TouchArcade uncomfortably subjective/promotional [Archive]

Jensen

08-06-2009, 09:46 AM

I have read touch arcade for several months and, while I enjoy the amount of content, I am uncomfortable with the subjectivity portrayed by the authors. Here are the issues I have:

- often it is hard to tell whether an article is a news announcement or a review, especially considering the amount of subjective words ("you have to buy this," "it seems worth the money," etc) in each article

- The amount of positive press you give games before giving them an initial review or even first look is surprising. It's almost as though you are gaining some kind of benefit if any game (even a mediocre one) is bought when clicked through from your site.

- The number of times I have seen that a game is a "must buy" at a certain price, or similar language, is astounding. If I bought every "must buy" game recommended by your website, I would be several hundred dollars in the hole. Why not put games to a higher standard and only recommend those that truly stand out from the pack?

- Reviews seem to be intent only on getting the user to purchase, not helping the user figure out if this is the right game for him/her. For example, in the article http://toucharcade.com/2009/08/06/spy-bot-chronicles-just-go-ahead-and-buy-it-now/ you give a blanket recommendation to buy before discussing the game whatsoever.

Again, while I appreciate the amount of content you put out, I am put off by how eager you are to recommend seemingly almost any game out there. This is exactly the kind of thing that will cause developers to continue developing mediocre, uninspired games for the platform. I hope you change your direction as your site evolves.

Booch138

08-06-2009, 10:10 AM

Yeah I'll even admit that the article you sited's (Today's Spybot Chroicles) first paragraph did irk me a little. Just seemed a tad unnessisary for the first paragraph. I have seen some other unfavourable material, but for the most part I kind of dismiss it. A lot of the time thier main reviews are generally decent. I usually don't like someone telling me to go buy something vs telling me why I would want to, but most of the time they mix the 2 up a little.. heh

Brave thread though, I applaud that.

Thorero

08-06-2009, 10:33 AM

Jensen, You've put into text what's been running around my head for quite some time. And I agree wholeheartedly. Whilst, as you say, there's a good ammount of content, the constant positive press and "Buy it now" attitude is a bit much.

In short, I back everything you've just said, and couldn't have put it better myself.

arn

08-06-2009, 11:01 AM

Again, while I appreciate the amount of content you put out, I am put off by how eager you are to recommend seemingly almost any game out there. This is exactly the kind of thing that will cause developers to continue developing mediocre, uninspired games for the platform. I hope you change your direction as your site evolves.

We've covered this before. Front page game selection is primarily decided upon by games we like and therefore recommend. The fact that most of the reviews that we post are positive is by design, not by accident. Developers often email us asking us to review their game. Our primary reason not to review a game is that we simply didn't like it.

The exceptions to this are big name titles that tend to get reviews (positive or negative) regardless of whether we like them or not.

If you want to read article after article about games you've never heard of that suck... well, that's a site that no one else is going to want to read.

Why not put games to a higher standard and only recommend those that truly stand out from the pack?

Yep. that's what we do.

arn

DaveMc99

08-06-2009, 11:14 AM

I am put off by how eager you are to recommend seemingly almost any game out there.

There are over 8000+ paid games in the store now. TA has recommended under 800. That is the top 10%.

It would help if you linked to a mediocre game that TA recommended. Spy Bot is 5 star game in iTunes. In the Spy Bot review he did write this for people that want to know why buy it. "If you still must be convinced, here's the spiel:"
A number of people here only read Big Albie's rating on a game and don't read his whole review. Why does it matter if the recommendation is the first paragraph or the last?

VeganTnT

08-06-2009, 11:15 AM

If you want to read article after article about games you've never heard of that suck... well, that's a site that no one else is going to want to read.

Actually that's called my Twitter feed, haha. The games that request reviews but are completely unplayable or need work usually get a shout out there

Stroffolino

08-06-2009, 11:17 AM

I wouldn't mind seeing occasional reviews of bad games.

Not only could this be entertaining (i.e. failed American Idol auditions), it could stimulate discussion and most importantly would provide nice counterpoints to the endless reviews of "must have" games. If every article strikes the same tone, it lessens the impact of an actual endorsement.

A good analogy is professional movie critics. They don't go and review every direct-to-dvd movie that churns out, but they present a nice mix of positive and negative reviews, while always making sure to review any "big name" movie.

If you want to read article after article about games you've never heard of that suck... well, that's a site that no one else is going to want to read.

arn

arn

08-06-2009, 11:23 AM

There are over 8000+ paid games in the store now. TA has recommended under 800. That is the top 10%.

actually, that's kind of inflated.

There are 11574 games (link (http://148apps.biz/app-store-metrics/?mpage=catcount)) in the app store. The 800+ count is from various TouchArcade article pricing categories including free, but we didn't recommend them all, and a game we cover multiple times gets placed in the categories multiple times.

arn

silentdante

08-06-2009, 11:32 AM

ok lets look at it like this, this is a blog review site with forums, on a blog, they arent IGN or another gaming website that HAS to or SHOULD review everything. they are a blog by some guys that love iphone gaming, and offer impressions thoughts and reviews on things that interest THEM, you know, how a blog usualy works. just because they are the best and an extremely popular blog does not make them into a full blown review site. they owe nothing to anyone just because they are popular. thats my opinion on it, i enjoy the forums because you get lots of peoples thoughts, you get thier front page reviews of games THEY love, and suggest you buy them to so you can share in the enjoyment they are getting. they have no interest to blog about games that arent great or to help hype something just because a company asks them to.

if you go to www.appshoper.com and look at the last 10 hours, you will probly see about 20 NEW games that have come out without a mention at all, though one like dungeon scroll, whose topic i started would be one of those "missed" games that got a front page article because it's a fun game with a twist. they say go out a buy it because it is a cool new type of word genre game. there are a ton of other topics created for games that people swear are 5 star games that never see the front page, probly because the blog owners and writers didnt enjoy it. they also try to cover news like bubble bobble and upcoming games, which often dont come with the GO BUY IT NOW hype.

just because i'm rambling i'll end with this. i see warpack: grunts as an advertiser all over the site (or used to) and if i rememeber correctly when they reviewed it, it really didnt have that "this game is awesome go buy it" type of review, to me it was more of a "this game is pretty fun, some faults, get it if it interests you" type of thing. maybe i am remembering wrong, but that at least lends some honesty to a blog where they dont owe any honesty to us the readers.

