The first thing I do, before buying a game, is read reviews. I try to read as many as I can, just to get an idea how the game is. I look for three main traits of a game in a review. I'll cover these traits after the hop.
Image may be NSFW.
Clik here to view.
(a) Graphical quality --
I like to be wowified by a game's graphics. I like to be pleasantly surprised by great lighting effects, detailed environment and character models. I like games to be eye-candy. Graphic quality one of the main reasons I buy games. Whenever I look around for community reviews on websites like Amazon.com (respectively), and Gamestop.com (respectively), people seem to summarize a game's graphics in one word. Look on GameShack, and you'll see reviews on Black Ops. The one phrase you see the most is 'Teh grafiks suk!1!' Seriously? When people look for reviews, they don't go to MW2 fanboys and ask them to describe a game's graphics in one phrase. They want details. Describe that locale, the way the trees sway with the wind. The detail that goes into that one multiplayer map, the way the light creeps through the crack in the roof. These are the things people look for in reviews. Not one phrase with poor English. This brings me to the second point..
Image may be NSFW.
Clik here to view.
(b) Story --
When I'm in the mood for a new game, one of the first things I research is the game's story. The game needs to have a strong story. There's no way I'll buy (or even rent) a game with a poor story. Because I've looked at reviews, I've been lucky enough to not have played many games with a bad story. I like a story with intrigue, action, a bit of romance for cinematic sake, and better-than-good voice acting. To me, if a game has a really interesting story, but sub-par voice acting, it's a disappointment. You need to have people that fit the character they play. It's the same with movies, I don't think Prince of Persia (just to stick with the video game theme) had a good selection of actors. Jake Gyllenhaalisn't my favorite actor, and for good reason. He can't become the character. Now, this is personal opinion. Some girls on this site might be like "Oh, Jake, he's soooo hot." But is he a good actor? No, I don't think so. To the upcoming Uncharted movie, I can't say that Mark Wahlberg was a good choice. He's a good actor (loved him in The Italian Job), but Nathan Drake's character isn't Mark Wahlberg's style, in my opinion.
Now, back to the subject that I so rudely changed, story is the biggest point I look for in a game. But, of course, I read the community's reviews, and it's almost always summarized in one phrase, and it's variations--"Teh stori suks1!" or "Its 2 confuzing.." The Assassin's Creed series has one of the best storylines in gaming, and yet people downgrade it saying it's too confusing, or it's too boring. What the game developer wants you to do is pay atttention. The games with the best stories are games that you have to pay attention to. Games like Boogerman, or Sonic, or Super Mario Bros., they have stories that aren't complex. They have stories that allow you to zone out, play the game, not care about the story, but in the end, you know what the story's about because it's always summarized for you in the end in catchy taglines like "You've saved the princess from Bowser!" In games like AC, you have to pay attention. You have to follow all the plot-points, get to know the characters better. People read reviews to find out how fast/slow-paced the story is. How much you have to pay attention. If people read about the game more, they wouldn't feel obligated to write 5 word reviews telling people how much the game sucked.
Image may be NSFW.
Clik here to view.
(c)Gameplay --
I'll try not to waste your time more than I already have, but this is the final thing I look for in a game. Gameplay is widely argued as the most important trait in a video game. If the gameplay is smooth, the game is (usually) good. If a game is playable, the game is enjoyable. A good example of a game that needs smooth gameplay? Mirror's Edge. Mirror's Edge received mediocre reviews across the board (GI gave it an 8, respectively). I tend to agree with the reviews. The gameplay was really smooth, the controls fir the game, and it wasn't hard to pick up and play. For a game that has any sort of platforming/puzzle solving, you need smooth controls, and seamless animations. A good example of this is Modern Warfare 2. With a first person shooter, you need seamless controls/animations. If you, for instance, press the jump button (and expect to jump), and you don't jump? That's going to be a problem. You need to have reactive, and easy to learn controls. You need to feel like you are the game. You need to feel like the only thing separating you and the game, is the controller. When you read reviews, you expect to read in-depth examples of the controls and related things. But with certain communities, you have trolls, and fanboys.
Image may be NSFW.
Clik here to view.
When I read a review, I expect to read a non-biased review about how this game plays, how the story is, and how the graphics are. I don't care if it's not like CoD, I want a game that isn't like CoD. I want a game that's unique, breaking out of the mold. This is what I like about GameInformer. They're completely un-biased, and even though I may not agree with them on all of their reviews, they don't compare (unfairly) to other games like/unlike it. So, GI, keep up the good work. And, I beg of you, don't turn into a biased payed-off review company. **coughIGNcough**
Image may be NSFW.
Clik here to view.