolutely need to hold yourselves accountable to the same standards of diligence and professionalism you request from the gaming media you cover.
on September 28th, 2007 at 7:22 am
That’s interesting: Tom Chick is a veteran in writing on videogames. I really enjoy his weekly ‘Shoot Club’-stories on The Escapist. And it does seem to be fair to point out to readers of Variety, that MP3 might not be for them.
As for ‘well paced’ vs. ‘thrill-a-minute’ — I do not see the contradicition. But english is not my mother tongue, so maybe i am just wrong. But does ‘well paced’ really have to mean ’slow’?
on September 28th, 2007 at 1:57 pm
FYI, Tom Chick is one of the most prolific freelance game journalists out there. He has written for almost everyone of importance (Yahoo, Gamespy, Games for Windows, and The Escapist now. Gamespot, CGM, Gamecenter and hundred others in the past) and maintains the games forum Quarter to Three. Few other writers have been doing this so well for so long.
on September 28th, 2007 at 4:26 pm
“I’m not familiar with the reviewer, Tom Chick, and I probably won’t become familiar with him, either.”
Saying you can’t be bothered to look up someone’s resume before trashing his abilities/qualifications to be a reviewer sort of destroys your credibility.
(Who’s Billy Kirk? What experience do you have to judge someone’s critical thinking ability?)
It should probably be noted that Tom is one of the most respected game critics in the world, and has been writing about games for 10-15 years.. He’s written for almost every publication, from Gamespot to Yahoo to various print magazines.
That you haven’t noticed his byline—and it’s pretty hard not to, both to the uniqueness of his name and the fact he’s written so many articles—makes it hard to take your own criticisms of his criticisms that seriously.
To use your own sentence, “If you can’t be bothered to look up a writer or follow enough game sites to see a heavily used freelancer’s byline, you shouldn’t be reviewing reviewers.”
(By the way, you can start by visiting his website, http://www.quartertothree.com)
Anyway, after accusing the Variety article of resorting to hyperbole, it’s somewhat ironic to resort to it in your final sentence. They’re not qualified to rate games because they do it differently than you would like, or reach different conclusions (and they dared criticize a Nintendo product!)?
Crikey, what an elitist view.
on September 28th, 2007 at 6:02 pm
Billy, if you had the Wikipedia mastery you attribute to Tom you’d know that he is, among other things, is a longtime game reviewer with articles in Firing Squad, Yahoo Games, Gamespy, Xtreme Gamer, 1Up, Rotten Tomatoes, Computer Gaming World, and others.
For bonus points, try searching the New York Times for Tom Chick.
on September 28th, 2007 at 6:05 pm
About 9 years ago I got into the game industry. Being in marketing I made it a point to read pretty much every major magazine or website to cover the subject. That’s a lot of bad reading.
On the other hand, it wasn’t long before I discovered some of the stand-out journalists in the game industry. Tom Chick was one of those.
One of the things that I always liked about his writing is that I always knew whether or not I would like the game based on his reviews - even if he didn’t. For me, this is the hallmark of a good reviewer. Somebody who can convey the core of the game enough to turn somebody on to it even when they don’t like it.
You may not agree with Tom’s reviews… I’m not in a position to critique your critique (and wouldn’t THAT be something) but you do try to impugn Tom’s expertise within the industry because you don’t agree with his review… and yet don’t bother to try to find out about his background of credentials deeming them to be “besides the point.”
Not everybody agrees with every review. This is a fact of life. Your critique is well written… it’s a shame that your unwillingness to do your homework makes you out to be foolish.
on September 28th, 2007 at 6:09 pm
You /do/ realize that Tom Chick is one of the most widely known and respected video game reviewers, right? No? I thought you were plugged in; perhaps a little googling would have been in order?
Seems to me you’re just putting him down because he gave a game that you liked a poor review. Surprisingly not everyone likes the same games you do.
on September 28th, 2007 at 6:10 pm
You seem a little ill-informed, and it hurts your credibility. The least you could have done was do a quick google search to make sure the New York Times had never heralded him as one of the foremost “New Games Journalists” or that he doesn’t currently have regular columns at Games For Windows Magazine, The Escapist, and Gamespy.
on September 28th, 2007 at 6:21 pm
Wow, you’ve got to be one of the stupidest columnists I’ve ever read. Did you not bother even googling him before writing this column?
on September 28th, 2007 at 6:24 pm
Tom Chick =
http://www.quartertothree.com/
http://videogames.yahoo.com/masthead
http://www.escapistmagazine.com/articles/view/editorials/shoot_club
and probaly some more.
on September 28th, 2007 at 7:31 pm
Hope you enjoyed your entire two-month career as a game journalist.
on September 28th, 2007 at 7:44 pm
I really don’t know what to mention other than:
1) At least wikipedia a guy before assuming anything.
and
2) Know who the big reviews are “in the industry” before making blanket statements about someone who obviously is.