DaveMc99

08-06-2009, 11:35 AM

actually, that's kind of inflated.

I was going by apptism's number of paid games 8939 (http://www.apptism.com/?x=17&y=8&price=paid&category_id=1&price_range=&activity_type=&order=recent&query=&type=&user_id=). Just making the point there is a process before games are recommended and there are literally hundreds of 4/5 star games in the store now.

Booch138

08-06-2009, 01:13 PM

silentdante

08-06-2009, 01:31 PM

The reviews arn't nessisarily why I post here though, it's definitely the community :)

I agree wholeheartedly, when i first got my iphone in june, i searched for every site i could find on apps, not just games, but everything. i now have 17 sites bookmarked that i do check on a regular schedual, and while some are great for reviews on everything, some are great on reviews for just games, some are just a blog about the iphone itself (apples tuaw).

the reason this site stays important to me is the community they provide through the forums, the reviews or news on the front page just serve as an axtra thought by the forums hosts. plus they get some nice interviews with game creators (rogue planet, the sega 2d retro engine guy, ect.) because of the popularity you get extra stuff like that.

you have big albie, devilishly good(sp?) and a couple other people that often give great reviews or impressions of games too. the community is strong, and often not to biased (though i am looking at you minigore) plus you have to have your own common sense and sense of value and what your into.

yourofl10

08-06-2009, 02:00 PM

Brave thread though, I applaud that.

+1 You have guts dude. I'm here for the forum because there are awsome people here and its fin and keeps me up to date. I read the home page reviews sometimes but not to much.

squarezero

08-06-2009, 04:09 PM

We've covered this before. Front page game selection is primarily decided upon by games we like and therefore recommend. The fact that most of the reviews that we post are positive is by design, not by accident. Developers often email us asking us to review their game. Our primary reason not to review a game is that we simply didn't like it.

The exceptions to this are big name titles that tend to get reviews (positive or negative) regardless of whether we like them or not.

If you want to read article after article about games you've never heard of that suck... well, that's a site that no one else is going to want to read.

Yep. that's what we do.

arn
Arn, I think your response to Jensen is a bit too mild. Here you have someone who has been lurking on the site for months and uses his second (second!) post to question your integrity and that of the other contributors -- and does it in the most mealy-mouth way possible ("I appreciate the amount of content you put out..except that it's bought and paid for").

I guess it's good that you are a tolerant and patient soul; I, for one, would have told him to go to hell.

Jensen

08-06-2009, 04:16 PM

Arn, I think your response to Jensen is a bit too mild. Here you have someone who has been lurking on the site for months and uses his second (second!) post to question your integrity and that of the other contributors -- and does it in the most mealy-mouth way possible ("I appreciate the amount of content you put out..except that it's bought and paid for").

I guess it's good that you are a tolerant and patient soul; I, for one, would have told him to go to hell.

For one, I wish you wouldn't troll. From my position the main objection was not being critical (criticism in the literary sense...a solid analysis), though the propensity of "you have to buy this right now" commentary did leave me wanting an explanation of any relationship between advertising and editorial content. And, I do appreciate the website, I would (as a reader) like to see it evolve in beneficial ways.

Lastly, I do not "lurk" on the site. I use the RSS feed to read reviews and do not normally post on the forums. I saw that there was a forum for feedback but not direct email contact link, or ele I would have sent the feedback directly to the staff.

Any good website should welcome constructive criticism and interaction with its audience, and I'd like to hope that they took my feedback in the way it was intended.

squarezero

08-06-2009, 04:29 PM

For one, I wish you wouldn't troll. From my position the main objection was not being critical (criticism in the literary sense...a solid analysis), though the propensity of "you have to buy this right now" commentary did leave me wanting an explanation of any relationship between advertising and editorial content. And, I do appreciate the website, I would (as a reader) like to see it evolve in beneficial ways.

Lastly, I do not "lurk" on the site. I use the RSS feed to read reviews and do not normally post on the forums. I saw that there was a forum for feedback but not direct email contact link, or ele I would have sent the feedback directly to the staff.

Any good website should welcome constructive criticism and interaction with its audience, and I'd like to hope that they took my feedback in the way it was intended.
Jensen -- there is only one logical conclusion of your "criticism": that Arn, Hodapp, etc are on the take from developers (you even suggest it on your post). That would mean that the opinions offered are not honest, and that, essentially, the Touch Arcade crew are a bunch of liars. That is not constructive criticism -- it's character assassination, which makes you the troll in this conversation.

I use an RSS feed too -- that has nothing to do with being a lurker. According to Answers.com: "A lurker is one who sits in an internet chat room, message base or newsgroup , but does not participate." The fact that you choose to "participate" by questioning the honesty of the moderators is, in my view, pretty offensive. That's not trolling, that's expressing an opinion -- something that you invite when you make your views public.

shen

08-06-2009, 04:52 PM

I read the original post as mostly complaining about the overuse of calls to action (eg "Buy this now") instead of actual descriptions of game play pros and cons.

I agree with that to some extent, and I think it is part of the reason for the hype backlash that I have been seeing in the forums.

I would prefer if reviews stuck to giving descriptions of game play, and letting the readers know about the good and bad points of a game, and the features and bullet points, and let the reader decide for themselves if they think the game is worth the money.

It seems like a majority of the forum posts most days are people asking if they should buy one game or the other, so maybe the TA readership in general likes reviews to have an "OMG, buy this game now" element.

squarezero

08-06-2009, 05:09 PM

I read the original post as mostly complaining about the overuse of calls to action (eg "Buy this now") instead of actual descriptions of game play pros and cons.

From the original post: It's almost as though you are gaining some kind of benefit if any game (even a mediocre one) is bought when clicked through from your site.

I agree with that to some extent, and I think it is part of the reason for the hype backlash that I have been seeing in the forums.

I would prefer if reviews stuck to giving descriptions of game play, and letting the readers know about the good and bad points of a game, and the features and bullet points, and let the reader decide for themselves if they think the game is worth the money.

It seems like a majority of the forum posts most days are people asking if they should buy one game or the other, so maybe the TA readership in general likes reviews to have an "OMG, buy this game now" element.

Longer, more in-depth reviews are appreciated, but unless you're reading something like the New York Review of Books, there's an expectation that a reviewer will, at some point, let us know what they think of the game. It's the same with movie reviews, music reviews (check out Pitchfork, for crying out loud), book reviews, etc.

