phant0m
Member
He petered out after < 2 hrs to get his steam refund. The early game combat is pretty bad before you get any of the other weapons or powers, too bad they couldn't stick with it.
His (or her) loss, I suppose.
-
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.
Prey review thread
- Thread starter Cyberia
- Start date
He petered out after < 2 hrs to get his steam refund. The early game combat is pretty bad before you get any of the other weapons or powers, too bad they couldn't stick with it.
His (or her) loss, I suppose.
MosquitoSmasher
Member
I guess the Metascore isn't bad but man I would rate it so much higher. Prey proved to be such a huge surprise for me. When they announced it I didn't think much of it but that demo did it for me. After that I only wanted to know how the rest of the game was and after I found out that all was well thanks to ACG's review I picked it up.
Really really hope the sales will pick up. We really need a sequel and if not at least another game from this highly talented studio.
Is bad marketing the sole reason that not more people went out to buy Dishonored 2 and Prey?
Really really hope the sales will pick up. We really need a sequel and if not at least another game from this highly talented studio.
Is bad marketing the sole reason that not more people went out to buy Dishonored 2 and Prey?
PepsimanVsJoe
Member
phant0m
Member
Yep, they did pretty much everything right to capture the parts of Deus Ex and Sys/BioShock that everyone loved, it would be my GOTY if Zelda/HZD hadn't come out this year.
Outlets are punishing Beth for not giving early copies, either intentionally or not (rushing through so they can get their review out).
Listen to the latest Vice Gaming podcast (Waypoint), Austin & the gang really seem to get what the game is about.
Maximilian Kolbe
Member
Can someone tell me is that IGN Prey(PC) review final score(i remember they start doing something like "NOT FINAL" score in recent year), if so that seems pretty stupid especially it's fixed today.
IGN's review seems really harsh if the bug has already been patched, but I can understand where he's coming from, I know I'd be extra harsh on a game if I had a late game breaking glitch happen to me. Though I'd also probably pass it on to someone else as I wouldn't want to replay everything and it'd sour me too much on it. Probably just write an article on it or something.
Look like another Nier case here: got overall very bipolar score review, but in the end, it got a cult status like any other JRPG since a long time. I think this is the same thing here. I'm sure this game will be recognize as a very good shooter/survival/horror/RPG in a long run. I usually not agree on review in general(they like what i usually don't like and vice-versa), but on this one i think they are way far from player concussions.
TheChocolateWar
Member
Because they give your economic choice self affirmation?
GlamFM
Banned
No, that´s what threads like this one are for.
Booker.DeWitt
Member
Of course reviews matter, because that is how a lot of public will buy the game. Even publishers use reviews and impressions on the cover of some games to attract attention.
Having said that, because reviews matter, that might be an extra motivation for the publishers and developers to not release a game with significant bugs or incomplete.
As gamers, we complain that a lot of games are being shipped without polishing, and some people even complain that they have to download day one patches. If a broken or incomplete game can have significant point deductions from the score, would not that be a good thing to make sure the developers are on the top of their game?
It is all about competition and free market, the reviewers want to release their analysis ASAP, if they don't get review copies earlier, they will rush through the game, and they can't really wait for patches that might come later. That is just my opinion
Having said that, because reviews matter, that might be an extra motivation for the publishers and developers to not release a game with significant bugs or incomplete.
As gamers, we complain that a lot of games are being shipped without polishing, and some people even complain that they have to download day one patches. If a broken or incomplete game can have significant point deductions from the score, would not that be a good thing to make sure the developers are on the top of their game?
It is all about competition and free market, the reviewers want to release their analysis ASAP, if they don't get review copies earlier, they will rush through the game, and they can't really wait for patches that might come later. That is just my opinion
comshoplesce
Member
I just remembered IGN SPAIN and IGN ITALY gave both 9,0
Hell, even Polygon gave it 8-8.5.
IGN USA?
https://www.polygon.com/2017/5/10/15615926/prey-review-ps4-xbox-one-pc-arkane-studios-bethesda
Hell, even Polygon gave it 8-8.5.
IGN USA?
https://www.polygon.com/2017/5/10/15615926/prey-review-ps4-xbox-one-pc-arkane-studios-bethesda
More_Badass
Member
If you have ever in your lifetime asked someone, be it friend or family or on GAF, what they thought of a movie/show/book/game/etc that you were interested in, then you understand why reviews are useful
GHG
Member
When polygon of all people are writing more thought out reviews than you it's time to rethink your position.
The technical issues section on the side of the review and then giving each platform a seperate score based on that is how it should be IMO.
JimmyRustler
Gold Member
German 4players gave it a 90%. That's one hell of a lot more than I expected. Think I'm gonna grab it.
grandwizard
Member
Tough reviews, jeez.
