How much do you research a game before you buy it?

Most of the time, I thoroughly research my games before I buy them, unless it's a Nintendo game that I know I'll love. :P

This has worked out for me, because I rarely buy a game that I don't like. I don't buy just AAA games, either. :D

It depends on the game. There are games and series that I know I like. For example, I love Dynasty Warriors, I also love giant robots. I didn't care if ChromeHounds was worse than Big Rigs I would have purchased it. Same thing with any of the Dynasty Warriors games, so eventhough it was panned, do you think I hesitated to buy Dynasty Warriors Gundam? Oh heck no!

Now for series that I'm not familiar with or a new series, I do a fair amount of homework. Professor Layton is a good example. I waited on that one for a week to see how it would be reviewed and to get some more info on it.

I think that buying games should always rely on what you enjoy, not what others tell you about it. Does that mean you'll pick up a stinker at times? Sure, but that copy of NFL Tour had a good home for a week before I said that I needed to dump it. Seriously, how did they screw up NFL Street?

It depend.

If it is made by BioWare and/or a MMO, I will research it a LOT more than I will even play it.

If it is made by Bethesda, I will just purchase it and experience it...but I won't bother with their expansions no matter how cool they may, or not, be...and unless I am bored, I won't read or research anything about it.

I may be prone to impulsive purchases, depending on the game setting, the rules, the feedbacks from the seller.

USALLY I DO QUITE ALOT

HOWEVER VIDEOS AND DEMOS ARE ENOUGH FOR ME,PAGES AND PAGES OF WRITING ARE INCREDABLY BORING;)

Most of the time, I thoroughly research my games before I buy them, unless it's a Nintendo game that I know I'll love. :P

This has worked out for me, because I rarely buy a game that I don't like. I don't buy just AAA games, either. :D

MayorJohnny

Most big releases I've made up my mind on beforehand - like MGS4 for instance. I could care less about the reviews that game gets, I will buy on day 1 because I love the series. But if it's a game I haven't seen get a ton of press, I will read the numerical reviews on a few sites I trust (I won't read the text, because they usually spoil parts of the game), or just go to Metacritic and look at the average of all reviews. This way I can get a good feel if the game is well recieved without giving me too many details.

Not reading reviews before playing a game has let me enjoy my games much more - I don't go in with preconceived notions, and I end up being surprised much more often. You should try it.

Just call it Mario and everyone will buy it...

Luckily theres so many reviews available for most games that I can find out quite a bit if I'll like it or not. But theres always a chance that even from extensive research, a game will fail for me.

Two most recent memories of this are Viva Pinata and Okami, both got a lot of positive reviews, but I didn't enjoy either of them. I did my research and still failed, so you can never know for sure.

I usually read reviews for an initial screen-test. Then, if the game in question has any games in the series before it (like using Phoenix Wright: Ace Attorney to see how good Phoenix Wright: Ace Attorney - Trials and Tribulations would be), I'd look at reviews for that/those games.

If I'm really iffy about a game, I'll usually see what friends think.

Yes and no. With stellar franchises like Final Fantasy, Shin Megami Tensei, Metal Gear, Resident Evil, Half-Life, Mario (canonical only, obviously), Zelda, etc. I don't think twice. I'll certainly read the reviews on Gamespot and inside EGM for the hell of it, just so I can read other's opinions, but my mind was made up about games in the above mentioned series a decade ago. Likewise, sometimes a publishing company or development team is all I need, such as the team behind ICO/Shadow of the Colossus. I didn't read a single review for SOTC before purchasing it, because I knew that I would love it (and I most certainly did).

On the other hand, I often research other titles to a near pedantic degree, oftentimes this drive to research the product is influenced by the development team/publishing house. We all knows what kind of trash Microsoft Studios, EA, and Take2 have put their names.

When it comes to the general line-up for 360, I ALWAYS want a demo. With the saturation of the FPS market that is currently underway, I NEED a demo or rental beforehand. This has come in handy with recent FPS releases, from Halo 3 to Turok and beyond. Few if any of the recent FPSs are worth purchasing. Check out the reviews here at Gamespot. For me, they weren't all that helpful. Gushing over mediocrity, if you ask me. The same can be said for the PS3 too, given that many of these titles are third-party and multi-plat.

It also has A LOT to do with genre as well. I will research every FPS I find interesting extensively before purchasing, and this goes back to my childhood. It took me nearly a month before I decided to purchase Tom Clancy's Rainbow Six for the PC. The only exceptions to this rule have been DOOM, Half-Life, and Bioshock. I will purchase almost any JRPG/Anime Action-Adventure game without reading the reviews, in part because I know I'll almost always enjoy the title and also because 10 years down the road I'll be able to rip some poor collector off, Growlanser, I'm looking at you, you steaming piece of turd. Another example would be racing games. I know what I play, and I don't need to read reviews. If it doesn't say GT or Forza on the cover, then it can cock a blender in my book.

And finally, if Hideo Kojima is involved, I purchase it. The owner of souls, you know.