I'm sure it would be very difficult for Arn and co. to achieve any level of enthusiasm about this endeavor if all they did was dutifully transcribe the features of the games they cover. In any event, I find that TouchArcade maintains a pretty tempered tone: the hype tends to get built up in the forums.

HJJ

08-06-2009, 06:01 PM

I read the original post as mostly complaining about the overuse of calls to action (eg "Buy this now") instead of actual descriptions of game play pros and cons.

[...]

I would prefer if reviews stuck to giving descriptions of game play, and letting the readers know about the good and bad points of a game, and the features and bullet points, and let the reader decide for themselves if they think the game is worth the money.

I suppose you also oppose Entertainment Weekly's "grades" and People Magazine's "stars"? I think people need to calm down and stop taking things so literally and so personally without looking beyond this insular iPhone gaming environment.

When Entertainment Weekly gives a movie an A, I take that to mean that the reviewer generally recommends the movie to people who are interested in the genre or to those that find the preview materials otherwise appealing. I don't take it to mean that the reviewer implores every person on the planet, regardless of personal taste or circumstance, to see the movie.

Touch Arcade has simply chosen a different approach to making general recommendations. Instead of giving a game an A or 5 stars or some other arbitrary "rating", they are straightforwardly letting us know whether they recommend a game or not. There is no "call to action." Arn or Hodapp probably aren't going to show up on your doorstep if you choose to ignore their recommendations. What about this concept is in any way difficult to understand? Part of the answer seems to be that people don't understand the point of reviews. Reviews aren't merely descriptions. How F-ing boring would that be? And how pointless, as well. Reviews are inherently flavored by the opinions of the reviewer.

Is it so hard to think for ourselves; To take in the opinions of others and make informed decisions based on our own intellect and knowledge? Why must every external viewpoint be completely void of identity or sentiment in order for us to come to personal conclusions? What needs to be understood is that, while some reviewers are more respected and/or objective than others, no reviewer is an authority on how we, as individuals, are to behave - whether that behavior concerns which movie we see next, which game we download next or which restaurant we eat at next. Don't get me wrong: Impartiality is extremely important in these fields. But impartiality doesn't and shouldn't have to equal emptiness. If all this site did was take the App Store descriptions and fluff them out to 5 paragraph blog posts without commenting on the quality of the game or providing any sort of recommendation, I'd be gone. That "information" is worthless and a waste of web space.

---
As to the other part of this "concern", I see no reason why TA should be obligated to report on every shitty game that comes out just to appear unbiased to a few 15-year-olds. As far as I'm concerned, TA is doing us all a service by handpicking the cream of the crop and presenting it to us on a silver platter. I have no use for reviews of bad games, and especially no use for reviews of bad games "just because" as has been suggested here. I realize that TA cannot provide me with all the information that I will always want or need, so for some things, I will go to other sources. But what TA does, it does very well, and I see nothing wrong with any of its thoroughly ordinary practices.

DaveMc99

08-06-2009, 08:54 PM

FYI Spy Bot is already the #63 Top Game with 10/10 5 Stars in iTunes. A few people other than TA like this game. :)

Ravenblack

08-06-2009, 10:43 PM

I just read "must-buy" as "must-buy if you like this sort of game".

Stop relying so much on written reviews alone. And learn to take some personal responsibility when choosing what games to buy.

arn

08-06-2009, 11:01 PM

I read the original post as mostly complaining about the overuse of calls to action (eg "Buy this now") instead of actual descriptions of game play pros and cons.

What's interesting is it's all a work in progress. I've actually made some conscious efforts to be more definitive in my recommendations when appropriate. We've actually received criticism for hedging too much in the past, and not giving clear enough recommendations.

We'll keep tweaking our reviews and voice, but understand that there are criticisms no matter what we do. In fact, we also get plenty criticized when we do give a negative or not entirely favorable review. In the end, we just have to figure out what we are happy with and let people decide themselves.

arn

s0mah

08-07-2009, 01:38 AM

The Bat Outta Hell

08-07-2009, 02:25 AM

Whoa are you blasted or something? What's with the uncalled for attacks?

Edit: Nevermind, read through 20-30 of your last posts. It's just your nature to be an asshole I suppose.
9/10 eli's reviews:

follow whatever arbitrary direction a game's hype machine is headed.

1/10 eli's reviews:

are trolls.

10/10 blake's reviews:

obligatory name drops of whatever retro-remake throwbacks he warezed off an amiexpress board, circa 1994.

100/100 fat albie reviews:

are vapid and mostly read, "please IGN, notice me type about games! check out mai wits! plz job me thx. i've got an AA in english!! look at me go!"

pharmx

08-07-2009, 02:33 AM

Whoa are you blasted or something? What's with the uncalled for attacks?

Edit: Nevermind, read through 20-30 of your last posts. It's just your nature to be an asshole I suppose.

Bat....you're not acquainted with s0mah?? Well, I guess he has been quiet for a little while...looks like the beast has awakened again though!

hyk

08-07-2009, 02:34 AM

I disagree with the OP. Like Arn had mentioned many times, USUALLY ONLY games (with a very few rare exceptions) that the TA guys LIKE are featured. It means they think it is good enough for them to recommend to TA visitors and hence they featured it.

That obviously meant that the bulk of the featured games are positively reviewed, which is fine by me. I don't want to go to a site and read reviews after reviews of lousy, bad, crappy games on TA. 99.9999999% of the games on the appstore are crap and not worth TA's time at all. In fact, those games are not worth ANYONE's time at all.

The fact that TA is distilling the cream and recommending it to visitors is neither subjective or promotional, it is just common sense since the appstore is crowded with so much crap. People visit TA to find out what is good, not to read through 99 reviews of lousy crappy games before finally being let in on a good one. Think about it.

whatever

08-07-2009, 08:19 AM

9/10 eli's reviews:

follow whatever arbitrary direction a game's hype machine is headed.

1/10 eli's reviews:

are trolls.

10/10 blake's reviews:

obligatory name drops of whatever retro-remake throwbacks he warezed off an amiexpress board, circa 1994.

100/100 fat albie reviews:

are vapid and mostly read, "please IGN, notice me type about games! check out mai wits! plz job me thx. i've got an AA in english!! look at me go!"

