POLL: Is it more beneficial or detrimental for sites to release multiple reviews of the same game?

[Cobretti2]

coolbeans said:

fauzman said:

I feel reviewing again should only be done if there are significant changes to the game. I feel Ghostwire Tokyo hasnt seen much difference between both versions as the changes only consist of a new mode or few collectables/side missions.

I see.  Perhaps I put too much stock in the advertised changes to Ghostwire's recent update.

I feel like I'm split between your threshold and Machina's issues with multiple reviews overall.  If a hypothetical TLOU Pt. II Director's Cut came along that made gameplay updates & notable alterations to story pacing, I don't think I'd reflexively shoot down someone else reviewing it here.  I guess the tension comes back to how Machina said would be the "real review."  I'd hate to see responses that acted like a more positive review would be like "fixing past errors," if you know what I mean.

If you had like a director's cut then that would almost be it's own database entry I would think, or at least identified as a variant to the original game. If that reviewer was smart, they would then make reference to the original review and maybe touch base about the thing they agreed on in terms of the negatives, and if those negatives have been addressed and whether they believed it was a superior experience to the original and worth the purchase again. Conversely they could also conclude that the changes made, actual deter from the original game experience and they recommend to those who haven't bought it yet to find the original copy.