>>12122564
>EGM
EGM famously ripped off Famitsu's 4 man review team where even reviewer provides their thoughts on a game and a score on a 10 point scale. I actually really like this approach as you can either try identifying with the reviewer who matches your taste or simply go with the total scores. It's always fun when there's a game that has a wide delta among the reviewers. Most of the reviewers used their real names but Sushi-X was a "character" and I remember he loved fighting games and hated the Game Boy. They would make small alterations to this formula, including adding a 5th reviewer who would review B-titles or giving one reviewer being given much more space to write their thoughts over the others. Professional game reviewers get a bad rap around here but I read a LOT of these and very few of their scores seem out of line. EGM in particular got in trouble with publishers a few times (they loved bragging about this)
>GamePro
Ah, GamePro! This mag was famous for it's review scores which featured a face in various stages of excitement with a perfect score showing the head EXPLODING! Anyway, GamePro was much more...publisher friendly than a lot of mags. Lots of perfect scores and the in-house style of the reviews themselves kind of read like ad copy. All the reviewers use pseudonyms too which makes it feel less legit.
>Game Players/UGP
This magazine probably had the best written reviews and one of the few where each reviewer feels like they had an individual voice. They had a fairly complex scoring system where each category(graphics, sound, replay value etc) was rated then weighted then divided by 19 or something to get a %. The main downfall is they had had some horrendous taste. They were also one of the first mags to get really down on 16-bit or 2D games in general. Maybe not as bad as some of those britbong mags but they got really dismissive towards some great stuff.