Well, I will say that I sort of agree with you on Blake. He rarely posts, and when he does, it's usually about some obscure retro game that to me, should stay retro, because those games are usually quite boring and good only because of nostalgia. I suppose there are those who like these games, but it just isn't my cup of tea.

I guess what I wish for TA would be more in-depth reviews. TA usually hones in on a narrow aspect of the game and then says it's a must-buy. I want in-depth explanations on all parts of the game so I know what I'm getting into when I buy the game. Liking the game or calling it a "must-buy" is always going to be subjective, so I would just like mostly overviews of the game with a few opinions as to what works and what doesn't here and there. I often don't agree with Big Albie's reviews, but he does explain the game in a very detailed fashion.

Yagami_Light

08-07-2009, 09:38 AM

I disagree. I love the fact that TA only really talks about really good games and really popular games. That is really the only thing that I want to hear about. When I visit the main page of the site, I'm usually looking for a new game to play, and want to see everything that it highly recommended. I don't want to sift through the ****. I could do that on the app store.

9/10 eli's reviews:

follow whatever arbitrary direction a game's hype machine is headed.

1/10 eli's reviews:

are trolls.

10/10 blake's reviews:

obligatory name drops of whatever retro-remake throwbacks he warezed off an amiexpress board, circa 1994.

100/100 fat albie reviews:

are vapid and mostly read, "please IGN, notice me type about games! check out mai wits! plz job me thx. i've got an AA in english!! look at me go!"

I've got to disagree with you 100% here. Anyway, judging from your past posts, you are a complete *** to everyone.

HJJ

08-07-2009, 10:28 AM

The fact that TA is distilling the cream and recommending it to visitors is neither subjective or promotional, it is just common sense since the appstore is crowded with so much crap. People visit TA to find out what is good, not to read through 99 reviews of lousy crappy games before finally being let in on a good one. Think about it.

Thank you. This is true. I think some people just have this insatiable need to see their own opinions mirrored in some official medium.

shen

08-07-2009, 11:49 AM

Can you guys conceive of a world where TA still reviews all the same games it does now, but the reviews have more facts and information in them, and less cheer leading?

That seems to be what the original poster was asking for.

Jensen

08-07-2009, 11:53 AM

If I had known that TA's goal was to only cover games that they endorse/recommend, I would have phrased my initial comments somewhat differently (whether that is something I like or not would be a different discussion). Perhaps this would be more easily understandable up-front if they used the phrase 'best in iPhone gaming' instead of 'latest' in their tagline.

DaveMc99

08-07-2009, 11:57 AM

if they used the phrase 'best in iPhone gaming' instead of 'latest' in their tagline.

Best is subjective.. latest is what this site does.. because of the forums and it also previews upcoming games.

Prab

08-07-2009, 11:59 AM

Well if people are interested in (literally) the latest in iPhone gaming, AppShopper is good for that. I used to subscribe to their RSS for new games. But since most of the new games are not so good, it just gets tiring after awhile.

DaveMc99

08-07-2009, 12:00 PM

Well if people are interested in (literally) the latest in iPhone gaming, AppShopper is good for that.

And here on this site :) http://toucharcade.com/newest-iphone-games/

Prab

08-07-2009, 12:14 PM

And here on this site :) http://toucharcade.com/newest-iphone-games/
Wooo~~~ Didn't know that. The hidden gems of TA :p

monk666

08-07-2009, 01:01 PM

First up, i had been reading this thread and found it pretty amusing.

Just to state my point, like many others who know what TA is about, i completely disagree with the title of this thread and what the original poster is implying.

Can you guys conceive of a world where TA still reviews all the same games it does now, but the reviews have more facts and information in them, and less cheer leading?

That seems to be what the original poster was asking for.

I'll have to disagree here too about having more facts & information on the TA frontpage game articles. If every TA review on the frontpage is as long as Big Albie's reviews, TA's frontpage will simple blow. Look at the TA logo at the top, the punchline is "...Keeping you in touch with..." and not "...Give you every single detail about every game...".

The TA frontpage articles are short, simple and straight to the point. If you don't agree with them, it is not much to ignore them too. At least you didn't spend 30 mins reading it before deciding you'd wasted your time.

TA is saving everyone time, that's why everyone comes here.

To the TA guys, don't be swayed by these off-the-rail suggestions and comments. You guys are doing a good job that's why people come here. If you start doing half the things there were suggested here, TA will just explode into another time-wasting POS iDevice site.

Cheers!

darchinst

08-07-2009, 02:13 PM

First up, i had been reading this thread and found it pretty amusing.

Just to state my point, like many others who know what TA is about, i completely disagree with the title of this thread and what the original poster is implying.

I'll have to disagree here too about having more facts & information on the TA frontpage game articles. If every TA review on the frontpage is as long as Big Albie's reviews, TA's frontpage will simple blow. Look at the TA logo at the top, the punchline is "...Keeping you in touch with..." and not "...Give you every single detail about every game...".

The TA frontpage articles are short, simple and straight to the point. If you don't agree with them, it is not much to ignore them too. At least you didn't spend 30 mins reading it before deciding you'd wasted your time.

TA is saving everyone time, that's why everyone comes here.

To the TA guys, don't be swayed by these off-the-rail suggestions and comments. You guys are doing a good job that's why people come here. If you start doing half the things there were suggested here, TA will just explode into another time-wasting POS iDevice site.

Cheers!

agreed 100%.
The only thing I would change about TA would be a mobile version of the site or a TA app.

coolman

08-07-2009, 02:40 PM

TA and noone, can't put all in agreement, but if they act like they do and have so hughe audience then they aren't doing badly.

I am put off by how eager you are to recommend seemingly almost any game out there.

They don't do that. We, developers would like that TA makes more reviews )or at least reviews from our games :D), but there are many games out there and probably they can't handle all. So TA choosed to feature the games they like and I prefer this that making reviews for every game under the sky.

My game has not been featured by TA. I didn't ranted for this. I blamed myself and contacted to some guys here that make reviews and asked where did I failed, what I need to improve. Actually I'm working in enhancing my game and I hope sales will go better and being featured anytime here or in the other major review websites.

As for having reviews here for bad games, I completely disagree. Making a game it's not an easy (but fun) task and takes months & months for us. Is better a non review than a negative review. This will let room for us that another major review site likes the game and have some success. Also think that reviewers are humans and they could like some things and don't like anothers, no one has they absolute grial of what is cool or not.

