SirMossyBloke
Member
Unfinished or added content? Do you know the facts here?
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Driveclub Reviewed again by GamesRadar. Should others follow?
- Thread starter Game4life
- Start date
Unfinished or added content? Do you know the facts here?
I think original reviews should stand as they are written at the time of a game's release, but if outlets want to go back and take another look at an older game that has had substantial patchwork done, they are free to do so as a separate article. Just don't call it a review, call it a Second Look, or something.
Patches released months and months and months after the original release of a game should be nothing more than a mere footnote at the bottom of the original review.
Patches released months and months and months after the original release of a game should be nothing more than a mere footnote at the bottom of the original review.
Freedom = $1.05
Banned
Well, it isn't as if the backlash didn't get out there. Much like it did with Unity and MCC and Arkham Knight PC. People found out about that stuff without new reviews being made. At that point, it's better to question the quality of the reviews than when it's done.
Giant bomb will hold off reviews until they can verify how the online works when a game launches, for example.
That would be like reviewing a game based on the early development builds. A released game is supposed to be it's final form. Or at least a presentable form ready for the public. Ready to be reviewed. If a dev, such as Evo, fucks it up in a huge way, it deserves all the bad reviews it gets and the stigma that comes along with it.
ChronotriggerJM
Member
I absolutely think reviews should change based on the progress of a game. It's unrealistic to expect a re-do of every game, but if enough improvements have come down the pipeline, and it's almost unrecognizable from it's earlier iteration, I'm all for it.
Review what's there first obviously, and if the community warrants it, re-review it. If it'll generate additional clicks for your website, and reflect what the game currently is, power to them.
Some others have mentioned Killer Instinct, and I think that absolutely should be re-reviewed. Talk about some massive changes, that game is practically brand new.
Review what's there first obviously, and if the community warrants it, re-review it. If it'll generate additional clicks for your website, and reflect what the game currently is, power to them.
Some others have mentioned Killer Instinct, and I think that absolutely should be re-reviewed. Talk about some massive changes, that game is practically brand new.
TechnicPuppet
Nothing! I said nothing!
Why can't they just add a bit to the end of the original review?
Reviews are a snapshot in time that's why they are not updated. Forza 5 got great scores. When Forza 6 launches its not going to look so good, should they go back and downgrade it?
True. I should explain myself better.
MCC did not deserve the high scores it got IMO, but the time to update those reviews and scores was right after launch.
What if we buy them a couple of months later? What if that's my "given moment"? It's not like the game is only on sale for a day. I guess its just tough titty for later consumers? What if the game had a post release patch that broke it? Current consumers dont deserve to know? All of the, strident, "Games dont *deserve* re-reviews!" arguments seem to make the implicit assumption that re-reviews or addendum's to reviews would be in the games favour, when its also likely that it could go the other way (it's not like there's a shortage of games that have had additional content introduce issues on either a program or gameplay level).
>-Baron-Spamedi-<
Member
If they rerelease Batman with loads of fixes and improvements and it deserves a 10/10 why shouldn't it get it?
People reading the review once it's fixed and been improved will want to know what it's like at the time they are buying it.
Zen_Arcade
Banned
Sure, but that doesn't mean reviews shouldn't do the same. Reviews only exist to inform consumers of the quality of a product. Saying people can find that information somewhere else doesn't really prove why reviews shouldn't have that information as well.
ItsTheNew
I believe any game made before 1997 is "essentially cave man art."
I think reviewing relevant games after big free dlc/patches is a good idea. Games evolve like Destiny and driveclub. And I think people like myself keep tabs on games that come out technically a mess but become fine games in their own right.
That's because most games, if any, have had the kind of post launch support that Driveclub has had. Pretty much every single update it's had month in month out, has tangibly improved the game, including tonnes of fan requested settings, features, tweaks and so on. Luckily Evo has been very careful about what feedback they have taken on board, including from this very forum. Whereas many other games end up changing elements of their game for the worse, pretty much every tweak of Driveclub has been for the better.
DUFFMCWALIN
Member
Seems like a consumer friendly thing to do. Don't know why people would be upset with the re-review living along side the original review.
I'm all for review updates to address patches and changes, though i'm against review scores being changed throughout that. I feel scores should remain the same because they don't matter anymore at that point, get the point across with information, not with numbers
It's still fun to see people think the game got bad review scores cause of it's launch issues too lol.
It's still fun to see people think the game got bad review scores cause of it's launch issues too lol.
A lot of users on NeoGaf have this vindictive opinion about games launching in an unready state and first day reviews. While being upset about a game not being finished at launch is fair, the notion that a fixed game should still be judged as a broken piece of shit is backwards.
NullPointer
Member
Some other games that could use re-reviews:
Warframe - every last part of this game has been overhauled and so much more has been added that what people are playing right now might as well be called Warframe 2, if not Warframe 3.
