What would you like to see OCC review?

[Compxpert]

Send me in a 30incher to review Dave! xD

[hardnrg]

Networking equipment would be nice oh and Beer.

Definitely should have beer reviews

[The Smith]

Definitely should have beer reviews

Now I expect another reviewer to redo the joke of asking for women... <_<

[Andrewr05]

Send me in a 30incher to review Dave! xD

They make those in 30 inch?

 

 

Definitely should have beer reviews

This isn't OverClockersPub Steve!

 

[Zertz]

They make those in 30 inch?

 

They make them in all sizes and shapes!

[Andrewr05]

They make them in all sizes and shapes!

lol

[rourkchris]

OCC's own CPU cooler roundup done every quarter.

[scr4wl]

Now I expect another reviewer to redo the joke of asking for women... <_<

 

Can we review women?

[ClayMeow]

No offense taken. So performance reviews of the games is not what you are looking for but in depth game play?

Performance could be a part of it, but yes, I'd like to see reviews of the games themselves, similar to PC Gamer, IGN, or GameSpot.

 

The performance review for Darkest of Days was nice, but how many readers actually have the cards you tested with? It may be beneficial to those thinking of buying those cards, but then, that's what we have the video card reviews for. I mean, I have an 8800GTX, so I don't care how the game plays on a GTX295, but a review of the game itself would interest me. There are a few nuances of game reviews that would have to be overcome though:

 

1. As stated, you can't have a good, valid review without finishing a game (MMOs excluded). This may make it difficult to publish reviews in a timely fashion, especially for some games (the upcoming Dragon Age: Origins, for example).

 

2. Reviews must remain spoiler free. If someone has never written a game review, this may be the toughest thing of all. This is simply something you never even have to think about when it comes to hardware reviews. What qualifies as a spoiler? How much can you divulge before it becomes a spoiler? Just one spoiler and you'll quickly make enemies.

 

3. When it comes to performance, for the best possible review, a game should be tested on both a high end rig and one simply making the minimum requirements. This could be a problem for reviewers that don't have old systems lying around. For casual games, testing on netbooks or lowend laptops (with onboard video) would be ideal as well. And of course, testing on both nVidia and Ati would be ideal as well, but you guys don't have a problem there.

 

4. If a game crashes even once, it should be mentioned, however a reviewer should also try to repeat it, and note whether it could be reproduced or not. All bugs/glitches should be noted as well. This will mean that reviewers should have a notepad handy for whenever something happens (though it's probably helpful to take notes on the gameplay itself anyway, as that'll make writing about it later a little easier).

 

5. Game needs to be played on all available difficulties. Usually you will not actually have to complete the game on each difficulty, but you do have to be able to determine how the difficulty scales. You want to be able to tell people if it's a cakewalk on easy, but on hard, you got one-shot killed every time you stepped into an open area, etc. In RTSs, this relates to playing as each faction. In RPGs, this relates to trying out each available class. For the latter, you may be able to get away with not doing this, though it is still often useful to at least have an idea how the classes differ.

 

6. A reviewer must KNOW THE GENRE! If you've never played an FPS, you have no place reviewing MW2. That may fly in the forums where it's more casual in nature, but not for an official review. Now, this really only has to do with the "big" genres, like FPS, RTS, RPG, etc., as casual games and action-adventure are so diverse that it doesn't really make a difference. But if when Starcraft 2 comes out, and someone reviews it, saying it's too hard and complicated to control and then admits they've never played an RTS before...I will berate him to no end

 

I'm sure there are a lot more, but I've had a long day and my brain isn't fully functioning anymore.

[Bosco]

Performance could be a part of it, but yes, I'd like to see reviews of the games themselves, similar to PC Gamer, IGN, or GameSpot.

 

The performance review for Darkest of Days was nice, but how many readers actually have the cards you tested with? It may be beneficial to those thinking of buying those cards, but then, that's what we have the video card reviews for. I mean, I have an 8800GTX, so I don't care how the game plays on a GTX295, but a review of the game itself would interest me. There are a few nuances of game reviews that would have to be overcome though:

 

1. As stated, you can't have a good, valid review without finishing a game (MMOs excluded). This may make it difficult to publish reviews in a timely fashion, especially for some games (the upcoming Dragon Age: Origins, for example).

 

2. Reviews must remain spoiler free. If someone has never written a game review, this may be the toughest thing of all. This is simply something you never even have to think about when it comes to hardware reviews. What qualifies as a spoiler? How much can you divulge before it becomes a spoiler? Just one spoiler and you'll quickly make enemies.

 

3. When it comes to performance, for the best possible review, a game should be tested on both a high end rig and one simply making the minimum requirements. This could be a problem for reviewers that don't have old systems lying around. For casual games, testing on netbooks or lowend laptops (with onboard video) would be ideal as well. And of course, testing on both :lol:nVidia and Ati would be ideal as well, but you guys don't have a problem there.

 

4. If a game crashes even once, it should be mentioned, however a reviewer should also try to repeat it, and note whether it could be reproduced or not. All bugs/glitches should be noted as well. This will mean that reviewers should have a notepad handy for whenever something happens (though it's probably helpful to take notes on the gameplay itself anyway, as that'll make writing about it later a little easier).

 

5. Game needs to be played on all available difficulties. Usually you will not actually have to complete the game on each difficulty, but you do have to be able to determine how the difficulty scales. You want to be able to tell people if it's a cakewalk on easy, but on hard, you got one-shot killed every time you stepped into an open area, etc. In RTSs, this relates to playing as each faction. In RPGs, this relates to trying out each available class. For the latter, you may be able to get away with not doing this, though it is still often useful to at least have an idea how the classes differ.

 

6. A reviewer must KNOW THE GENRE! If you've never played an FPS, you have no place reviewing MW2. That may fly in the forums where it's more casual in nature, but not for an official review. Now, this really only has to do with the "big" genres, like FPS, RTS, RPG, etc., as casual games and action-adventure are so diverse that it doesn't really make a difference. But if when Starcraft 2 comes out, and someone reviews it, saying it's too hard and complicated to control and then admits they've never played an RTS before...I will berate him to no end

 

I'm sure there are a lot more, but I've had a long day and my brain isn't fully functioning anymore.

 

So what you are saying is that you are more then willing to be the game tester for us

[ClayMeow]

So what you are saying is that you are more then willing to be the game tester for us

If I had the time, I would so be on that.

 

I've actually been meaning to write a review on Arkham Asylum to post on GameSpot, but I just haven't had the time...I don't know whether to or

[jammin]

As Clay says, doing game reviews properly comes with a whole heap of requirements (along with plenty of time).

It might be something a bit big to take on without some more man power.

 

I think focusing on what we already do well and developing it is always a must.

Throwing in some extreme overclocking investigations would be interesting, even if it was revisiting products that had previously gone through the usual review process.

 

I personally spend quite a bit of time listening to music, so I always make a point of reading the audio gear reviews when we get them. And that's the box I checked.