I also completely disagree that 99% of games are crap. :mad:

Perhaps my rant with TA are is the review style, I rather prefer reviews with cons and pros for the games. I really like reviews done by Big Albie although I'm not always agree with him :)

TA is a bit biassed. But this is absolutely NORMAL. I don't imagine TA guys doing a bad review from Rolando or any game from Freeverse or Chillingo. They are his sponsors. So the reader must know who are the sponsors and read between the lines.

pharmx

08-07-2009, 04:37 PM

....TA is a bit biassed. But this is absolutely NORMAL. I don't imagine TA guys doing a bad review from Rolando or any game from Freeverse or Chillingo. They are his sponsors. So the reader must know who are the sponsors and read between the lines.

I think that last comment is misleading and you shouldn't make accusations like that. Otherwise all the conspiracy theorists will jump in.

I've noticed that a lot of the threads that complain about how TA is run is posted by either 1) jaded devs who are too stubborn to see the faults in their game and think that front page coverage will save their failing app....or 2) oversensitive people with extremely frail egos

coolman

08-07-2009, 05:08 PM

It's not an accusation, is just a fact.

Or do you really think that MacWorld, PCWorld, Computerworld, CNET, IGN and many other technical media are not a bit biassed with his sponsors? It's innocent to think they aren't.

For sure they are, and I'm talking from experience. I worked for one of them, and there were indications for not rating bad some products (sponsors).

It's just life (and marketing).

As for the conspiracy theorists they rather should go to another web site for ranting.

And as for me .. I never complained here. If just one guy didn't liked my game them this could be for his point of view, but if there are more .. them it's totally my fault and I did badly somewhere.

coolman

08-07-2009, 05:13 PM

I've noticed that a lot of the threads that complain about how TA is run is posted by either 1) jaded devs who are too stubborn to see the faults in their game and think that front page coverage will save their failing app....or 2) oversensitive people with extremely frail egos

And yes, perhaps you are right.

monk666

08-07-2009, 05:13 PM

I also completely disagree that 99% of games are crap. :mad:

I completely agree with you that not 99% of the games are crap. It is more like 99.99%.

Just look at how many new games are launching each day, more than 9 out of 10 are crap. Don't be confused by what TA is recommending because TA only pick the good ones to present to the readership (Kudos to that). There are countless other crappy shit being uploaded by the minute. Counting all those crap, the app store is indeed full of crap.

HJJ

08-07-2009, 07:53 PM

It's not an accusation, is just a fact.

Or do you really think that MacWorld, PCWorld, Computerworld, CNET, IGN and many other technical media are not a bit biassed with his sponsors? It's innocent to think they aren't.

Can you please prove how this is a fact? Have you read TA's official position on reviews vs. editorial content?

It is not, in any way, uncommon for a publication to run feature or editorial content in tandem with objective reviews. FFS, this practice is everywhere you look.

Take Entertainment Weekly for example (there happens to be one sitting on my counter right now). Have you ever seen an issue of EW with a huge cover story featuring the big popcorn blockbuster of the moment only to flip to the back to ironically be deflated by a mediocre review? I have - a number of times.

How about this? Entertainment Weekly is published by Time, Inc. Warner Bros. Pictures is a subsidiary of Time, Inc. Let's look at a few of the WB's films (http://www.imdb.com/company/co0026840/) that EW also reviewed.

License to Wed (2007) (http://www.ew.com/ew/article/0,,20044392,00.html)
Grade: C
The creepy-faced robot twin babies are funny (for a while); the rest of the film is not. It's like Meet the Parents with Dr. Phil as the officiant from hell.

The Bucket List (2007) (http://www.ew.com/ew/article/0,,20170203,00.html)
Grade: D
It's fun, for two minutes, to see Nicholson and Freeman jumping out of a plane, but once they've gotten tattoos and raced vintage cars, the movie is already scraping the bottom of the bucket.

Orphan (2009) (http://www.ew.com/ew/article/0,,20293459,00.html)
Grade: D+
To really get under your skin, a bad-seed horror movie needs a demon child whose dastardliness sneaks up on you. There's nothing too subtle, however, about Esther.

I could go on, but it's rather a lot of html markup to for a Friday night. I think the point should be becoming pretty clear.

If hundreds of years of publications have dealt with this very issue, what makes iPhone game reviews the outlier? Why and how is it a "fact" that iPhone game sites publish biased reviews based on sponsorships and advertisements when it is clear that publications such as Entertainment Weekly (that have serious affiliations with the content they review) have no problem printing professional, objective reviews?

I am not saying that all publications are created equal or that we should unconditionally accept the idea that any rough-and-ready blog is trustworthy. But it remains maddeningly foolish to continue to question the integrity of Touch Arcade simply because of ignorance of the publication process. TA has officially stated its review policy (http://toucharcade.com/toucharcade-advertising-and-editorial-policies/) in regards to advertisements and sponsorships. At this point, what more do you want them to do? Do you want the admins to send notarized letters to your moms that promise they are being impartial?

ImNoSuperMan

08-08-2009, 02:58 AM

Ahem. Thank you jensen for wasting my time. I don't even have words to describe how foolish and senseless those accusations are. Every thing you said has been proven wrong in the thread and I'll be just repeating them if I try to argue here. If you still don't think you were completely wrong here then please Don't let the door hit u on the back on your way out.

Sierra275

08-09-2009, 03:16 AM

It is accurate to say that often times, I have found TouchArcade editors to be rather supportive of games. Though I am confident that games are reviewed objectively, I do tend to wonder why so many games are given positive ratings, or commended greatly by the reviewer, as compared to other sites such as Pocketgamer.

However, over my course of searching for reviews, through many review sites, I have found no site more reliable and up-to-date than TouchArcade. Furthermore, having read Arn's response, I understand why we do not see many negative game reviews. Almost all the games I have, I have found through TouchArcade. As a community, I believe that the purpose of such websites is to help the reader find good games to buy. Writing just as many reviews about lousy games which nobody wants to buy is a waste of time on the reviewer's part. If we have any queries about the quality of a game that is not featured in TouchArcade, the forums are always available for us to ask questions. Hence, now that I understand the intention behind the lack of reviews of low-quality games, I honestly think that the Administrators decision to only bring high-quality games to the attention of the community is the most efficient way of running the site, for both reviewer and the userbase.