I always buy the yearly version of College Football, other than that just a few of the major titles, this year Halo 3, AC, COD4. I'll buy MGS4 and GTA4 the day they come out, but I tend to wait a bit otherwise.

Demos are the way to go for me. You just can't trust some reviews when a game is really hyped.

Demos are the way to go for me. You just can't trust some reviews when a game is really hyped.

voltron2011

Yeah, but alot of demos are purposefully deceptive (containing the best segment of the game, being more polished than the rest, etc.).

Pffft, I buy a game because I want it. I really dont care about other when it comes to games. I do read reviews but they have no baring when it comes to purchases. I only buy games I know im going to like anyway so. I have bought games that are excellent yet every reviewer has giving it a terrible score. When I think research a game I think a game I have never heard of and am thinking of buying. As I said earlier I know exactly what games I am going to like so I buy them because I want them not because people say its good.enterprise1345

I used to do that. But negative experiences with SOE and a few titles such as Mask of the Betrayers teach me better. See, I don't mind an occasional stincker like trying a new style and not liking it.

But low scrupulous devs abusing your confidence and changing the gamestyle... Again, in my example with BioWare, maybe. If they don't like the final results on the customers, they are more than welcome to go discuss it with the guilty devs which change my habits (SOE and Mask of the Betrayers). Negative situations mark customers a LOT more than positive ones...

See, back in time, there was no trap. You see what you buy on the box. Devs have changed, they fast talk, they put neat pictures but miss key gameplays elements, they show the good part, but not the ugly part (neither WoW, nor EQ, nor EQ2 ever say that the game end in raiding on their sold box, nor put all the heavy focus it should have receive in publicity...and which would have kept me FAR from their game). See, take Vanguard for example...with all the talking about freedom, while in fact you have 0 freedom, if you want to progress you have to do EVERYTHING; that is a complete lack of freedom.

When you see a SSI product, you knew exactly what it was. Even if it was your first time seeing them, on the box, it was crystal clear. 20 years later, way after they have died...they still have loyal customers...even if they don't exist or sell products anymore.

See, back in time, there was no trap. You see what you buy on the box. Devs have changed, they fast talk, they put neat pictures but miss key gameplays elements, they show the good part, but not the ugly part (neither WoW, nor EQ, nor EQ2 ever say that the game end in raiding on their sold box, nor put all the heavy focus it should have receive in publicity...and which would have kept me FAR from their game). See, take Vanguard for example...with all the talking about freedom, while in fact you have 0 freedom, if you want to progress you have to do EVERYTHING; that is a complete lack of freedom.

Anofalye

Dude, did you actually play videogames "back in time?" It was WORSE then, far worse. You didn't have widely available objective opinions like Gamespot and EGM. Nintendo Power or Sega Vision anyone? How many times do you think we came across negative reviews? Also, you were LUCKY if you even got a vague description of the gameplay. More often than not it was blatant PR. "The greatest videogame of 1991 for the NES published and devoloped by Nintendo and reviewed by Nintendo Power." Yeah, that's objectivism. Obviously, even today, the boxes for the games aren't going to offer any valid criticism..they're trying to sell as many copies as possible. Anyway, keep reading Gamespot and EGM and you shouldn't have any issues in the future...

I do quite a bit. For games i'm familiar with i won't, for example i bought Dynasty Warriors: Empires without reading a review and surprisingly i enjoyed it.

With new games i'm not familiar with i will do quite a bit. I'll read some reviews, look on their forums, read previews, ask friends before i buy it and if push comes to shove i'll play a demo if there is one. I've never rented a game before and bought it though.

It's not the same now as it was "back in the day". Most kids were happy just to be playing games at all, lots of crap was forgiven, stuff that wouldn't be forgiven by gamers now. Personally, I can't even remember why I got the first Zelda, for instance, which turned out to be awesome, but of course nowadays I would know pretty much exactly what I would get with a Zelda title.

I'm not big on demos, but I do try them on games where I am really on the fence. Sequels of established games comes down entirely to whether I liked older games in the series, like most people I imagine. The amount of magazines and websites I read will fill the rest of the gaps in my "reasons to buy a game" portfolio. I know what genres I like, so I look for things in previews and stuff that seem like a game in a genre I like will be good. Or perhaps sometimes even a concept is enough. I bought Turok because shooting dinosaurs makes me laugh. :D Sometimes this approach fails miserably. (Pirate games should be awesome but they tend not to be), but it works mostly.

Overall, a lot of the time it's just a feeling. If you've been gaming a long time, you will instinctively know what you like, and if a game sounds like it has those things, you'll get it. I'm more generous now, leaning in favour of buying the game if in doubt because I have more money.

[QUOTE="Anofalye"]

See, back in time, there was no trap. You see what you buy on the box. Devs have changed, they fast talk, they put neat pictures but miss key gameplays elements, they show the good part, but not the ugly part (neither WoW, nor EQ, nor EQ2 ever say that the game end in raiding on their sold box, nor put all the heavy focus it should have receive in publicity...and which would have kept me FAR from their game). See, take Vanguard for example...with all the talking about freedom, while in fact you have 0 freedom, if you want to progress you have to do EVERYTHING; that is a complete lack of freedom.

