Video Chums brings you great video game content including fair and unbiased reviews, fun top 10s, and interesting articles for new and retro video games. Stay connected with Video Chums by following us on Facebook and Twitter. Also, subscribe to our YouTube channel for gameplay videos and such.
What is Video Chums?
This site was created by A.J. Maciejewski with the idea of friendly and interesting video game content in mind. The name "Video Chums" is inspired by the moments when you hang out with friends and play video games. No one wants to hang out with obnoxious people, so you won't find any cynical articles about such trivial topics like the console wars here. Please enjoy your stay and don't be afraid to contact us and leave comments even if the article is ancient. We'd love to hear from you!
Every author on Video Chums is obsessed with video games. With decades of combined experience, you can trust that we'll provide nothing short of informative and interesting content from a knowledgeable perspective. We have a rigorous editing process to ensure that every article meets our high journalistic standards before it's published. In other words, it's better to be late and thorough than it is to be early and misinformed.
Ethics and practices
Our only source of income is from on-site advertisements generated by Google AdSense. We will never receive payment from any party for publishing content at their request. Every request sent to us asking for such content to be published in exchange for benefits of any sort will be ignored. Our authors are not tied to any video game company, public relations firm, publisher, or developer so there will never be any conflict of interest.
Authors on Video Chums take pride in their reviews. What makes us stand out as an awesome video game review site is that by the end of reading each review, you should have a firm understanding of what to expect from the game and feel as if you've already played it. Prior to writing a review, our reviewers are strongly discouraged from reading other reviews. This ensures that our reviews consistently come from unique perspectives and are scored genuinely without reinforcing already established opinions. Our reviewers will also experience everything a game has to offer before reviewing it. In other words, if a game cannot be completed, the reviewer will play it to the point where they have experienced everything that it has to offer as reviewers must write about all applicable aspects of every game that they review.
Our authors are never assigned games to review and only review games that they're interested in. Because of this, a game will be judged by how good of a game it is and not by what kind of game it is. Additionally, our reviewers will never make excuses for a game. If a part of a game is bad then it should be pointed out as such and not excused by saying something like, "The graphics are bad but the game is fun so that's okay." We review on a game-by-game basis with no defined structure or restrictions. As a result, our reviews are not broken up into categories with individual scores (for example; graphics, sound, gameplay, story). Certain categories may not matter as much and therefore the final score should not be heavily weighed down by them. Finally, a game's price has no place in a review of it. Free games can be terrible and shouldn't be given higher scores just because they're free. Inversely, a game may be unprecedentedly expensive but that doesn't mean that its score should suffer. After all, overpriced games tend to go down in price quickly. As a review reader, you're savvy enough already to decide if a game is worth the asking price or not after reading one of our reviews.
We score games with the following ratings in mind:
- Completely unplayable
- Just playable
- Absolutely perfect
If a game falls between two ratings, the reviewer will give it a fraction according to where it lies between the two ratings. For example, a game with a rating of 5.3 is playable but only a little bit satisfying. A game with a rating of 9.7 is almost perfect but may have some very minor flaws.
Our rule when it comes to sequels specifically is that if a sequel meets the reviewer's expectations of what the sequel should be, it should get the same score. If it falls short of expectations, it should get a lower score and if it exceeds expectations, it should get a higher score. In other words, if a sequel is merely of the same quality as the previous game then it obviously falls short of expectations and should get a lower score because sequels should always improve on established formulas.
We also publish Rapid Fire Reviews with the following star ratings in mind:
- ☆☆☆☆☆ Complete waste of time
- ★☆☆☆☆ Heavily flawed
- ★★☆☆☆ Most gamers won't enjoy this
- ★★★☆☆ Enjoyable but nothing spectacular
- ★★★★☆ We highly recommend playing this
- ★★★★★ If a game was this good, we'd write a full review for it
All images used on Video Chums are either provided by staff or within the public domain. Feel free to use any image with a Video Chums watermark but please leave the watermark intact and provide appropriate credit to the original article.
From time to time, we may have to remove visitor comments. The following is a list of unacceptable content:
- Insults to authors or other visitors
- Offensive language
- Politically-charged narratives
- Spam or advertising in any form
We do not tolerate plagiarism which is defined as the theft of another's ideas. For example, if you're stuck writing a review and reword portions of one of our reviews then we will find out and demand that you remove it. Failing to remove it will result in further action.