#9: C.W. Richeson's Guide to RPG Reviewing

[RPGnet Columns]

http://www.rpg.net/columns/oneshot/oneshot9.phtml

Summary:

Why and how to review for RPGnet.

Go to the column (http://www.rpg.net/columns/oneshot/oneshot9.phtml) for more information.

[ghost-angel]

Good article - if only I had it when I started writing reviews :)

The whole idea of reviewing products was completely done on accident for me, I play one system almost exclusively (Hero) and a discussion on their boards regarding poor sales of a product I had thought was really cool prompted me to write first one, then more reviews.

Little did I know that I'd get free stuff out of it, only about half a dozen books to date, but that can be a good chunk of change these days.

I have to echo your statements about establishing an overall tone to follow in all of ones reviews. It took me several to figure out what it was I not only wanted to say but how I wanted to present it. The idea of a consistant format for presentation has not only made reviewing easier, but has gotten me better responses on my reviews. People now know what to expect when they see a review I've done, which helps them.

Personally I llike reviews that go more into what the product is giving me than how much the review did or didn't like it. So mine tend towards the objective end of the scale.

I've now officially started to ramble... So I'll just leave you with a thanks for writing this article for the rest of us and that I enjoy reading reviews you've written.

[C.W.Richeson]

Thanks for the kind words and feedback, ghost-angel!

Interestingly enough, by focusing on HERO products I've come to think of you as an expert on the system - kinda an additional side reputation you've built up by sticking to one area.

[ghost-angel]

Interestingly enough, by focusing on HERO products I've come to think of you as an expert on the system - kinda an additional side reputation you've built up by sticking to one area.

Thanks!

Now I can claim "Hero System Expert" in my tag line :D

[jushin53]

C.W.- Terrific guide to reviewing...I've written a few myself for HERO, in fact.

I haven't written much in the last couple of years but am working on a review that I wanted to see if I could get some pointers from you on.

I recently rediscovered the Marvel SAGA system and have picked up the core system, the three roster books and two add-on books. I'm one adventure short of the whole run.

What are your thoughts on doing a review of a whole line? Marvel SAGA is small enough to do it...

I hope to get your thoughts on the board or by PM.

[C.W.Richeson]

Thanks for the kind words, jushin53!


What are your thoughts on doing a review of a whole line? Marvel SAGA is small enough to do it...

I hope to get your thoughts on the board or by PM.

I'm assuming you mean a single review of every product for the entire line. I think that would be fantastic! RPG.net will even group your reviews together so it's easy for readers to see that you've reviewed the whole line and check out other products they're interested in. When one reviewer covers material in the same line it makes it easier for a reader to judge the products, since it's the same person evaluating each one. I've written a review of every Vampire Covenant book, for example, so someone new to the V:tR can get a greater sense of my values and prejudices through those reviews and is better able to tell which of the Covenant books is best for them.

Just be sure to enter the same thing for each of the "Line:" tags when preparing the review for the site. If you look at my review of Invictus (http://www.rpg.net/reviews/archive/12/12470.phtml) you can see that by noting "Vampire: The Requiem" as the line RPG.net automatically grouped all 12 of my current Vampire reviews together to make them easy for consumers to check out.

Assuming that you mean a single review of the entire product line - I think this is great too! I think it would be less valuable than a review of each product with a section on "The Line As A Whole" or something like that talking about how that particular book compares to others in the line, what books it works well with, etc. However, plenty of folk are interested in picking up entire lines of a product (I did this recently with Transhuman Space) and a review of this nature can help them make that decision. Be sure to distinguish the review title in some way that makes it clear the review is of several different products, however, or folk looking for SAGA wont realize what a treasure trove they have in front of them.

I'd definitely read a review of the whole Marvel SAGA line, the Transhuman Space line, and plenty of other "limited" product lines.