YourChaosIsntMe

Dude, did you actually play videogames "back in time?" It was WORSE then, far worse. You didn't have widely available objective opinions like Gamespot and EGM. Nintendo Power or Sega Vision anyone? How many times do you think we came across negative reviews? Also, you were LUCKY if you even got a vague description of the gameplay. More often than not it was blatant PR. "The greatest videogame of 1991 for the NES published and devoloped by Nintendo and reviewed by Nintendo Power." Yeah, that's objectivism. Obviously, even today, the boxes for the games aren't going to offer any valid criticism..they're trying to sell as many copies as possible. Anyway, keep reading Gamespot and EGM and you shouldn't have any issues in the future...

But on the BOX itself, you have a fairly good description. Games with no descriptions where games that wouldn't sell. I still have some old habits. I check a box...I see nothing but a picture that isn't even in-game footage? I don't buy and I don't ask sellers. These days, most box give you no informations; if not for Gamespot, I would purchase a lot less games. I never purchase any Nintendo game, no description, no selling. I know what Mario is, but that is it. Videogames back in time has very little to do with Mario and Nintendo. I have a LOT of fun on various games...and they all have a box which explain the game before I purchase it...if the box has no explanation, you can be sure I never even consider the game...

All SSI games have a fairly accurate desciption of what the game was, with examples. Capcom games where also quite forward.

I agree that today it is easier to get OUTSIDE info, but on the BOX, it was a lot better back then. Most games where described rather well. I have no idea about NES or such consoles, I was on Amiga 500 and then PC...but even the Vic20 has a fairly decent explanation as well on the box. Box with no decent descriptions where just doomed to never sold. This is why I am also quite angry at MMOs who put a gameplay out of nowhere and enforce it, since MMOs usually have a desciption of the initial hook, but nothing about the ending...which is VERY bad, and deserving of all the hate they get. See, on EQ original box, you have a fairly decent idea of what the game was except for raiding, which make me hate them all the more. On every SSI product, it was crystal clear. Check the box, this is it.

EDIT: Any space they use to say Amazing, Best, Cool, Awesome, is just waste space. I check the box for INFORMATION, not opinions. If they do it a little, maybe I still can get the info I need...if they overdo it, they serve no information purpose and I just discard it with no second though. Most of the games I purchase, it is the box which sold it...if not, it was a friend...and if not, extremely rarely, it is gamespot or such 3rd party. If the box use Amazing, Splendid, Cool or other such words too often in a sentence, I may very well stop reading out of boredom; they are wasting my time. Box aren't going to be objective, neither will be gamespot. I want INFO...and the more info you get in the least time, the more chances the box has to sell itself (or to be discarded and that I will consider another box instead of leaving (maybe another product of the same company)).

Depends on the game and on the developer. If it's being made by a company that I'm fairly familiar with, and usually staying the same genre, I can more or less know what to expect from the game. For most games, I read various reviews, check out whatever video footage is available, and then play the demo if one is out for the game.

The further away from my known likes the game is, the more research I do before deciding to buy. It's far more likely that I'll like a shooter than a JRPG, for instance.

most of the time i buy triple a titles first and i still read the previews for the hell of it. but other games that im not really looking foward to i look up the score and ask my friends if its good or not. even if the game gets a low score such as legend of dragoon, the game can still be fun. also researching can actually hurt your buying, as sometimes it is not true.

Games im looking foward to: GTA4,Fable 2,fallout 3, Mgs4, and many more........

games that needs researching before buying- comdened 2, rainbow vegas 2, smackdown 09, and many more....

If i'm not sure whether I should buy/rent a game or not, I read a few reviews on gamefaqs usually.

It depends.

I research a lot on JRPGs because I just got into it 6 months ago when I played Rogue Galaxy. I want to make sure it's at least 70% similar to Rogue Galaxy especially the battle system. So far KH series is the closest.

I don't research on sequels of games I really like because I don't want to get spoiled even on the smallest detail.

I also don't research on sports games. Though I only play 1 sport game...NBA 2K series.

if its a game that i know ill like very little maybe waut for a few reviews and gameplay videos

but if its a game that im a bit unsure of ill wait for more reviews gameplay vids and might rent it

thinking about obscure the aftermath its sounds pretty good but im still unsure

I follow GameSpot's pre-coverage of the game and decide in advance if I like it. How much I am impressed by the details may outweigh the rating of the game; unless it is given a 4.0 or something.

To be honest, I do very little "research." I know about most games coming out, sure, but if I'm not grabbed by the game immediately, usually that "research" is just hype.

I've sort of discovered that if I need a hype thread to get interested, I should steer clear until I find a cheaper way to play it. Most games that I really want to play are ones that immediately caught my attention. The only time I've been totally surprised by a game I had heard about but didn't grab me immediately was the original Mercenaries. All of the other ones that I needed encouragement to buy just tend to flop in my eyes.