Mock reviews are a widespread practice within the games industry, yet due to the secretive nature of the work involved, they remain an under-discussed branch of the feedback process – particularly in comparison to fields such as QA and player testing. With most mock reviews and game evaluations written under heavy NDA, it's perhaps unsurprising that we hear little about this line of work.
With the help of experts in publishing, PR and game consultancy – combined with my own knowledge as a freelance consultant and mock reviewer – this article aims to demystify the mock review process, and explore how game evaluations provide a useful form of feedback at different stages of the development process.
In its most basic form, a mock review resembles the sort of review you would see published by games media. It's a written essay that discusses the strengths and weaknesses of a game, intended to mirror the external critique that a game would face at launch. Mock reviews are typically commissioned by publishers or marketing agencies, and often written by people with a background in games journalism.
"The idea is that publishers really want to gauge the potential success of their title and what a critical landscape will look like," says Sterling McGarvey, head of consulting at game consultancy firm Hit Detection. "Oftentimes, the goal is not to be broadsided by surprise reviews."
Alongside a written article, clients will ask mock reviewers to provide a score, or an estimate of how the game would rank on Metacritic. McGarvey notes that publishers now increasingly value community sentiment as a way of gauging a game's success at launch, but as a forecasting metric, "Metacritic is easier and neater for all parties involved."
Depending on the project, reviewers could be required to give a general overview of their impressions of a game – as if they were publishing a real review – or be asked to focus their feedback on specific areas. This could be something such as a potential
Read more on gamesindustry.biz