Destiny - Besides each DLC pack, the game has made some pretty interesting changes to its progression and patrols. This game is sortof getting the benefit of multiple reviews because it sells its DLC, but those reviews tend towards a mix of new content and changes to the core game besides.
DriveClub - The online functionality + weather makes this one a prime candidate. Its not just new features but underlying changes to the game itself.
Killzone - Shadowfall. Again, lots of added multiplayer maps, new features and modes and continual post-release support make this a candidate for a re-review, but this one might not be a net positive if the community has dwindled to nothingness.
I'm sure there are other candidates. The Master Chief Collection, Helldivers, Forza 5, etc.
matrixman92
Member
A game shouldn't be released in its infant stage then.
More like "why did I get a 0 on this math test. Give me a few months to get these answers right and let me turn it back in"
Ingueferroque
Banned
Yes, we should rejoice and encourage games getting continuous support. I wish that more pubs/dev cared.
Flame Lord
Member
It feels like every month I see someone talking about how Drive Club should be re-reviewed.
Omnistalgic
Member
I'd say update the scores, but just have the old review next to it. It doesn't erase the past, but it does reflect what the game's quality level is today.
Isn't DC considered a service now as well?
Isn't DC considered a service now as well?
Zen_Arcade
Banned
People do this all of the time. It's called retaking a test. By your logic anyone who failed their drivers test the first time they took it should never be allowed to drive.
I don't think it should be a reviewer's responsibility to keep their published piece of work up to date as a database of patch notes.
matrixman92
Member
Not sure where you live. But I have never been able to retake a school test. Obviously you can retake driver tests, that's part of the deal
NullPointer
Member
I was joking folks, but your points are well received.
reviews (most the "score" part sadly) are a tool of information of the customer.
How can you say that a game that gets a 4 in its release date, and via free updates a patches now is an 8 should not be updated?
Isnt that misinformation of a customer that doesnt know nothing about the game and thinks that the game is the same 4 of the beginning?
How can you say that a game that gets a 4 in its release date, and via free updates a patches now is an 8 should not be updated?
Isnt that misinformation of a customer that doesnt know nothing about the game and thinks that the game is the same 4 of the beginning?
TechnicPuppet
Nothing! I said nothing!
Zen_Arcade
Banned
Yes you can. If you fail a class you can retake it. I don't know were you live that you have to drop out of school if you get a bad grade.
Also, if you're going to try and argue semantics again, I've totally retaken tests I haven't done well on in school. It's not something that takes that much effort to do.
ChronotriggerJM
Member
But I'm all for a person failing the class, then re-taking it with a better score
I agree, but if they want to for whatever reason, I'm all for it
Perhaps someone on the staff is just infatuated with said game, and was willing to consider it a passion project.Newtype-001
Member
Lol?
I think some arbitrary time after first review (say 6 months) could be a good thing, the games largely still relevant and it would be useful to understand if the game still feels as good as the original review or if things have changed.
I dont see why this would be an issue, especially when in DCs case it was pretty much slated for not being Forza Horizon in some reviews or like MCC where it was just a given that things would work when most certainly it didnt (hell MCC had quite a change how some website review because how broken it was when it went public). Having those 6 months has made both those games better so why isnt that useful for a websites audience?
Do all games need that, I dont think so - its not that hard to qualify which ones do IMO. Considering how many games have hiccups at launch nowadays it seems even more relevant
ps3ud0 8)
I dont see why this would be an issue, especially when in DCs case it was pretty much slated for not being Forza Horizon in some reviews or like MCC where it was just a given that things would work when most certainly it didnt (hell MCC had quite a change how some website review because how broken it was when it went public). Having those 6 months has made both those games better so why isnt that useful for a websites audience?
Do all games need that, I dont think so - its not that hard to qualify which ones do IMO. Considering how many games have hiccups at launch nowadays it seems even more relevant
ps3ud0 8)
SirMossyBloke
Member
Actually if you fail a test you have a chance to go back to school then retake it.
You failed in your analogy, sir.
Why? Semantics wont change the fact that it is a review (technically a re-review). Reviews of evolving media arent meant to be static cultural artifacts. They're meant to be an information source that provides an overview of the product as it stands not as it stood. A review that has been outdated by additional content and patches is useless as anything other than a historical curiosity.
