It’s no secret that many publishers and developers alike don’t enjoy the game review process. There’s been a growing narrative among various gaming communities on just how reviews for games should be treated, and on what kind of scale they should be judged, if any. Kotaku, despite being one of the most popular gaming blogs, has foregone the “score” approach altogether, and even big companies like 1up have switched their style over to a letter-grade in favour of the standard 10 point scale. We, like the former, try to forgo scores, but that certainly won’t get your review tossed around the countless meta-score sites that some companies even use to judge bonuses and general success.

The whole issue of reviews aside, Peter Molyneux has made a plea to those receiving advanced copies of his upcoming Fable 2 to “please find somebody who doesn’t play games, watch them play it, and see how their world turns out…”. He also attached a stipulation to ask reviewers (these are requests, not demands) that they withhold judgment until the online co-op is finished, which will happen roughly a week after the release of game. It’s a quaint idea, one that I’m sure many people philosophically understand and agree with, but is it really the right approach for the process and his game?

A review, for the most part, is a company’s or individual’s assessment of a product (or beautiful art piece, if you prefer) meant to inform their readership, or at least express their own opinion on how the experience played out for them. Most groups justify this as a way to let players know before a game comes out whether or not they think it is worth spending their hard earned dollars on. It’s often based on what is deemed to be a final version, or the actual retail version of the game, and is usually taken at face value for what is delivered. In that sense, asking game journalists and enthusiast press to wait until a week prior to the game’s release seems almost unfair to those going out to grab it. If the success of the game really hinges on the missing features, then it is really a conflict between the publishers and developers and not something that should be imposed on critics and it definitely won’t stop people from commenting on it. There’s always the issue of “re”-reviews, which have been a recent controversy since Lair developers and fans wanted another look to be taken at the title with an updated control system.

As for the concept of non-gamer reviews, it’s a valid argument for certain. Some games aren’t designed for core gamers, and a truly open experience is usually observed when it is someone outside your own realm of knowledge going through a game. If you’ve ever been frustrated watching your siblings or friends struggle through what you consider an easy mechanic, you’ll understand that what might come natural to those who plug hours a day into their games, it may be something totally different to someone who has just recently started enjoying Wii Sports. However, most press groups target their reviews towards a certain readership, and shape their reviews based on that. While we tried a method similar to those for our review of Too Human, opening up to casual gamers is not what many communities are about. They want to know the hours, framerate, and overall experience they may expect from familiar writers and styles that are tailored to their reading expectations. While that might not always translate to a high review score based on things that many gamers might turn their nose at, it certainly isn’t a gauge of their success.

It seems like a bit of a plead from Molyneux to try and stir up a new look at his game. Of course, it could just as easily be a stab at a bigger bonus for their team for higher review scores, knowing they may take a hit for a lack of co-op out of the box and perhaps an experience that doesn’t quite deliver on the world many gamers were promised. The review system that exists and influences the industry may not always be the most fair, and it certainly does play a large part in determining how excited many core gamers get over big titles, it doesn’t reflect sales. Perhaps for the Xbox 360, though, the core gamer is the main audience this is targeting, and even a slight drop in review scores might bring it down just enough to get it below Molyneux’s promised target internally. Either way, it’s a lofty request against an established system that is not likely to take the change to heart.

Note: We haven’t received a review copy of the game, so we did not get this letter personally. Image courtesy Microsoft Game Studios.