'Overrated,' 'Underrated' and how to Use Game Reviews

After last week's lousy game, I figured I would take some time to discuss something I've had on my mind for a while.

The phrases "overrated" and "underrated" get thrown around a lot, like, A LOT, when it comes to video games. I hear those two words way more often when referring to video games far more often than with film, television, books or any other type of media (maybe music is a close second). Often, they are fighting words, leading to long winded online conversations and overly defensive social media posts about whatever game is being referenced. I actually decided to cover this topic after I got way too invested in a back-and-forth discussion on one of the many gaming groups I follow online. The original poster wanted to express his love for Chrono Trigger, something that isn't uncommon in retro gaming groups. But one user had to use the O word, expressing his opinion that while the game is excellent, it was a tad overrated. What followed was an avalanche of personal attacks, unnecessarily critical comments about other games (even other games people think are great), jabs at the guy's taste, the works (all by the same type of commenter, which is a different topic for a different day). How dare you someone say they think the high and mighty Chrono Trigger is bad! But here's the thing: the commenter never did say CT was bad. He said it was overrated.

On the surface, it's pretty easy to define overrated and underrated. Overrated means the subject is not as good as general consensus would have you believe, while underrated means it's better than said general consensus. That's as obvious as it is true, but it doesn't tell the whole story. These phrases are thrown around so frequently and with such different context that you really have to look on a case-by-case basis to really gain any insight from how these phrases are used. I myself try to avoid them, but I've certainly used them before. I usually find myself throwing them out in a specific situation, which we will get to in a minute, but every reviewer is different. Remember, game reviews are both subjective and objective, and how far they push to either side of that spectrum varies from reviewer to reviewer. Whether you're working for a big-name gaming publication or you're me, you're going to bring your own biases to reviews and that includes using the two phrases in question.

I guess I will start with what constitutes 'underrated,' as it's a little easier to define and a little less controversial. There is a lot of disagreement on what constitutes good or great games, but very little as to what makes a game bad. If something has completely broken controls or is glitchy to the point of being unplayable, it's probably a bad game and very few people are going to call a title like that "underrated." There is some subjectivity here, as some gamers have different levels of patience with controls that the powers that be have deemed "clunky." But for the most part there's agreement as to what's bad when it comes to game design. I find most games that are considered underrated are considered so because they are relatively unknown or obscure. You know, the kind of games I try to review here. Most of these games aren't bad, they just aren't very well known. Underrated is almost the wrong word here, but it's one that's used for games like this frequently. There are occasionally games that the mainstream gaming media considers "bad" that I don't believe to be so. Mega Man X7 and Fighter's Destiny are two titles that come to mind for me, they were critically panned games that I consider to be "underrated." It happens, but it's rare and in my experience, games that are considered "underrated" are usually just "underexposed."

But now we come to the other end of the spectrum. It sometimes feels like "Overrated" is the most common word in gaming media. Whether its major publications or small-time bloggers, AAA titles or indie projects, RPGs or FPS, everyone has their own thoughts on what's overrated. There seems to be a lot more discrepancy as to what constitutes "overrated" because there is way more discrepancy on what makes a game "good" than what makes it "bad." Sure, there's stuff that's objective, but there are a lot of other factors at play. What one gamer likes, another might despise. I like RPGs a lot more than racing games and my reviews are going to reflect that. It's also going to come through in which games I find overrated. Of course, it goes a little bit deeper than that when it comes to what's "overrated." Because there are a lot, and I mean a lot, of different levels of overrated.

Let's go back to the Chrono Trigger example. I try not to talk about this game too much, because people get absolutely ridiculous when anyone says anything bad about it, but I will say I find more and more gamers coming out and calling it overrated. I don't think anyone that even remotely likes RPGs would consider it bad. But here's the thing: it's so highly rated that it's hard to call it anything but overrated. So many gamers so adamantly consider it in their top 5 games of all time that if you don't get aroused at the mere thought of the almighty Chrono Trigger, that still means you think its overrated. Not bad, still great, just not as great as some people say. That is just one example, but there are tons of other titles that gaming pundits believe to be above reproach. Final Fantasy VI, Resident Evil 4, Super Mario World and just about every Zelda game fit into this category. I like all of these games (well, maybe not all the Zelda games) but I could totally see how someone would think they are overrated, especially if you don't like the genre. I'll argue with you if you think any of these games are bad, but whether or not they are overrated is far more subjective.

That's not to say that all overrated titles fit into that category. There are some cases, at least for me, where games considered all time classics are really just okay. Personally, the biggest example of this for me is the Tony Hawk series. I know I've mentioned these games before, but I just don't get it. I would absolutely consider almost every THPS game overrated, I can think of one I consider as good as advertised. I'm not a huge fan of Halo, which I know is a favorite of many a gamer. I understand the love a little more than I do with THPS. I could make an honest argument for Halo being the single most important video game of all time and its multiplayer is great. But again, I personally would consider it overrated. Looking at it from the other side, I know a lot of people consider Final Fantasy VII overrated. I disagree, but I could also understand why people think that. I'll vouch for my favorite games against unreasonable criticism, but I'm not going to get defensive about it, everyone is entitled to their opinion. And, at the end of the day, all of this overrated/underrated business is just people's opinion. Some of those opinions are more commonly held, but they are still opinions.

So, how do we use all this information? For one, I think media literacy is important when it comes to video game reviews. Don't just take someone's word for it when they say a game is underrated, overrated or anything in between. Use a variety of different sources, from the big-name mags and websites to the smaller outlets. I often see criticism levied against the bigger players for catering to big name series' and triple A titles, and that's fair. But it's also to be expected and they still generally do a good job of separating the good from the bad, especially if you read between the lines. I think some reviewers fall into the opposite trap as well, heaping praise on Indie titles or alleged hidden gems that aren't great.

I always felt it was more important to look at who is writing those reviews rather than where they are published. As I've discussed before, everyone brings their own bias to reviews no matter how much they try to avoid doing so. Look at a reviewer's past work, or a commenter's past posts, and see what their opinions are on different types of games. If someone says Chrono Trigger is overrated and has a good deal of varied opinions on JRPGs, then it's worth digging into why. But if someone says Chrono Trigger is overrated and feels that way about 90 percent of the great, classic games of the genre, then there's a good chance they just don't like RPGs. I used to call the Gran Turismo games overrated all the time, but I've ceased doing so because I recognize I just don't like games in that genre. I've learned to look at the series through the eyes of a racing game fan and at least attempt to see what they see and doing so helped me understand why the series is so revered. I'll call THPS overrated because no matter how hard I look, I just don't get it and even then, I still recognize that the series just doesn't offer anything for me. No matter where you find them, opinions are, well, opinions.

At the end of the day, it's important to remember that this is all supposed to be fun on some level. That's not to say there aren't games that are intense, provocative and cognizant of real-world issues, but they are still games at the end of the day. Let's not get too bent out of shape about differing opinions on video games, especially when those aforementioned real-world issue are so much more important. But still, you want to use your free time on games you will actually enjoy. Sometimes it's almost worse to have a game hyped up as great only to just be okay than to go in with no expectations. That's why I think it's important to make educated decisions on what you play and look beyond what a few folks on the internet think is overrated, underrated or anywhere in between. Reviews are a tool, not gospel, and you should take them all with a grain of salt, even mine (though you should still like and share them all with your friends!).