For the past year, much to the dismay of critics everywhere, Bethesdas marketing team has refused to send out early codes for their games. For Doom, Dishonored 2, and now Prey, Bethesda has provided review copies less than 24 hours in advance, giving reviewers little time to play through those games before they launched. In a blog post last year about this decision, Bethesda offered a laughable justification, writing that: While we will continue to work with media, streamers, and YouTubers to support their coverageboth before and after releasewe want everyone, including those in the media, to experience our games at the same time.
This strange, disdainful decision was slammed by critics when Bethesda announced it last fall, but the publisher has maintained its policy nonetheless. This makes Bethesda an anomaly. Traditionally, game publishers will send out review copies to press one to two weeks in advance, often with a review embargo of a specific time and date on which critics can post their thoughts. This allows everyone to stay on the same page. A critic at IGN doesnt have to worry about being scooped by a critic at GameSnacksWeekly because theyve both agreed to the same embargo. The timeframe may be tight, depending when review copies hit, but nobody has to rush to be first on the web.
Yesterday, for example, we received a copy of Fire Emblem Echoes from Nintendo, giving us a solid 11 days to play through the game before it comes out, on May 19. Atlus, god bless them, sent us codes for Persona 5 nearly two months before it launched. Although publishers like Activision havent typically offered early reviewer access to online-only games like Destiny, and once in a while a publisher will send out codes late, those are the extraordinary cases. Most publishers are happy to give out early codes for their single-player games, with rare exceptions (like 2K Games).
As of May 9, Prey has an 80 on Metacritic. Although that number may jump up and down a bit before it settles, it is not considered fantastic. (From what Ive heard anecdotally, most publishers Metacritic bonuses require games to hit an 85 or 90. I dont know if Prey has any such bonus.) This Metascore is based entirely on the thoughts of critics who have had the game for four or five days.
Boggles the mind, doesnt it? Arkane Austin started developing Prey in May 2013, nearly four years ago. Reviewers have offered thoughts and scores, contributing to the big number that will hang on Arkane for the rest of the studios existence, after playing the game for less than a week. Those reviewers cranked through the game under sub-optimal conditions, rushing to beat the clock (and the competition) despite the fact that most Prey players will have far different experiences.
Bethesdas failure to give reviewers that same opportunity does a disservice not just to customers who wont get timely reviews from their favorite critics, but to the developers at Arkane, who spent four years on this game only to watch reviewers stamp numbers on it after just four days. Theres no way to know whether Prey reviewers would have felt differently if they werent rushing, but regardless, Bethesdas policy is a bummer for everyoneeven Bethesda.
Please read the full thing here.
A really interesting discussion about how Bethesda's policy might just cost them their metacritic score as well as make it so reviewers barely have any time to play their games before shoving out a review. Press Sneak Fuck strikes again.