Reviews
A review is a recap or a general summary and analysis of fangames submitted to MFGG.
Contents
Structure
General Commentary and Game Overview
This section is for a brief description about the game and general comments. The pros section is for a list of general things that are positive about the game, and vice-versa for the cons.
Impressions
The impressions section is for analyzing the game in each of the four main fields. The first is gameplay, and it about how the game plays, how it's structured, or how it's engineered. The following section is graphics, and it concerns the visuals of the game, or how the game looks and appeals to the eyes. The third section is sounds, and it concerns both the music and sound effects for the game. The final section for impressions is replay, which is the concern of whether or not the game feels like it can be replayed many times, few times, to never again. People often consider the gameplay and reply sections the dominant impressions.
Final Words
The final words section is for rounding off the review and making a closing statement. It is supposed to be concise, as this section is the only part that appears on the preview underneath the actual game download. Many MFGGers try to make this a humorous statement to catch the attention of a person viewing the game.
Badge
On the forums, one receives a badge for being a prolific reviewer. Normally, if a reviewer has at least 25 reviews submitted to the main site, they will have a Super Reviewer badge. Notable people that have been prolific reviewers include Black Squirrel, VinnyVideo, Zero Kirby, SMBMM, RandomClam, Cap'n Coconuts, and Q-Nova.
A list of members that have received a Super Reviewer badge can be found here.
Controversy
Reviews are known to stir a bit of controversy. Many reviews submitted are not up to par. These include reviews that are far too short at only a few sentences long, reviews that are far too biased in one direction (constantly saying it sucks without commenting on one good thing, or vice-versa), or reviews that don't physically make sense (like random gibberish or unrelated text). Usually this results in reviews being declined. Quality Control member Zero Kirby, after realizing that a few of his reviews have been concerned for not "averaging" up the scores as the final score, decided to post a topic on the forums discussing it. [1]
However, some accepted reviews have a negative impact on our site. Fewer submissions, while in part due to a shortage of interest, may have something to due with the harsh reviews that make their way to the site. Standards now seem to be focused on quality rather than entertainment. Captain Jeff Silvers addressed this problem on the forums.
Some members also want to see the current 10-point scale replaced with a 5-point scale or a binary like/don't like scale, while some other members like the degree of granularity offered by a 10-point scale.
