| man-bear-pig said: It was originally 9.5, not 9 |
You are right... sorry.
I could have bet who would post a negative article about the XB1.
OT : I think that all of the reviews for games with online components ( almost all future games) reviews should wait at least a week after launch before being given out. Sure, that wouldn't help day 1-7 buyers, but most of those buyers would have bought it anyway.
It is near the end of the end....
I am with polygon on this one. If I payed 60$ for a game I demand it to be finished and tested before I buy it. I can only imagine the disappointment in people who bought a console just to play this online and the servers are down and have been down for a long time.
| Augen said: It does make reviewing games tricky these days. I mean, if a game was released horribly buggy and had a massive patch a week later would you say "3/10 for broken mess" or "8/10 for fixing the issues"? Server issues seem even more vague because one person's experience could vary greatly from another. "I cannot get on, this game is unplayable! 0/10!" "I had no issues, this game is amazing! 10/10!" Not sure how you aggregate those experiences within a review or if the reviewer goes on their own experience in a bubble of what other's experienced. |
They made tests to confirm the issues in different times and I guess in different places... got user's data too.... at the end the dev posted the issues are really happening.
ethomaz said:
They did that already with a lot of reviews... and they even upped some after a year and the game got better content. |
Really? My mistake then. In theory, this is a good thing. It just means that we need to be more aware of the current reviews of a game before we part with our money.
| Augen said: It does make reviewing games tricky these days. I mean, if a game was released horribly buggy and had a massive patch a week later would you say "3/10 for broken mess" or "8/10 for fixing the issues"? Server issues seem even more vague because one person's experience could vary greatly from another. "I cannot get on, this game is unplayable! 0/10!" "I had no issues, this game is amazing! 10/10!" Not sure how you aggregate those experiences within a review or if the reviewer goes on their own experience in a bubble of what other's experienced. |
Both reviews should be present, then. Put the timestamp and highlight the mistakes of the first reviewed version, then put the second one which explains the change.
| toot1231 said: I am with polygon on this one. If I payed 60$ for a game I demand it to be finished and tested before I buy it. I can only imagine the disappointment in people who bought a console just to play this online and the servers are down and have been down for a long time. |
This is why I'm STILL very aprehensive about this whole online future of games. Online has infested so many games and platforms we have today, even for single player experiences. And when servers go down, your single player game is also down.
|
CladInShadows said: Really? My mistake then. In theory, this is a good thing. It just means that we need to be more aware of the current reviews of a game before we part with our money. |
There is a game I don't remember right now for 360 or PS3 I guess that they five a 7.5/10 and a year after I read the review and they upped it to 8/10.
Seems like they make some schedules to re-review the game... like 6 months, 1 year, etc.
The good part they matain the old score in the list and tells you why they changed... I think it is fair.
|
Wright said: Both reviews should be present, then. Put the timestamp and highlight the mistakes of the first reviewed version, then put the second one which explains the change. |
This is exactly what Polygon does.
ethomaz said:
I think the ideia to update the reviews times from times to show the actual state of the game is a genius ideia... if you read a review a year late to buy a game you will know what you are getting. Just holds a history of the scores changes to avoid discussions. +1 supporter here |
You know what would be even more geniuser? Reviewing an online multiplayer focused game AFTER it came out. You know, the time when there actually are problems. And not in a developer controlled environment before release. That way you wouldn't even have to adjust the rating.
If you demand respect or gratitude for your volunteer work, you're doing volunteering wrong.
About Us |
Terms of Use |
Privacy Policy |
Advertise |
Staff |
Contact
Display As Desktop
Display As Mobile
© 2006-2024 VGChartz Ltd. All rights reserved.
