Well, if you haven't noticed, the startingPlayer blog took a bit of a vacation. I do plan to get back to regular, weekly posts. Here is something I thought I'd share with you that would be worthy of a post. There is a new board game website going up called boardgaming.com. First, I have to congratulate them on a great domain name. A good domain name is crucial for a website, but that is a topic for another day.
They were wondering how a site like theirs could encourage quality game reviews on the site. I have pondered this question long and hard even before they asked it because, at one point, I was thinking of starting my own board game reviews website. When I started examining it, I came down to this question: Why is it that I keep coming back to GiantBomb.com for my video game reviews and only go to other sites when they don't have a review of the game or I want more opinions? I came to the conclusion that it was because I knew and liked the editors, and I am familiar with the community and its trends or communal attitudes. Given that previous thinking and examining I'd done on the subject, here is the info recommendation I posted as a comment on boardgaming.com's article.
1) User reviews can be a great help and asset when a buyer needs a few more opinions, but are often not enough by themselves. A site solely of user reviews is not a useful site at all.
WHY?
Several reasons.
a) you do not want to spend time reading a review if it is off base or you just plain don’t agree. So, you have to depend on user Yay/Nay votes. However, these are often misleading.
– users often vote down (Nay) a review simply because it speaks poorly of a game they like, even if the review is accurate and well written.
– users may up vote (Yay) a review just because it gives a few sentences they agree with. The review may not say nearly enough to be useful, but they “Yay” it because they agree with the sentiments.
b) user reviews are often too short, too long, or not clear and, sadly, there isn’t any way to guarantee (or even necessarily get a high likelihood) of quality reviews.
c) even if the review is quality, it can be hard to determine if the game is for you. Maybe the reviewer is very harsh on the randomness in the game because they hate ANY randomness. Maybe you don’t mind randomness as much and it wouldn’t bother you so much.
SOLUTION:
* You need some regular, official reviewers that users can get to know. Example: When a GiantBomb.com editor reviews a game, I have read enough of their reviews that I know what they like and dislike. So, if they say they hate the inventory management, I know whether to take that “with a grain of salt” or whether to really take note because they don’t usually have a problem with such things. All those problems I mention above can be avoided via regular, official reviewers. You can be sure they write solid reviews because you have chosen them in response to good reviews they’ve written. The users know how to evaluate their reviews because they learn their likes/dislikes.
WE CAN’T PAY ANYONE. HOW CAN WE DO THIS?
I would suggest starting with scouring the site for users that regularly write good reviews (or even a few good reviews without any poor ones). Email them and ask if they would be willing to be a official, boardgaming.com reviewer. You could put a special stamp on their profile and reviews. You might request that they just review one game every one or two months. That isn’t too much to ask. Heck, I’d love to do that (yes, for free). If needed you could add incentive by giving them earlier access to new features or something.