Quantcast
Is Polygon right to drop DriveClub review score?

Forums - Gaming Discussion - Is Polygon right to drop DriveClub review score?

Tagged games:

Should Polygon now do this to all games?

Yes 109 61.24%
 
No 41 23.03%
 
Samuel L 'Mother F*cking... 26 14.61%
 
Total:176

The update of review scores is welcome and should be used by many other sites now that we are in the age of downloadable updates/patches. But i think the reduction of review scores should apply if a game turns worse, the game already had a messy launch and polygon still gave it a 7 (i think), they now reduce the score like they just realised the problems. Feels like they didnt even review it properly



Around the Network

Reviews shouldn't be dropped: rather, they should be appended to. But old articles probably won't be read as much as new ones hence probably won't happen.



Pipedream24 said:
prayformojo said:
Pipedream24 said:
Way too many games are being released unfinished and unpolished. People paying full launch price for a game and not being able to enjoy many of it's features is just inexcusable. You are going to charge for a beta, fine let people no that up front. So yes, they should have dropped their review score and so should everyone else. The game is a mess.


Behold...THE FUTURE! Gotta love how people defend and celebrate the rise of online centric console gaming. Back in the PS2 days, games released fully tested and AAA were never totally broken. Now it's common place and people actually defend it. 

I think the hardest thing to deal with when you have a high IQ, is accepting that 90% of the population doesn't.

I love the fact that developers can fix small glitches and get input from players to improve the experience. Testers can't catch every glitch and being able to patch out the ones that are missed is great. Having to patch an entire game because it is broken is just ridiculous. Quite frankly, having to patch in weather effects is ridiculous as well. The game was not ready to be released. Plain and simple. Just like Battlefield 4, it is going to be months before the game is truly complete...and that is just sad. But like you stated, people keep defending it, keep buying broken crap, and the cycle continues.


But here's my point. Is having the ability to fix small glitches worth putting up with the Drive Clubs, Battlefields and the overall price gouging we've seen with games getting chopped in half and then released in DLC packages? I don't remember anyone complaining about any AAA games back in the day. No one complained about SMB or Super Metroid. No one bitched about Metal Gear Solid or OOT.

AAA games use to release IN FULL and for the most part, had nothing major wrong with them. If they did, they'd get panned and no one would buy them. But isn't that a GOOD thing? Shouldn't developers who lack skills and don't use testers get punished? 

That's my point. I honestly don't think it was worth it. I think it's caused more harm than good.



No, because they wont update the score once the servers will work, once the game will have weather and more car, no one update reviews for that (while they should because reviews dont represent the actual game after all updates)



Predictions for end of 2014 HW sales:

 PS4: 17m   XB1: 10m    WiiU: 10m   Vita: 10m

 

It's NOT the first time Polygon did this - first time was with Simcity, and they revise they score four times because of warying server conditions http://www.polygon.com/2013/3/4/4051444/simcity-review

So I think they should just increase score back to normal when Driveclub will be fully operational.



Around the Network

Yes. Hell yes.

This way you wouldn't have games like MW2 scoring 91 on metacritic.



Yes!



In a way yeah they are. But they should raise it back up once issues are resolved. Then raise it more once weather and photo mode are released.



You judge all games by the same criteria. If you judge one game, a game that has a functional single-player mode as far as I know, by its online functionality, you must judge ALL games by the same criteria.



So reviews are now properly one with the games industry. Released too soon with errors and patched up as an afterthought (usually only after public outcry).

In a sense, I disagree with changing review scores. They should be accurate from the outset, and held back if sufficient time or experience with the game has not been attained. Much like games. Allowing alterations only encourages a rushed review, in order to 'be first' and generate views, which can be fixed up later to save face.

We have Metacritic (sadly too important in the industry) which will not use updated review scores. An inaccurate review will permanently, unfairly bolster or tarnish any game. There is also the potential for this to be done intentionally, without any repercussions. Initial sales are similarly affected. With so much money on the line (game sales, site revenue, Metacritic related bonuses etc.) there is a clear conflict of interest and reviews need to be held to a higher standard.

Perhaps we need to start reviewing reviewers as well (and take control of that nasty weighting used by Metacritic, if the industry so insists upon using it). Marks can be awarded for consistency, accuracy and bias (towards publishers, genres etc.).