And as Jensen earlier stated, he did not understand fully the policy of the reviewers when writing this thread. As is apparent from the responses of others in this thread, they also did not understand the policies of TouchArcade reviewers. I also sometimes wonder why TouchArcade seemed to, for whatever reason, only feature games in a positive light. Thanks to this thread, my questions have been answered. To flame him for bringing up a legitimate concern is really being quite immature.

hyk

08-09-2009, 04:18 AM

coolman

08-09-2009, 06:05 AM

The review policy stated by TA is just a statement of intents not a law.

I don't want to come in details, but anyone that has been reading TA after some days can see the facts I'm referring.

Also I don't think I'm flaming neither acussing nor questioning the integrity of TA, I see this normal in a tech review media. For those think I'm are doing this then you don't understand how technological media works.

TA is doing well, so they are his high number of readers. Congrats to them.

squarezero

08-09-2009, 07:53 AM

I offer a solution. How about TA stating that it is trying to "bring the best of iDevice gaming to visitors" instead of being quiet about that?

Seems like a good time to change the catchline underneath the site logo :)
Frankly, I don't think that changing the tagline would make much of a difference: cynics would still suspect that there's collution between reviewers and advertisers, others would immediatly question the use of the word 'Best' to describe games they think are only mediocre.

What I like best about TA is that it's an enthusiast's community. I don't expect reviews to be objective (no review is, by the way), but I do expect them to convey the writer's honest enthusiasm for the game. That's why I found Jensen's original post so offensive -- he pretty much accused TA reviewers of "putting on" their excitement to make money (an accusation he has yet to take back or apologize for). These guys have been covering iPhone gaming since before there was an App Store; I think their efforts deserve our respect and appreciation, even when we diagree with their views.

coolman

08-09-2009, 09:25 AM

I think their efforts deserve our respect and appreciation, even when we disagree with their views.

Agreed

HJJ

08-09-2009, 11:43 AM

The review policy stated by TA is just a statement of intents not a law.
I figured this would be brought up, and my response is this: You're right. TA's review policy is not a law, and it never will be. With this knowledge, you have choices. (1) You can accept their word and simply enjoy your time here, discovering new games and being part of the community. (2) You can refuse to accept that TA is an honest source of information with a reasonably transparent review policy and just leave the site because you'll never be happy, and you'll always find something "biased" or "suspicious" or of "questionable ethics" etc. (3) You can stick around and continue to question the motives and ethics around every corner, even though the official response will not change.

Options 1 and 2 are valid, and I urge you to consider either. Unfortunately, I expect that many will choose Option 3, which is a bit puzzling when you think about it. If you have such an inert disagreement with the way this site is run, what are you doing here? Personally, I don't patronize establishments that I consider dishonest businesses.

I don't want to come in details, but anyone that has been reading TA after some days can see the facts I'm referring.
No. Sorry, but you can't call things "facts" without evidence. You're making some pretty strong accusations here. The burden of proof is on you. Where is the evidence? Remember, we're not dealing with "the law" here, so there's no reason to be coy.

Also I don't think I'm flaming neither acussing nor questioning the integrity of TA, I see this normal in a tech review media. For those think I'm are doing this then you don't understand how technological media works.

TA is doing well, so they are his high number of readers. Congrats to them.
First of all, in this post (http://forums.toucharcade.com/showpost.php?p=410055&postcount=38), you stated:
TA is a bit biassed. But this is absolutely NORMAL. I don't imagine TA guys doing a bad review from Rolando or any game from Freeverse or Chillingo. They are his sponsors. So the reader must know who are the sponsors and read between the lines.
In this post (http://forums.toucharcade.com/showpost.php?p=410432&postcount=40), you say:
It's not an accusation, is just a fact.

Or do you really think that MacWorld, PCWorld, Computerworld, CNET, IGN and many other technical media are not a bit biassed with his sponsors? It's innocent to think they aren't.

For sure they are, and I'm talking from experience. I worked for one of them, and there were indications for not rating bad some products (sponsors).
I'm not sure if you know what integrity means, but you are in fact questioning the integrity of TA by claiming that it is a "fact" that they are biased and that they slant their reviews based on paid sponsorships. Considering that TA has officially refuted these claims, this is the definition of questioning integrity.

Right now, what you are doing is making accusations. Yes. You can't just say, "This is a fact, wink wink, trust me!" That doesn't fly. If you want to state a fact, give us the evidence that proves your statements are factual. Until that time, you are simply making accusations.

you don't understand how technological media works.
OK, enlighten me.

coolman

08-13-2009, 11:38 AM

Hi,

I didn't came before cause I'm too busy at work.

The facts I'm referring can be sawn searching for example articles from ngmoco games vs others and more.

I don't need to follow your Options, but I also don't see a point to continue with this thread.

So I think enough said.

DaveMc99

08-13-2009, 11:43 AM

The facts I'm referring can be sawn searching for example articles from ngmoco games vs others and more.

Every game Ngmoco has released is rated 3 stars or more in iTunes. Try again.

The Bat Outta Hell

08-13-2009, 11:46 AM

Mass Effect is more than 3 stars as well, I think many would beg to differ =P

Coral

08-13-2009, 03:01 PM

I am really late to this thread haha.
One thing I like about TA is that every review is obviously the opinion of the writer. Some may not like that, but I do. If I wanted to know what features a game had, I can find that out from the description. I want to know what someone thinks about a game. I have not bought every suggested game here on TA, and no one would be expected to. I buy what appeals to me, and what is unearthed from the app store mire. I also seek second opinions, this isn't the only site out there.
So those are my thoughts, sorry if they turn out to be repeated from someone else or irrelevant.

coolman

08-13-2009, 05:07 PM

Every game Ngmoco has released is rated 3 stars or more in iTunes. Try again.

:) And is this relevant for you?

If so do a search for Freeverse and see how many articles they have (I don't want to count them) except the Flick Fishing look at the rates from other Apps from Freeverse.

If reviews would also be in what is relevant to readers, them some reviews are missing (based in AppStore sales), for example StickWars, one game that has been some months in the top of the 100 list .. and no review here.

coolman

08-13-2009, 05:11 PM

Every game Ngmoco has released is rated 3 stars or more in iTunes. Try again.