[Dan Davenport]

Great job, CWR! Couldn't have said it better myself. (Well, okay, so I did say a bit of it myself... ;) )

The only minor point of contention I have concerns the issue of the value placed on PDF review copies as opposed to print review copies. While I certainly agree that PDF games should be treated with an equal amount of respect, I have found that at a certain point, PDF copies have to take a backseat to print copies in reviewing priority. A publisher supplying a print review copy has spent actual money on you, while a publisher supplying a PDF copy has not, unless you would have purchased a copy of the PDF in question on your own.

Also, reviewers should be aware that because PDF review copies do not represent a tangible investment, they may find themselves getting offered a lot of PDF review copies. If you're not used to getting free stuff, your first instinct may be to snap up every one you can. That's a recipe for a very quick backlog.

[C.W.Richeson]

Great job, CWR! Couldn't have said it better myself. (Well, okay, so I did say a bit of it myself... ;) )

Thanks, Dan!

As some folk know, I would never have continued reviewing if not for Dan's positive feedback and encouragement.


The only minor point of contention I have concerns the issue of the value placed on PDF review copies as opposed to print review copies. While I certainly agree that PDF games should be treated with an equal amount of respect, I have found that at a certain point, PDF copies have to take a backseat to print copies in reviewing priority. A publisher supplying a print review copy has spent actual money on you, while a publisher supplying a PDF copy has not, unless you would have purchased a copy of the PDF in question on your own.


Keep in mind that as a young law student with a focus on Copyright I come at this from a bit of a different perspective than some folk. Part of the problem with our different views is the value we place on the granted license. I consider the license to be worth whatever its list price is, some others would think of it being worth a lot less because, as you say, the licensor didn't directly spend any money on getting out the review copy.

I think that the license the publisher grants for a reviewer to receive the free use of a product is valuable. Is it less valuable than a print product? Probably, we can go compare costs for PDFs against costs for print books and, barring online discounters, the PDFs always win out. Shipping is often one of the biggest costs for someone to send out a print review copy, which doesn't exist for PDFs.

That said, I don't keep pushing $20 indie games to the bottom of my stack so I can review $50 games with 5x their word count. I don't see a reason to do that with PDFs either. I take the stance that my reviews should generally operate on a first in first out basis, with some consideration given to value of the review to the publisher (a brand new game usually gets moved to the top of the stack because it helps the publisher a lot more than the two year old review I'm working on - it's a temporal consideration) and my own interests (it's tough to review a bunch of similar products right after each other - breaks are nice).

What I would agree with is that a publisher who has eaten $10 or $100 to send you some books is going to be much, much more upset if you don't follow through on the review than someone who sent a single PDF (who may just be irritated). If I had taken on more work than I could deal with and wanted to salvage what I could of my reputation I might consider reviewing the print stuff first and deleting the PDFs and contacting those providers.

(note: Dan has actually reviewed PDFs, unlike me, so don't pay too much attention to me here :))


Also, reviewers should be aware that because PDF review copies do not represent a tangible investment, they may find themselves getting offered a lot of PDF review copies. If you're not used to getting free stuff, your first instinct may be to snap up every one you can. That's a recipe for a very quick backlog.

Really great advice! Let me add that some publishers will offer you PDFs first, but are actually willing to provide you with print copies. If you only like print copies it's always worth specifying that when making a request.

Also, some publishers will just send you random PDFs. I've received some weird stuff, actually, with broken English requests to review the PDF. I recommend writing a short email politely declining and not downloading the file (usually something from RPG NOW) in order to prevent any feeling of commitment towards the person.

[smascrns]

Humm, I'm afraid I'm going to be the dissenting voice here. I liked the column but it is not was I was expecting. I mean CW writes a lot about things that happen around reviews but is very parcimonious on reviews themselves. In other words, there's almost no advice on what to include on a review. What should we cover when we consider Style? What Content should we mention? What is absolutely necessary and what is not? That's the sort of things I would like to know about.

