BraLoD said:
To be honest, I think this should be the way things are.
No one should receive a game before it's released, they should just go by themselves after one if they want to review it.
I don't want people giving scores to things there are not even released to the public yet, we should be able to form our own opinions, and without this early reviews we would be way more honest (as a whole) to what games deserve.
If one see a 10/10 to a game before play it, it can really affect what he will feel about the game.
He can start it thinking: this gonna be great! and be totally let down because the game was only good and not meet his expectations, or he can go thinking the game may be over scored because of being so high rated and then start playing it already trying to find flaws and not enjoy it.
And we all know a bad score can really destroy a game, and that thing was not even released yet!
My opinion is that everyone should get the game only when it's public released, and if want to do a review be able to prove he actually beat the game and not rushed while doing it to his opinion to be at least taken in account. (reviews are no more than other people opinions).
We should start seeing reviews only after some good time after the game is released, equivalent to the gameplay time that game has.
I think gaming would be better like this, where people would have to actually try a game (or at least watch a gameplay on yt or the likes) to start forming a opinion about it, people would be a little more honest with the games they play.
But that's only my opinion anyway.
|
The problem with that is that we would have to buy the game to "form our own opinion". Then if it turns out to be rubbish, it's too late. And it would let shitty publishers to what they please with their strong marketing arm.
No, reviews are there for a reason. We might complain about them, but they are needed. Even if you disagree with the scores, reading them or watching video reviews helps a lot.