In a way it's the perfect result of it being a true System Shock 2 successor. Bad sales and underappreciated in it's time.
In a way it's the perfect result of it being a true System Shock 2 successor. Bad sales and underappreciated in it's time.
I've only experience two weird bugs where the game randomly gets rid of an item from my inventory and I only realize it is gone like 15 minutes later. First time was my fully upgraded stun gun, and I thought oh maybed I was dumb and recycled it, but later it was all of my med kits which I would never recycle or split, so yeah. That's on PS4.
Giving this game a 4/10 is beyond moronic. I haven't even completed it at the 25 hour mark so far and I already want a sequel it's been so damn good.
Right now my list of games in order of greatest to least great Ive played and completed this year:
Horizon
Persona 5
Nier
Resident Evil 7
I'm about 99% sure Prey will take over that Horizon spot depending on the ending. This game oozes atmosphere and does world building that only the souls franchise has been able to capitalize on. Quests are done quite intelligently and obstacles can be overcome in multiple ways. This game is a work of love, and the designers went well and beyond to make every piece of its world and how you interact in it be immersive and fun.
4/10? 4 out of 10? My God. Go throw that number at Skyrim and Fallout then if you are the high hero of bugs. Those games get a pass everytime for all the shit they have wrong with them, but Prey has one that is fixed almost immediately and nope, 4/10? Ridiculous.
Giving this game a 4/10 is beyond moronic. I haven't even completed it at the 25 hour mark so far and I already want a sequel it's been so damn good.
Right now my list of games in order of greatest to least great Ive played and completed this year:
Horizon
Persona 5
Nier
Resident Evil 7
I'm about 99% sure Prey will take over that Horizon spot depending on the ending. This game oozes atmosphere and does world building that only the souls franchise has been able to capitalize on. Quests are done quite intelligently and obstacles can be overcome in multiple ways. This game is a work of love, and the designers went well and beyond to make every piece of its world and how you interact in it be immersive and fun.
4/10? 4 out of 10? My God. Go throw that number at Skyrim and Fallout then if you are the high hero of bugs. Those games get a pass everytime for all the shit they have wrong with them, but Prey has one that is fixed almost immediately and nope, 4/10? Ridiculous.
captainnapalm
Member
Really surprised at the lukewarm reception, even setting aside the guy who basically rage reviewed it.
For me, this game is just so much better than 99% of the stuff out there. Unless the quality falls off a cliff or something at the end I don't know.
For me, this game is just so much better than 99% of the stuff out there. Unless the quality falls off a cliff or something at the end I don't know.
SunBroDave
Member
If anything it's the middle section that drags a little long. The game actually really picks up the pace at the end and finishes pretty strong.
captainnapalm
Member
Good to hear.
And I know Prey is a little derivative, but at least its borrowing from great games.
Glass Shark
Banned
z
GHG
Member
I did read it and they said the console reviews are in progress. But by all accounts the console versions are worse than the PC version. In this case it would have made sense for them to wait until all verdicts are in for the different versions and then sit down and discuss it. But no, the PC review in his own words needed to be "rushed out of the door" to get as many clicks as possible.
So now that they have backed themselves into a corner what now? Give the console versions 3/10? 2/10?
The implications (even on themselves) of giving it such a shitty score were clearly not thought through. Nice.
LegitMcfalls
Member
I said it earlier! Dan Stapleton and IGN are probably the most butthurt over the bethesda review policy and now they give an extraordinary low score to a solid game and blame it on game breaking bugs and other small gripes. I just cant believe the lack of review ethics here.
Lol that crossed my mind too. Although surely it's because the bug only happened late in the game, at which point it broke the experience? So the 4 points were from pre-bug?
ISee
Member
The xbox one version should get the highest score, going by that logic.
We aren't aware of any save corrupting bugs there and input lag is also better than on ps4. But it is running at 'just' 900p, loading times are long and there are some issues when installing it on an external hard drive.
--> IGN verdict: 6/10. It's playable if someone holds a gun to your head.
/s
You mention while the bug sucked, it doesn't appear to be a common one. Then, when it gets fixed, you mention that in your review. If you're going to not recommend a game because solely of a bug, and that bug gets fixed that same day, you should probably update that review.
I don't think that's an entirely fair comparison. A car is a several thousand dollar investment (or tens of thousands of dollars, depending). If it breaks at 30 hours I'd fucking be furious. But a game is not several thousand dollars, nor do I need to take out a loan to get one.
I mostly agree. For instance, I agree that I hate the God Hand/Party Babyz comparison image, and it annoys me when it comes up. Some other posters are overly salty, but it's best to ignore them, or report them to a mod if you think their behavior crosses a line. There's still tons of good discussions to be had in a review thread, as you said. Just ignore anyone overly salty or argumentative for the sake of it.