Other than that, it’s okay to disagree with a review, your counterpoints are good, just understand who Tom Chick is.
on September 28th, 2007 at 8:07 pm
You just jumped the shark, foo.
on September 28th, 2007 at 9:24 pm
Who the heck si billy kirk and why should I care what they write about another reviewer?
on September 28th, 2007 at 10:25 pm
You end up looking like a huge jackass because you complain about non-gaming reviewers trying to “rate games” and use the example of Tom Chick, whom you couldn’t even Google once to find that he is one of the most prolific “hardcore” game writers around. C.f. www.quartertothree.com
I mean, please. The guy writes from Gamespy, Games for Windows magazine, Yahoo, The Escapist, and has written for Gamespot and many others, and you write a whole article like he’s some anonymous Variety writer who did his “research” on “Wikipedia.” But you couldn’t even do the most basic research and Google him once. Sheesh.
on September 29th, 2007 at 10:27 am
Maybe you should do some research. Tom Chick is a veteran game reviewer of many years, and he freelances for CGW (now GFW Magazine), 1Up.com, Yahoo Gaming, Firing Squad, Gamespy and many others.
Ironic that you mention “a Wikipedia job” in your article, when you should have done “a Wikipedia job” on Chick himself before writing this.
It seems to me you’re just mad a game you liked didn’t get as good a review as you wished it did and you’re blaming the magazine and the reviewer.
on September 29th, 2007 at 2:22 pm
I believe that mister Billy Kirk should do a little more research before putting his foot in his mouth.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tom_Chick
on September 29th, 2007 at 7:53 pm
Ha ha, boy, this writer is totally lost. Doesn’t he think it may be worth a minute to learn who Tom Chick is? I’m sure most avid gamers know Tom Chick is the most respected game reviewer on the planet, that’s all.
on September 30th, 2007 at 1:15 am
You may want to do a little more homework before posting this sort of rant. As it happens, Tom Chick is one of the most prolific and well-respected game writers in the business. He’s written reviews (and every other type of article) for nearly every major game publication for over a decade, and has been a long-time fixture at CGW (or whatever they are calling themselves these days) and Computer Games magazine (before they went bust). He also runs his own site–Quarter to Three–and the forums there have been a longtime watering hole for not just game fans but many industry professionals (game designers, programmers, PR folk, you name it) as well.
I’m not saying that there’s anything wrong with disagreeing with his review, because there isn’t. But pegging Tom Chick as an uncritical newb to the game writing biz makes you sound pretty uninformed. Just FYI.
on September 30th, 2007 at 3:52 am
I’m not familiar with you, Billy Kirk, but it’s clear that you haven’t even bothered to do any homework - not even a ‘Wikipedia job’. If you had done so, you know that Tom Chick is, in fact, a professional games reviewer. He even runs Quater to Three. His review of Deus Ex is (in)famous.
If Mr. Chick isn’t knowledgeable enough about videogames to review them, then you most certainly are not knowledgeable enough about video games media to review him.
on September 30th, 2007 at 10:04 am
“I’m not sure of Chick’s past game journalism experience, but whether it’s impressive or not on paper is besides the point.”
It is totally not beside the point when your whole article is about how mainstream game journalists aren’t qualified to review video games.
on September 30th, 2007 at 1:57 pm
Billy, your story is ridiculous in every way–as I’m sure many have written to tell you. Nice work, Ace.
on September 30th, 2007 at 7:11 pm
Way to go with your fact checking. If you had done some you would know that Tom Chick has been writing game reviews for over 10 years now in such hardcore publications as Computer Gaming World, Computer Games Magazine (where he had his own column Three Finger Salute), etc… I would posit that Tom Chick is one of the more astute video game reviewers out there and a decent writer as well. Check you facts before launching a personal attack. Uncalled for and unprofessional.
on October 1st, 2007 at 11:29 am
Setting aside for a moment the obvious lack of research that makes this article look foolish from the start, let’s take a look instead at the main points that you seem to be asserting. First, that Mr. Chick’s review of Metroid Prime 3 is somehow flawed, and secondly that Variety has no business publishing game reviews.
Mr. Chick’s writing style is distinctive, and not everyone may be a fan. That’s fine, and you make a couple of points at the start to support that opinion. However, the article quickly devolves into an almost fanboy-esque defense of MP3 in response to Mr. Chick’s criticism. In the end it’s merely a more wordy way of yelling “nuh-uh!” while protectively clutching your Metroid Prime 3 clamshell.