[C.W.Richeson]

Humm, I'm afraid I'm going to be the dissenting voice here. I liked the column but it is not was I was expecting. I mean CW writes a lot about things that happen around reviews but is very parcimonious on reviews themselves. In other words, there's almost no advice on what to include on a review. What should we cover when we consider Style? What Content should we mention? What is absolutely necessary and what is not? That's the sort of things I would like to know about.

That makes sense. The problem for me is that I don't consider my own reviews to be perfect or "the right way" just one way among many, many ways to approach it. That's why I discuss looking at different reviews and deciding what works for you, considering what your goal is, and other overall perspectives.

Having paid a lot of attention to reviews and feedback over the past year I can safely say that different readers want, at times, very different things from the review. Some want a short opinion review, some want a detailed review that spills out a products contents, and others want humor or entertainment. I think someone who really wants to figure out what to put in their review, content wise, is best served looking at other reviews and then asking for feedback when they start reviewing. This gives them several voices to work from and will be far more effective than whatever general thoughts I might share here.

[smascrns]

That makes sense. The problem for me is that I don't consider my own reviews to be perfect or "the right way" just one way among many, many ways to approach it.
Of course, and that's what makes a column on reviewing so interesting. After all, the column was not called Guide to RPG Reviewing, it is called C.W. Richeson's Guide to RPG Reviewing. It is your take on reviewing, not someone else's or even an attempt to define a standard of reviewing. I was precisely expecting to see how you work out a review. Next RPGnet might have other frequent and apreciated reviewers giving us their approach to reviewing. The contrast would be enlightning. And no, asking people to read the reviews is not a substitute to the insights on reviewing by reviewers themselves.

Having paid a lot of attention to reviews and feedback over the past year I can safely say that different readers want, at times, very different things from the review. Some want a short opinion review, some want a detailed review that spills out a products contents, and others want humor or entertainment.
That is irrelevant. The column is not about what redearers of reviews want from the reviews they read, it was presented as being about what a particular reviewer, you, wants to give people with his reviews.

This gives them several voices to work from and will be far more effective than whatever general thoughts I might share here.
Well it is not more effective, at least to me. After all, from that perspective there's just no scope for columns on reviewing. You are basically saying that your column is useless and redundant. If that's so, why write it?

[C.W.Richeson]

I'm sorry to hear that the column didn't help you, smascrns. If you need some assistance with a review that you're writing please feel free to PM or email me.

[ghost-angel]

That is irrelevant. The column is not about what redearers of reviews want from the reviews they read, it was presented as being about what a particular reviewer, you, wants to give people with his reviews.

I took it as a column on ways to approach reviews, things to keep in mind and some very generalized advice.

A "Guide To How C.W. Richardson Writes Reviews" wouldn't help me at all, considering he and I have differing conceptual approaches to reveiwing. But a general article on things to keep in mind is very helpful. Doubly so since I found that some of the points brought up in this column were similar things I had thought on my own and felt a sense of relief knowing that I wasn't completely out in left field.

Personally, it doesn't help me at all to know C.W. Richardsons methodology. His experience (having written around 4x the reviews I have) does - especially regarding the point on contacting companies for free product to review (which I hadn't really thought of considering that I'm a niche reviewer at this point - but down the line I'll run out of Hero products to review on a regular/weekly basis).

I'm sure, would you want to pursue it, C.W. Richardson and others would be more than willing to open a thread discussing how they put a review together.

[Dan Davenport]

Thanks, Dan!

As some folk know, I would never have continued reviewing if not for Dan's positive feedback and encouragement.

You're too kind, CWR. :)

Keep in mind that as a young law student with a focus on Copyright I come at this from a bit of a different perspective than some folk. Part of the problem with our different views is the value we place on the granted license. I consider the license to be worth whatever its list price is, some others would think of it being worth a lot less because, as you say, the licensor didn't directly spend any money on getting out the review copy.

I think that the license the publisher grants for a reviewer to receive the free use of a product is valuable. Is it less valuable than a print product? Probably, we can go compare costs for PDFs against costs for print books and, barring online discounters, the PDFs always win out. Shipping is often one of the biggest costs for someone to send out a print review copy, which doesn't exist for PDFs.

