∎ FAQ ( major wip sorry ) ∎
Q: what is a "game journal"?
A: it's a collection of game reviews ( sometimes more ) with an emphasis on my personal experiences & thoughts for each entry. the point is that this is not supposed to be authoritative -- it's a place to gather my feelings on as many video games as i can.
Q: why'd you want to make this?
A: i love video games & have loved them since i was a kid. i'm not the most eloquent person, but as i've gotten older, i thought it might be fun to try thinking about games more in-depth beyond a simple "it's good" or "it's bad". i figured finding a place online to chronicle reviews was a good way to do this -- that way i could simultaneously explore how a game made me feel, identify & talk about game mechanics & development methodologies as i learn to, and hopefully, get better at expressing myself in the process.
i originally made an account on backloggd with the intent of doing this all there, but ultimately felt too anxious about the social aspects of that site. so i decided to build my own database here on neocities! i feel i can speak more honestly now, which is naturally important to the goal. while i do hope other people end up finding these reviews useful or entertaining in some way, my ultimate plan is to just see as much as i can, better understand what i value in video games, and make sure i don't lose all these good ( and bad ) memories i had playing them!Q: where do you get your info?
A: i am using wikipedia. if i cannot find info there, i use the IGDB.
Q: do you do much research for these?
A: not especially -- i'm going into these to test my knowledge & also verbalize how a game made me feel. i'm of the opinion that a work should stand on its own & express its ideas sufficiently as it is, but i'd also be crazy to say i don't think a greater context & understanding of a game's development doesn't change how i feel about it; i do strongly believe in art & artist being inseperable to an extent, so if something really piques my interest, i might dig deeper ... but at the end of the day these entries are supposed to be more casual than academic, and i don't want to turn this project into homework.
Q: can i suggest a game to you?
A: sure. you can leave it in my guestbook, but no promises i'll check it out right away.
Q: your reviews are too long ... can you summarize them for me .............
A: you can look in the "so, do i recommend this?" section at the bottom of a review for what is essentially a TLDR.
Q: does watching a game really count as having played it?
A: arguably no; gameplay & interaction are the driving factors for this medium, after all. but the cruel reality is that i just don't have the time or energy to play every game out there -- and also, there are games whose gameplay / aesthetics / etc. just don't mesh with me enough to make me want to play them myself. but because my goal is to see as much as i can as a learning exercise, i personally find value in the experience of a letsplay or playthrough. i want to give every game an honest shot, so having as many avenues as possible to do that is cornerstone to the journaling process.
but ... i think it's fair to say that the games i play myself will overall get more passionate reviews. such is life!Q: what's the difference between "partial" and "full" completion?
A: partial completion: normally this means i put a few hours into a game, but am putting it down for one reason or another. enough time to issue judgement, IMO, but also i recognize that endings can make or break a title, so my reviews may be lacking context for mid- / late-game experiences. this might also mean i've seen bits & pieces ( including the ending ) but i haven't seen enough to really want to claim i've truly "beat" a game.
full completion: i've seen nearly everything in a game & i've gotten to an ending.
Q: you didn't give X Game enough of a chance / you gave Y Game too much credit!!!!!
A: oops, sorry about that. you should make a neocities where you can build your own game journal, then you can give a better review there! and then you can share it with me in my guestbook & tell all your friends you have a personal website now, inspiring them to make their own too!! that would really show me what's what!!!
Q: you gave a low rating to a game with a "good" review. that doesn't make sense?
A: i'd like to think i'm self aware enough to know when i'm hating on something that's arguably amazing. similarly, don't you have something you love that you'd hesitate to recommend to anyone, for one reason or another? it's like that. the number rating is a more level-headed / "objective" read on the game, while the review itself is where the details of my feelings lie, but ultimately all of it is going to be biased & informed by my tastes.
Q: can you explain your rating system more in-depth?
A: sure. here:
DIDN'T LIKE AT ALL
★
(1) absolutely despicable game. very likely actively harming me through a combination of presentation, aesthetics, gameplay, and subject matter. there is basically nothing about a 1-star game that i like. you have to do a truly wretched job to earn such a rating.
★
(1) absolutely despicable game. very likely actively harming me through a combination of presentation, aesthetics, gameplay, and subject matter. there is basically nothing about a 1-star game that i like. you have to do a truly wretched job to earn such a rating.