And I cannot find any ngmoco game in the top 100 list. Wierd .. ¿no?

pharmx

08-13-2009, 05:21 PM

:) And is this relevant for you?

If so do a search for Freeverse and see how many articles they have (I don't want to count them) except the Flick Fishing look at the rates from other Apps from Freeverse.

If reviews would also be in what is relevant to readers, them some reviews are missing (based in AppStore sales), for example StickWars, one game that has been some months in the top of the 100 list .. and no review here.

And I cannot find any ngmoco game in the top 100 list. Wierd .. ¿no?

I'm not sure I follow your logic. The top 100 lists don't reflect what Touch Arcade considers great games...why should they have to review everything on those lists? If a "game" like iFart is in the top 10 list, you're saying that Touch Arcade should do a review for it? I hope that day never comes...

coolman

08-13-2009, 05:38 PM

Well DaveMc99 pointed that ngmoco games haved so hughe articles cause his games rated 3 or more on iTunes.

Ranking if a game is good or bad based in the iTunes reviews is as bad as ranking if they are high in the top sellers. But I think that the top sellers is a best way of ranking a game than the iTunes argument. There are games with more than 4 stars in iTunes and no reviewed here.. so ... argument by Dave is wrong.

And no, I'm not saying that TA must review all games in the lists. They said some times they will review games they like ... also against Dave argument :)

I also hope that a review for a game similar to iFart would never came in TA.

DaveMc99

08-13-2009, 05:43 PM

Well DaveMc99 pointed that ngmoco games haved so hughe articles cause his games rated 3 or more on iTunes.

I am saying that Ngmoco produces quality games. Can you name 1 Ngmoco game that is not well reviewed on other sites?

Eli

08-13-2009, 05:43 PM

yourofl10

08-13-2009, 05:55 PM

ngmoco games get articles on the front page because we like their games, it's as simple as that. There isn't any conspiracy to be uncovered or any deep seated bias to be discovered. We post about high profile games and games that we like, that's really all there is to it.

Question is, why dont you guys post about games you dont like? As in review games but if you dont like it, well review it and explain why. If you like the game, write the review on why you like the game.

DaveMc99

08-13-2009, 05:58 PM

Eli

08-13-2009, 05:59 PM

Question is, why dont you guys post about games you dont like? As in review games but if you dont like it, well review it and explain why. If you like the game, write the review on why you like the game.

Because there is an overabundance of good games to post about on top of the daily news like sales, updates, etc that we also post about. I have four games in queue and two interviews right now to write about, and by the time I'm finished with half of that I'll have more stuff in queue. Why would I waste time writing about a game I don't like when there is no shortage of good games I do like?

yourofl10

08-13-2009, 06:00 PM

Do you spend time playing a game you don't like? There are too many other games.

If I play a game for 5 mins I can assume what the rest will be like. If the dev requested you review it and you said you would. Doesnt that mean you should review it even though you dont like it?

DaveMc99

08-13-2009, 06:04 PM

yourofl10

08-13-2009, 06:06 PM

Arn and Hodapp can confirm this.. TA does not tell developers their game will be reviewed before they have played it.

Ok then I see now..

pharmx

08-13-2009, 06:08 PM

If I play a game for 5 mins I can assume what the rest will be like. If the dev requested you review it and you said you would. Doesnt that mean you should review it even though you dont like it?

I don't understand your logic at all either....

Why would anyone at Touch Arcade play a game for only 5 minutes and write a review for it? That's not fair to the developer and defeats the purpose of front page article. There's a forum for user reviews where people are free to do that sort of thing if they wish, as long as they follow the basic ground rules.

There is no way in hell that Touch Arcade could review every game that they are requested to review....there's simply too many of them out there. If they don't like a game....not reviewing it is actually the nicer thing to do...imagine the impact on sales if they warned people not to buy a game because they thought it was horrible?

yourofl10

08-13-2009, 06:15 PM

I don't understand your logic at all either....

Why would anyone at Touch Arcade play a game for only 5 minutes and write a review for it? That's not fair to the developer and defeats the purpose of front page article. There's a forum for user reviews where people are free to do that sort of thing if they wish, as long as they follow the basic ground rules.

There is no way in hell that Touch Arcade could review every game that they are requested to review....there's simply too many of them out there. If they don't like a game....not reviewing it is actually the nicer thing to do...imagine the impact on sales if they warned people not to buy a game because they thought it was horrible?

Example:

If I play Doom Resurrection for 5-10 mins you can assume it is about etc..If I play Rolando for 10 mins I can assume what you do in Rolando.

Yea it's not good for the devs sales but if it's a bad game and needs some work provide some helpful feedback for the dev.

Eli

08-13-2009, 06:19 PM

If I play Doom Resurrection for 5-10 mins you can assume it is about etc..If I play Rolando for 10 mins I can assume what you do in Rolando.

...not really. I don't post what I consider a "full review" until I've played through all of (or a large majority) of the game.

yourofl10

08-13-2009, 06:25 PM

...not really. I don't post what I consider a "full review" until I've played through all of (or a large majority) of the game.

but you can safely assume what it will be like

pharmx

08-13-2009, 06:34 PM

but you can safely assume what it will be like

You're talking about "first impressions" not a "review"

aloepar1

08-14-2009, 09:47 AM

I don't post too much. Usually when I do is just to ask a few questions about a game that I may be interested in. I read the reviews, Big Albie's are hard to miss (he really likes puzzle games). But to me, the main purpose of the site is to 1) Inform about new games and updates 2) Discuss new games and updates.

Plenty of good and bad games are discussed every day, just not all of them are covered on the front page. The ones on the front page are the ones that arn and and a few others are interested in. I have also seen them cover games that were hyped on the forums (e.g. spider: the secret of bryce manor).

I don't agree with the moderators' tastes all the time, but you get enough feedback from the forums to figure out if you will like a game or not. 1 out of 5 you'll probably make a mistake (e.g.: liked gomi and spider; disliked skabooki and lifeboat, these are not bad, just not my thing).

In conclusion, keep the site the way it is right now, which is a community driven site. While every now and then I check IGN, slidetoplay and 148apps, I believe that the amount of content and depth offered here is unparalleled.

Keep up the good work.

Jensen

09-03-2009, 11:58 AM

I hate to resurrect a dead thread, but I wanted to add my thoughts since my last post. I have been continuing to read touch arcade over the last several weeks and have found that I have really enjoyed reading it lately, and it has not had the problems I was complaining about before. Not sure if this is because of a direct response to feedback or not, but just wanted to note my appreciation of a flow of high-quality and enjoyable articles recently.