That said, I don't keep pushing $20 indie games to the bottom of my stack so I can review $50 games with 5x their word count. I don't see a reason to do that with PDFs either. I take the stance that my reviews should generally operate on a first in first out basis, with some consideration given to value of the review to the publisher (a brand new game usually gets moved to the top of the stack because it helps the publisher a lot more than the two year old review I'm working on - it's a temporal consideration) and my own interests (it's tough to review a bunch of similar products right after each other - breaks are nice).

What I would agree with is that a publisher who has eaten $10 or $100 to send you some books is going to be much, much more upset if you don't follow through on the review than someone who sent a single PDF (who may just be irritated). If I had taken on more work than I could deal with and wanted to salvage what I could of my reputation I might consider reviewing the print stuff first and deleting the PDFs and contacting those providers.

(note: Dan has actually reviewed PDFs, unlike me, so don't pay too much attention to me here :))

Heh. :)

But let me put it another way: Again, I don't dispute the value of the work put into a PDF game; however, there's a definite difference in the value of the work as a product when it comes to the publisher's investment in the review. A publisher sending me a physical copy has indisputably given me something of physical value, regardless of whether I'd have purchased the book on my own if a review copy hadn't come my way. The only expense on the publisher's end of a PDF copy, by contrast, is the money they've lost from me on a hypothetical sale that I might never have made in the first place.

By way of comparison, let's say two painters want you to review their paintings. One mails you a framed print of his painting. The other emails you a jpeg of his painting. Both have put equal work into their respective paintings, and the medium in which you receive the paintings has no effect on their inherent worth as paintings... but the painter who sent you the framed print has spent money on you. The one who sent the jpeg has not.

[smascrns]

I'm sorry to hear that the column didn't help you, smascrns. If you need some assistance with a review that you're writing please feel free to PM or email me.
Don't take me wrong, it's a good column and what it covers it covers it well. It's just not a "guide to rpg reviewing". Let me put it this way, this means that you have scope to write a new column that complements the first one, a column where you give your take on what to cover in a review and how to present it. What do you think?

[smascrns]

I took it as a column on ways to approach reviews, things to keep in mind and some very generalized advice.

A "Guide To How C.W. Richardson Writes Reviews" wouldn't help me at all
Which means you look for different things from me. Nothing wrong with it except for the fact that the column was presented in its title as being "Guide To How C.W. Richardson Writes Reviews" (you just reframed the title). I was expecting this and felt I was not given what I had been promised. Had it been called "How C.W. Richardson Approachs Reviews and the things to keep in mind while writing the same" and I would have no complains with the column.

A good deal of what he gave me (the things you prized so much, for instance) are interesting to read but useless to me. I don't plan to sell/donate my infrequent reviews to places other than RPGnet, for instance.

I was expecting something, I got what I didn't want. I hope CW decides to write what he promised in a new column: An explanation to how he reviews rpgs. I look forward to it. You don't.

[ghost-angel]

Which means you look for different things from me. Nothing wrong with it except for the fact that the column was presented in its title as being "Guide To How C.W. Richardson Writes Reviews" (you just reframed the title). I was expecting this and felt I was not given what I had been promised. Had it been called "How C.W. Richardson Approachs Reviews and the things to keep in mind while writing the same" and I would have no complains with the column.

A good deal of what he gave me (the things you prized so much, for instance) are interesting to read but useless to me. I don't plan to sell/donate my infrequent reviews to places other than RPGnet, for instance.

I was expecting something, I got what I didn't want. I hope CW decides to write what he promised in a new column: An explanation to how he reviews rpgs. I look forward to it. You don't.

Funny, because I got out of it exactly what I was expecting: an overview of how to go about reviewing products from several angles.

Otherwise it would have been called "How C.W. Richardson Does An RPG Review" which is wasn't.

[C.W.Richeson]

Thanks for the clarification, smascrns!

What do you think?

Sounds like a good topic to visit at some point in the future!