I was wondering what you guys' opinion is on this. I found that most people think a review should talk about every good and bad aspect of the game. But there are also some people who think that this can be taken 'too far', where it's almost like they think a reviewer starts to nag about certain things.

Basically what I'm asking is, from which point on do review writers get too whiny about certain downsides?

I've done a few reviews and I've always tried to link criticism to game-play.

If I don't think the fire-hydrant looks right and it's non-essential, why put it in the review?

It really boils down to impact. If the problem doesn't have real impact, it isn't needed.

There is no point at which a review becomes to nit picky to put in in your words.  A person will write and discuss the game and you can expect pros and cons.

You'll also see who writes and how they write and you can decide for yourself to avoid people or to read just the overviews of the reviewers who get too knitty and gritty with their reviews.

In other words, it's up to you to decide what to go with and who to read.

Too nitpicky, or too detailed? Too much detail I have seen a ton of times. For example, telling me how much better the character's haircut is in the game than it was in the last installment, or how the reflection in the puddle looks smoother.

Basically, too much detail all comes down to length. How likely are you to read a 3,000 word review, as opposed to a 1,500 word review?

In the end, a reviewer can nitpick all they want and include all of the details they want, as long as they do so in a way that manages to hold a reader's attention (which is difficult to accomplish in a 3,000 word review).

But too nitpicky? As long as the reviewer doesn't start on stupid stuff, or begin trashing a game that he has no real complaints against other than the color of the snow is too dark or something, then he/she is okay. Oh, and ranting about those nitpicks? Also not cool, I think. AVGN did not do the review community any favors. lol


EDIT: An example of reviewers nitpicking too much by trashing games with no real reson would be a review in PSM for Harvest Moon: Save The Homeland back in the day. The guy rated the game's controls a four or five, and the only thing he could say negative was that they were simple. His words were "They do exactly what they're supposed to, but not much is asked of them". How does that merit a low score? The question isn't "Are the controls complex?" it's "Do the controls handle smoothly?". So why rate it low even though the controls are spot on and tight, just because there isn't much complexity to the controls? That's too nitpicky, and the kind of reviews I determined I would never write.