BORDERLINE INTOLERABLE
★☆
(1.5) everything about a 1-star game, but with slightly less of an edge. has one or two things that i find appealing -- likely on a conceptual level rather than a tangible / applied one -- but is still ultimately too at odds with my values to be viewed favorably.
★☆
(1.5) everything about a 1-star game, but with slightly less of an edge. has one or two things that i find appealing -- likely on a conceptual level rather than a tangible / applied one -- but is still ultimately too at odds with my values to be viewed favorably.
ENJOYED A BIT, MOSTLY UNPLEASANT
★★
(2) no vitriol in this experience, but still a poor one. fails to capture me on one level or another, but is not inherently a bad game, just one i did not enjoy. does not personally attack me, as 1-star ratings do.
★★
(2) no vitriol in this experience, but still a poor one. fails to capture me on one level or another, but is not inherently a bad game, just one i did not enjoy. does not personally attack me, as 1-star ratings do.
ALMOST OK, STILL NOT GOOD
★★☆
(2.5) a mostly neutral experience, but there's a slight lean towards "bad". something about these games feels off or unpleasant to me in ways that leave a very mild, but lasting bitter taste in my mouth.
★★☆
(2.5) a mostly neutral experience, but there's a slight lean towards "bad". something about these games feels off or unpleasant to me in ways that leave a very mild, but lasting bitter taste in my mouth.
GOOD, BUT NOTHING TOO AMAZING
★★★
(3) this is a TRUE NEUTRAL rating. i don't hate it, i don't love it, i feel mostly nothing after having played it. it's good enough to play through, but not good enough for me to have any strong thoughts on the matter.
★★★
(3) this is a TRUE NEUTRAL rating. i don't hate it, i don't love it, i feel mostly nothing after having played it. it's good enough to play through, but not good enough for me to have any strong thoughts on the matter.
BETTER, BUT MISSING SOMETHING
★★★☆
(3.5) piques my interest & has me thinking about it fondly, but ultimately didn't bring me a full experience. often these games have the most heart & soul, but lack a level of polish for me to consider them truly "good". this is a very favorable & compelling rating, IMO.
★★★☆
(3.5) piques my interest & has me thinking about it fondly, but ultimately didn't bring me a full experience. often these games have the most heart & soul, but lack a level of polish for me to consider them truly "good". this is a very favorable & compelling rating, IMO.
HAD A GREAT TIME
★★★★
(4) activates my neurons. fun to play, good aesthetics, good story. very similar to 3.5-stars, but went the extra mile in impressing or delighting me personally. still missing something, but makes up for it in other interesting ways. i unequivocally "like" these games.
★★★★
(4) activates my neurons. fun to play, good aesthetics, good story. very similar to 3.5-stars, but went the extra mile in impressing or delighting me personally. still missing something, but makes up for it in other interesting ways. i unequivocally "like" these games.
HAD AN AMAZING TIME
★★★★☆
(4.5) goes beyond just being well-made & fun to play. is something i both personally really click with, but also has nearly everything i'm looking for in a video game. displays some very, very minute "issues", but they're easily looked aside because of how fantastic the experience is overall. i unequivocally "love" these games.
★★★★☆
(4.5) goes beyond just being well-made & fun to play. is something i both personally really click with, but also has nearly everything i'm looking for in a video game. displays some very, very minute "issues", but they're easily looked aside because of how fantastic the experience is overall. i unequivocally "love" these games.
ESSENTIALLY A PERFECT EXPERIENCE
★★★★★
(5) the epitome of what a video game can be. meaningfully integrates story, aesthetics, and gameplay into each other to convey its vision. intelligently utilizes the interactivity of the medium as part of the experience. each design element strengthens the others. leaves me wanting nothing more after i'm done. 5-stars very likely appeal to me personally on some level, but may just be so impressive that i hand them this rating regardless of my taste. these games are few & far between.
★★★★★
(5) the epitome of what a video game can be. meaningfully integrates story, aesthetics, and gameplay into each other to convey its vision. intelligently utilizes the interactivity of the medium as part of the experience. each design element strengthens the others. leaves me wanting nothing more after i'm done. 5-stars very likely appeal to me personally on some level, but may just be so impressive that i hand them this rating regardless of my taste. these games are few & far between.