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 | ||
As long as they are going to do it to every game going forward, as well as update the reviews when the game's problems are fixed, I have no problem with this. My only fears are that some may do it to make a point, or for fanboy reasons, then never up the score after the game is fixed. And that it will only be done to the more known games, while smaller ones are left as is.
HEMSTAR said:
MW2 has a 94 metacritic. OT: Well if you lower the score of a game, you better be ready to raise it when patches come out, that's only fair. Imagine if BF4 or GTA5 had their scores changed because their MP's were atrocious at launch. |
BF4 did have its review score changed after release due to bad online lol
Platinums: Red Dead Redemption, Killzone 2, LittleBigPlanet, Terminator Salvation, Uncharted 1, inFamous Second Son, Rocket League
That's the wrong question. The question should be whether reviews of online dependant games should be reviewed under real world conditions or under pre-release online conditions?
Personally I think what reviewers did with Destiny was the right thing to do and I wonder why reviewers didn't take the same approach with Driveclub. Reviewing an online dependant game under real world conditions will expose any and all flaws and bugs and thus there will be no need to revise the review score later on.
But there's also the question of whether accounting for the quality of the online service should count towards the official review score or not. with a game like Driveclub the online aspect is really not what's important about long term enjoyment so long as it's fixed. What's more important are the cars, their performance, their customisability, the physics, sound, deformation mechanics, track variety, race modes etc. If I had a problem with online and I was reviewing I'd make an official score with the assumption that online would be fixed, but at the conclusion of my review I'd say until online is sorted the game really on rates a [official score - X] and depending on what X is it would either be a recommendation to get the game now any way (if I thought it was a good game at its core) or a recommendation to wait until online is sorted and running as it should.
What I hope happens as a result of drive club is more pre-launch open Beta for games that are highly reliant on online play, to better stress test the online service.
“The fundamental cause of the trouble is that in the modern world the stupid are cocksure while the intelligent are full of doubt.” - Bertrand Russell
"When the power of love overcomes the love of power, the world will know peace."
Jimi Hendrix
Polygon is only making things worse by paving the way for "review dlc"... hey developers, wanna turn that 7 into a 9? Patch the game and add some extra stuff to it lol.
On 2/24/13, MB1025 said:
You know I was always wondering why no one ever used the dollar sign for $ony, but then I realized they have no money so it would be pointless.
what i know is they will only change it to worst and won't change it to better even things turns good in future...
so why the hell we should ever care about such a troll site reviews... 
| Wagram said: I think it's fair, but I think it's pretty petty to single out one developer. Why was there never review drops for Skyrim? It only ran at sub 10fps on my PS3. It only had 1,000 bugs and glitches. But Driveclub, has server troubles 5/10! |
It amazes me how often games released by Bethesda just get a pass due to the "that's just how Bethesda games are" excuse. Are their games fun? Yes, of course they are. However, reviews are supposed to be judged on fun factor, as well as their technical prowess, or lack thereof. It just makes me laugh to see people bitching about glitches in games that they would 100% excuse if it was Bethesda.
To be honest... i dont care in the least. Its clear to me that that website does all it can to get clicks. I dont plan to feed them.
| SWORDF1SH said: First up, yes I agree that review scores should evolve along with a game. I think it's a great idea. But that's not where my issue lies. The DriveClub server issue is inexcusable. A game that has to rely so heavily on the use of online needs to make sure that its servers are perfect day 1. It's not like that they weren't given a whole extra year to polish the game. And I know that I'm a little late to the party to complain about Polygon but I just got the time to write about it. Like I said I don't blame Polygon for downgrading the score but they have to live by this rule from now on, and they have opened up a whole huge can of worms. If Polygon want to change scores because the state of the game changes then are they willing to upgrade the DriveClub review score when it receives the planned update that will introduce weather effects like snow, thunder & lightning and rain?? Will they upgrade the score if more free tracks and cars are introduced?? What about other games that constantly get improved and expanded?? This means that they will have to upgrade their review score for every game that improves over time, and almost every game does. As long as the game gets added content and improvements the game must still be relevant to the public and therefore adjust the scores accordingly. What do you think? It's easy enough to subtract from a score of one game but can they be fair and upgrade the DriveClub when it improves and of course do this to ALL games |
I disagree that a game's review needs to be upgraded with every added improvement. Yes adjusting scores is good and I believe it is a step in the right direction but it should not be mandatory to adjust a score just because Bethesda added another horse armor to their next ES. If Naughty Dog brought out Uncharted 2 now I do not believe it would get anywhere near the high score as it did in 2009: games these days may evolve with time but so do our expectation of games.
Unless a very significant overhaul is introduce to agame that change the way it is fundamentally played or enough additional content is added to significantly increase game length I don't believe the score needs to be changed at all.
Right now DC deserves all the bashing it is getting because it's unplayable to many people that actually bought it and Sony deserve all the flame for not only failing to deliver a finished product but also breaking a promise to consumer that bough and subcribed to their system.
No, reviewing a game and reviewing temporary online launch instability are different things.
The game itself is permanent.
| binary solo said: That's the wrong question. The question should be whether reviews of online dependant games should be reviewed under real world conditions or under pre-release online conditions? Personally I think what reviewers did with Destiny was the right thing to do and I wonder why reviewers didn't take the same approach with Driveclub. Reviewing an online dependant game under real world conditions will expose any and all flaws and bugs and thus there will be no need to revise the review score later on. |
If I'm not mistaken, what happened with Destiny was that Activision/Bungie didn't give reviewers early copies of the game or forcing an embargo that prevented reviews to appear before the game launch.
It wasn't a decision made by reviewers.
Please excuse my bad English.
Currently gaming on a PC with an i5-4670k@stock (for now), 16Gb RAM 1600 MHz and a GTX 1070
Steam / Live / NNID : jonxiquet Add me if you want, but I'm a single player gamer.
About Us |
Terms of Use |
Privacy Policy |
Advertise |
Staff |
Contact
Display As Desktop
Display As Mobile
© 2006-2024 VGChartz Ltd. All rights reserved.