Electric_Shaman

09-20-2009, 10:11 PM

Just to dig up the issue of no bad reviews, my gripe with this is that it means there's no scale. And I don't mean a 1 - 10 point system or anything: I mean things need to be put in perspective. For me, TA lacks benchmarking, like when people say "this has really raised the bar for what we expect from this kind of game". Obviously this is hard for a lot of idevice games, as they're innovative and what not, but not impossible.
A weekly chart would kind of sort this, one that sorts the games TA has reviewed by which ones the staff enjoyed the most.

Anyway, I still enjoy reading TA, keep up the good work.

arn

09-20-2009, 11:03 PM

A weekly chart would kind of sort this, one that sorts the games TA has reviewed by which ones the staff enjoyed the most.

thanks. we are considering something like this.

arn

The Game Reaper

09-21-2009, 11:45 AM

Eli

09-21-2009, 11:46 AM

At the moment TA's reviews are nothing more than a few nicely worded paragraphs.

You're meant to draw your own conclusions based on your likes and dislikes. We rarely post about games we don't like, so everything that appears on the front page is generally good. If it appeals to you, it's likely worth checking out.

The Game Reaper

09-21-2009, 01:30 PM

You're meant to draw your own conclusions based on your likes and dislikes. We rarely post about games we don't like, so everything that appears on the front page is generally good. If it appeals to you, it's likely worth checking out.
Okay. My prior accusation was a bit harsh and I retract that. I do enjoy reading TA's reviews, especially yours Hodapp, since you prove that a reviewer can actually have a personality! I guess the point I'm trying to get across is that most sites have a definitive score which manages express their feelings about the game and users don't have to read the entire review. Most people -to my limited knowledge- only skim the review and check the final score. If it scored well, they'll go back and check it out.

With TA it's different. In order to draw whatever the reviewer felt, people have to read the whole article. Occasionally they'll say something in the title, like; "Real Racing: We've Got It And It's Unbelievable". That by the way, is probably the boldest claim this site has ever made, but that's not by any stretch of the imagination a bad thing. I hate sites which claim everything is 'Amazing'. Anyway, you need to tie the loose ends, and have a benchmarking system. Be brave!

arn

09-21-2009, 01:44 PM

Most people -to my limited knowledge- only skim the review and check the final score.

That was part of the reasoning why we avoided a score in the first place. :)

That said, I do see the value in a score. It just introduces a lot of issues and a lot of discussion about "oh this got a 6 when it's clearly not better than this other game that gotta 5" etc...

But like I said, we are considering some sort of system.

With TA it's different. In order to draw whatever the reviewer felt, people have to read the whole article.

Note, we do try to sum up in the last paragraph our thoughts.

arn

pharmx

09-22-2009, 12:49 AM

That was part of the reasoning why we avoided a score in the first place. :)

That said, I do see the value in a score. It just introduces a lot of issues and a lot of discussion about "oh this got a 6 when it's clearly not better than this other game that gotta 5" etc...

But like I said, we are considering some sort of system.

Note, we do try to sum up in the last paragraph our thoughts.

arn

A possible solution is having a 2 person review process? I know this makes it more difficult to manage, but if it's good enough for Apple... :D

Jokes aside, does this sound like a reasonable solution? Every reviewer has their own preference when it comes to games, and their own style when it comes to writing...but as people become familiar with the reviewers, having a side by side comparison of the same game could be valuable I think, especially if set categories (graphics, music, gameplay, etc.) were rated on a scale of some sort. For example, Eli might give a game a great score while Albie gives it a poor score, or vice versa. People can then base their decision on whose personality they identify more closely with in this type of situation.

I'm guessing that this would add a lot to the workload, but maybe the editorial staff can be beefed up?

Ravenblack

09-22-2009, 05:58 AM

Jokes aside, does this sound like a reasonable solution? Every reviewer has their own preference when it comes to games, and their own style when it comes to writing...but as people become familiar with the reviewers, having a side by side comparison of the same game could be valuable I think, especially if set categories (graphics, music, gameplay, etc.) were rated on a scale of some sort. For example, Eli might give a game a great score while Albie gives it a poor score, or vice versa. People can then base their decision on whose personality they identify more closely with in this type of situation.

I'm guessing that this would add a lot to the workload, but maybe the editorial staff can be beefed up?

It sounds like something EGM used to do. Three reviewers for one game, each with their own scores. Sometimes the reviewers don't agree, and that's what I like about that mag. You don't just get one point of view.

Devilishly Good

09-22-2009, 11:00 AM

I don't like the idea of attaching a number to a review. It is way too subjective. One person's 4 or 5 does not translate into the same level of expectations for another reviewer's 4 or 5.

I am not a really fan of reviews that state you must get this or that game because it's awesomely cool for X reasons. Just tell me the game facts - how does it play, what does it have for content, what can I expect overall from a more neutral viewpoint and let me, as the potential customer, decide if that's enough for me to want to get the game. I don't want or need someone else telling me what to get because they thought it was great...I can make those decisions on my own...I just need to reviewer to let me know about the game so I know what exactly to expect if I buy that game.

MidianGTX

09-22-2009, 12:26 PM

If you ask me, the very fact there is a User Review section in the forum makes this whole argument void. How can you argue about a reviewer enjoying a game? He likes it, he's gonna say it, that's his job. You should know it's only personal opinion before you even come here, and if you're not happy with it, go to the forums and ask around. If you own the game and don't agree with the front page reviews, write your own.

Almost everything in the entire world is opinion, you're generally expected to form your own, not follow someone elses then complain if you don't like it.

The Game Reaper

09-22-2009, 02:31 PM

It just introduces a lot of issues and a lot of discussion about "oh this got a 6 when it's clearly not better than this other game that gotta 5" etc...

QFT. TouchGen ran into trouble with their review of Modern Combat. They gave it a 3.5 and needless to say the comments exploded. Complete mess.
It's a catch 22, no one's ever going to agree on everything.

But like I said, we are considering some sort of system.

Glad to hear it. I really, really don't like the '1 to 10' score system so please implement something half-way fair.

Note, we do try to sum up in the last paragraph our thoughts.

I appreciate this, but I still feel this is a bit too open ended.