| BeElite said:
Dont defend this pathetic industry and the scum that infest it. LOGICALLY a game should be reviewd as it is day one for the consumer thus if there is a patch day one it best be reviewd with it. Dont BS and spin abut some special treatment crap. Every game should be reviewd as it is day one patched or not. |
I'm not defending anything, i'm saying it how it is. If I point out an apple on a tree that isn't ripe, and I say,"eat this right now and tell me what you think? " Are you then gonna wait 2 weeks for it to ripen and then tell me how the apple was? Of course not (though in this example you could refuse, but lets just say you can't for arguments sake). It's the exact same thing with reviews, we as consumers expect reviews BEFORE the game comes out, how else would we know whether we should buy it or not? If they gave an incomplete version of LBP3 to review, then they will review what they gave. It's the company that made the games fault for not giving the reviewer a "complete" version of the game, not the reviewers fault. Now, as for the journalist who did the review, that's a different story, but it is absolutely "logical" for a reviewer to review what they were given and not to wait 2 weeks for the issues to be fixed.
Something...Something...Games...Something