They should do it for every game that has undergone a significant enough change they feel that its warranted. This isnt a binary proposition, its not "Oh they did 1 they have to do all of them no matter how minor the change". The reviewer or the outlet can decide where to draw the line on a game by game basis. What about the reverse, Why shouldnt they do it?
matrixman92
Member
I'm not talking about an entire class, i specifically said test. I don't equate the release of a game to something that can be redone over and over by releasing major patches. If you fuck it up day one, you deserve negativity. Just like fucking up a test, you deserve a bad grade
I don't really believe that either. I feel that if you start doing it for little patches and season pass dlc, then why not start doing it for every game? No journalist is going to want to do that. I always see many wanting to rereview games and I've said alot about this over time as there has been a shitload of topic (most pertaining to driveclub lol), and like I'm not against them doing info updates, but for little things it gets to be a bit much and you start to think that if just happens for one game, thats a bit unfair to other games who update as well but don't have people asking all the time for rereviews. But no journalist or group is going to want to do all that work to rereview all game for patches.
I don'think games should get re-reviewed because it pretty much results in cases of favoritism, as its infeasible to re-review all games that change significantly.
Driveclub gets re-reviewed? Great. So where's Titanfall's re-review? Killer Instinct's re-review, Destiny's re-review (this one probably wouldn't go up, lol), Forza 5's re-review etc. Do you only re-review games because they're better today, or to you go both ways, and re-review a game because it was online-focused and dead as fuck (Anarchy Reigns). It's all just too dynamic for a for of media ill suited to it. What it is suited to is reviewing once at time of release, and then letting gamer impressions take it from there.
Driveclub gets re-reviewed? Great. So where's Titanfall's re-review? Killer Instinct's re-review, Destiny's re-review (this one probably wouldn't go up, lol), Forza 5's re-review etc. Do you only re-review games because they're better today, or to you go both ways, and re-review a game because it was online-focused and dead as fuck (Anarchy Reigns). It's all just too dynamic for a for of media ill suited to it. What it is suited to is reviewing once at time of release, and then letting gamer impressions take it from there.
games should have a launch review (unpatched) and a "one year later" review (provided the game is still relevant, or there were significant changes to the game post release )
removing the old review doesn't truly represent the games unpatched state and not having a review update does not accurately represent the state of the game to someone with a usable internet connection
removing the old review doesn't truly represent the games unpatched state and not having a review update does not accurately represent the state of the game to someone with a usable internet connection
Rex Griswold
Member
As long as the original review is mentioned, I see no problem with this.
I think major game updates are worthy of their own separate news stories. Amending old reviews seems superfluous and a less efficient way of informing readers about important changes.
thewhitehawk
Member
I don't think it's viable for reviewers to have a look at all games after they've been significantly patched or improved over time but I have nothing against it. If a game releases with certain issues but over time has those issues sorted out and gains more content or better pricing then it's value increases and I don't think there's anything wrong in bringing that to light.
Freedom = $1.05
Banned
And who decides what games warrant a rereview and which ones don't?
SirMossyBloke
Member
No-ones saying it should be forced, but there's nothing wrong in doing it if it's improved.
How often will we have this discussion about Driveclub? To re-state my points again:
A) A reviewer should review what is in the box and take future improvements/degrades into consideration.
or
B) Review only what is in the box. Consider a re-review if the game substantially changes to the better/worse.
Both things happened with Driveclub. Stop acting like it completely got buried in reviews for the fucked up launch.
A) A reviewer should review what is in the box and take future improvements/degrades into consideration.
or
B) Review only what is in the box. Consider a re-review if the game substantially changes to the better/worse.
Both things happened with Driveclub. Stop acting like it completely got buried in reviews for the fucked up launch.
stan423321
Member
Not sure where you live, but retaking school tests has been a huge deal around here, to the level that various schools I've been in had very, very varying rules on how is it supposed to work (and when school didn't, the teachers did vary a lot). The high school institutions around here mostly have a separate exam retake session after every regular one. So yeah, this happens all the time... unless it doesn't.
MoonsaultSlayer
Member
For the folks saying no, why can't games evolve? Say none of the cock-ups happened but the game still continued to get better and better. Wouldn't you as a consumer be interested in knowing that game X for 60 dollars is now twice as good at half the price with tons of developer support? As a developer, wouldn't you want that known and reflected in a new score? Or should they have re-packaged it in some game of the year edition like everyone else?
Zen_Arcade
Banned
Though now you've just moved goalposts multiple times. If you fucked up a dozen tests in the same class, you still get to go take those tests again at some point. You should consider a review to be a whole class anyway, because much like a class, a video game is made up of many parts that equal up to an entire grade. Your logic here is very arbitrary.
I don't know? The professional journalists? The people writing them? They would be the best ones to know what games deserve them (Considering they're the ones that play and review them for a living) and how many games they could re-review without it having a negative effect on the entire website's output.
How is that even a question?
The snapshot in time works so long as the game doesn't substantially change. That held true in every gen up to now, but no longer is true. People used to be able to look it up and compare it against the other games of that period and gauge its quality - the reviews aren't useful for that anymore if it's not the same game. If a game has changed substantially since release then the review should definitely be updated ASAP and the new market environment noted, like 'drive club is way better now but heads up forza 6 is even better for these reasons so the bar has been raised.'