As to the assertion that Variety should not be publishing game reviews, that is simply ridiculous and very short-sighted, especially from a member of the gaming media. The key to success in getting video games recognized as more than a niche market by the mainstream is to get them out in front of the public. John Q. Public isn’t going to buy a Games For Windows magazine or surf over to Gamespot or The Escapist on his lunch break. Variety is a publication that reaches thousands of non-gamers. The fact that they not only want to include some gaming coverage, but were willing to put in the effort to bring in a well respected gaming industry journalist to produce that content is praiseworthy. I applaud their efforts, and hope that it brings a little more respectability to the hobby and perhaps gets a few more people interested in playing some video games. Criticizing Variety because you don’t agree with the content of Mr. Chick’s review is juvenile and elitist, and only reinforces the mainstream stereotype of gamers.
on October 1st, 2007 at 3:22 pm
He’s just another angry, unoriginal hack writer who pisses on everything. Don’t know what else he does, but his generic, witless articles illustrate why he’s so angry…imagine being a failure at creating anything worth reading. I’d probably spit on other peoples work too.
on October 1st, 2007 at 9:56 pm
How dare any of you ballast Mr. Kirk’s article and defend Tom Chick, especially over what was an awful and uninforming review on Variety.com!
If Mr. Chick was directing Variety readers in an informed direction on ANY game, he would have provided back-story and a little more substance to his review, number one. Most of his review consists of his comparison of MP3 to Halo and Myst, and blasting the game for “unsurprising use of the Wiimote as your gun.” What the hell else would a motion sensitive remote be used for?! “HURHURHUR I’M GOING TO POKE THIS METROID WITH MY WII REMOTE DURRRRRRRRR”
As for not knowing who Tom Chick is, I know who he is: HE’S A HACK. He relys on every one of his readers being misinformed and non-tech savvy. Video Game Reviews are for those in the know, not those who don’t know what the hell a Metroid is. I’d bet 90% of Variety’s readers don’t play video games, so why the hell would they even bother publishing a review of Metroid Prime 3? Is it so Mr. Tom Chick has another topic to rip apart for his readers, so they think he’s a provocative and critical writer? NO, It means he’s picking out easy targets for his readers who don’t know what he’s even talking about!
“But he just gave that game an awful review! How can you children play this crap?”
BECAUSE YOU DON’T KNOW WHAT THE HELL IT IS I’M EVEN PLAYING YOU STUCK UP DEGENERATE OLD MONEY WHORE! GO BUY A VIDEO GAME SYSTEM AND PLAY THE GODDAMNED GAME AND SEE IF YOU LIKE IT OR NOT FOR YOURSELF!
That’s all people like Mr. Kirk are trying to do: Inform people like myself with unbiased and PROFESSIONAL opinions, so that we may go and buy a game and choose for ourselves if we like it or not.
NO ONE can hold a video game reviewer responsible for a “bad” play session, because ultimately you have to decide for yourself if you like a game or not. You purchased the game, Billy Kirk did NOT force you to buy that game and cram it in your Wii.
Tom Chick: Find a better subject to write about. You’ve destroyed your professional credibility by taking great games and doing nothing but taking a big juicy SHIT on them. Find a politician to ballast and stick with that; God knows you’ll be anchoring the NBC Nightly News in a few years if you do that, and you’ll get a hell of a lot more brainwashed followers that way.
on October 1st, 2007 at 10:35 pm
Wow, BrianMilbeck, you are one annnnnnngry fanboi. FWIW, you should probably look at what the Chick review actually said before peeing your pants.
on October 2nd, 2007 at 9:26 am
Easy there Brian… step up the meds before ya pop something.
Speaking as a gamer who’s not in any way connected with the industry - you’re dead wrong in your assertion that Master Chick rips on great games. I’ve read thousands of reviews over the last fifteen years. Tom’s my favorite reviewer because he says it like it is. He’ll point out the flaws in good games and he also gives credit to what bad games do right.
In short, he’s just more… balanced… and fair… than any other reviewer I’ve read. I don’t use reviews to buy games but I do like to read them to pick up on nuances and to understand what other gamers think about them and he’s more fair minded than you are as anybody could tell from reading any of your rant… Pax Chico
on October 2nd, 2007 at 2:04 pm
“Video Game Reviews are for those in the know, not those who don’t know what the hell a Metroid is.”
So, you’re telling us that reviews are for people who are already well informed? Man, I’ve always read them in order to gain new insight about things that I was previously ignorant about. Thank you for pointing out the error of my ways.
on October 2nd, 2007 at 4:03 pm
The funniest thing, Jay, is that it’s industry people as much as anyone who enjoy Tom’s reviews, yet ol’ Brian here claims to be more in the know than y’all are.