Criteria of what a video game should be.

Why isn't there an industry standard set of criteria that a video game should be or hope to accomplish This way, reviews can be more objective than subjective. When reviewing a game, the reviewer should consider this criteria, and ask themselves, "does this game achieve x, , and z, and how well does it accomplish a, b, and c? The better the game achieves this criteria, the better the review should be rather than basing the review only off of subjective opinions. What I'm saying is, there should be an agreed upon standard of what a video game should be or hope to accomplish so we have something to base our opinions on about them. I mean there are too many games that better fit the criteria of a movie than a game that gets high review scores for a video game, which doesn't make any sense to me.

I'm pretty fine with the criteria for what a game is currently so I can't really say that I'd be interested in any kind of change myself.

I'd rather there be no strict criteria. That way, we can have a wider range of games and game genres in the market.

I think to limit games is like limiting any other form of artist entertainment.

@Archangel3371: There is no criteria. That's the whole point.

Well I guess I'm fine with that as well then.

Why confine creativity and innovation to a preordained (and eventually outdated) definition?

The only criteria any game should have is that it should be fair and balanced, everything else is Genre Specific, Criteria for Platformers wont be the same for Strategy Games.

Anyway, I don't think Reviewers should telling us how good they think a game is anyway..... I just want information about how the game is, not whether they like it or not...... I'l decide if a QTE movie game is really compelling.

@mastermetal777

Indeed..... That way even a completey non-interactive movie like say: X-Men can be a game too.... It meets all your criteria.... Which is none.

Haha !

There already is criterion for games.

Things like graphics, gameplay, storyline, sound effects / music, are pretty much standard.

But you seem to be suggesting something more than that - which I think would stifle creativity.

At the end of the day everyone has different tastes. Some people may love a game like football manager while hating a game like fallout 3... or hopefully the other way round !

@Lulu_Lulu: if it isn't interactive with a keyboard and mouse or a controller, I don't call it a game. As long as it progresses through my input, it's a game. All other criteria is just too limiting

@mastermetal777

All other Criteria is what makes games, y'know, games.... It doesn't limit them... It defines them. As if if something as stupid as terminology is going to stop Tell Tale Games and Quantic Dream from doing what they do. They don't care if anyone thinks they're games.... Why should you ?

Its not like people are out there telling developers to stop trying new things.

Gaming to me should be fun and not as much a time sink. It also shouldn't be as expensive as it is. I think if the industry is really doing what it should be, there should be something fun for everyone and it shouldn't be such a chore to find the fun as it is sometimes.

I've been talking about arcades but that is the essence of what gaming should be imo. Walking into an arcade and being like omg look at all that fun. What should I play first? Not spending countless hours trying to find it.

Video games should be wally world. The fun should not be this or the cross country trip to find the fun. The fun should be walley world. Right now wally world is closed more times than not, and I'm Chevy Chase after arriving at wally world only to find out it's closed..