If it's "pretty clear," can you explain it to me? Can you walk me through what specifically you think is going on, here? You think it's revenge for not sending our review copies early?
Do you think Dan made up or fabricated the completely game-breaking bug? Or do you believe he did indeed experience it?
If he experienced it, which caused his game to be unplayable, should he still give it a positive score? If he communicates with Bethesda/Arkane and for multiple days they ask for more time, and say a fix is incoming, how long should Dan wait? At what point does he have a responsibility to tell our audience about the bad experience he had? Isn't every day he waited doing a disservice to anyone that picks up the game then has their late-game save eaten?
Dan runs IGN's reviews. He personally oversees ALL of them - from assignments to copy editing, etc. No early review copies makes his job harder and is openly hostile to gamers. And yet Dishonored 2, the next game impacted by this policy, got a 9.3. That went through Dan's desk. And it published on the site because it's an amazing game. Prey, on the other hand, Dan had a very bad time with in the end. Which (I imagine) likely made Dan very sad, since I know he was really digging the game early on. So it got a bad score.
So please - indulge me. If it's clear what's going on, walk me through it.
SunBroDave
Member
Yep. And they're not corrupted, they work just fine now.
Yo Justin, I don't think anyone thinks that Dan didn't run into the bug, just that the bug:
- was rare to begin with, I certainly didn't run into it
- has been patched already
- didn't "break" his game. It prevented him from progressing, sure, but unlike real game-breaking bugs, his save isn't borked. After the patch, all of those saves can be loaded just fine.
Those things considered, people just think it's harsh that he chose to give Prey such a bad score, especially given that he seemed to really like it otherwise.
Rexatality
Member
Yes, it fixes the corrupted saves among other stuff (Nightmare no longer standing around, infinite fabrication materials exploit removed, etc...)
Dsyndrome
Member
Longer than he did, the Patch is in Beta and fixes the issue, went up the same day the review went up. The game's been out less than a week.
GHG
Member
It's pretty simply really. Your guy said it himself, so I will quote it again:
http://me.ign.com/en/ps4/125928/news/a-response-to-bethesdas-review-copies-policy
He got hit with a technical roadblock, became resentful about it and lashed out with a 4/10. So like I said in the post you quoted, why don't you ask him if he's resentful towards the fact that he didn't get an early review copy, and then got hit with a roadblock while "racing to get a review up while its still relevant on Google and YouTube". The game itself is supposed to be reviewed and not take into account politics surrounding the environment that you find youself having to review the game in.
If you encounter a bug while reviewing a game it is your duty as professionals to figure out how widespread the bug is before deciding how much weight you're going to give to it. While this bug is game ending, it doesn't appear to be widespread judging by impressions here, on steam and from other reviews of the PC version of game. Further to that, a patch addressing the very issue was released on the day the review went live. But yet that isn't event taken into account nor is it even touched on in the review. In its current state, the review is misleading.
And for what it's worth, no, I'm not accusing him of making the save bug up. So please, save the evidence, I never suggested as such.
But hey, he wanted to raise a giant red flag. I'd say it was quite successful to be honest, many people will find it difficult to take his reviews and your website seriously anymore. I hope you guys like Internet firefighting.
cleveridea
Member
Ouch at the 4/10 from IGN though can understand given that reviewers experience of wasting so many hours. I just started the game on PC so...I hope any patches can work with current progress.
Bloodporne
Member
GwyndolinCinder
Member
It's funny cause when people call him out on shit his first defence is always "Dont question my integrity as a journalist ".
But I'm just gonna casually raise a " Red Flag" for attention.
But I'm just gonna casually raise a " Red Flag" for attention.
SunBroDave
Member
Lol. What a joke.
SlasherJPC
Banned
Absolutely... and why not just hold the review for a bit or start over if its not some mad dash race to the finish to get published and out asap. Just a lot of huh? feelings. I mean if IGN wants to run things this way, fair to them but this type of behavior enforces the reasoning why Bethesda doesnt want to give review copies to some outlets or early. Outlets are becoming just as desperate to get content out as YouTube content creators.
Considering the rushed state of the hotfix as it is it's patently ridiculous to pretend Arkane and Bethesda hadn't told the two effected reviewers that a patch to fix the issue was imminent and not to worry. The fact that he still rushed the review out to beat the patch out the door so he could hold onto his moral high ground on trashing the game says just about all that needs to be said on the matter, really.
Probably more logical to buy it based on positive impressions from a source or forum that you've found reliable in the past. The problem with the way the IGN review is presented is that maybe his god's honest opinion would place it at a 7.5, but nobody gets to know because a bug most people are not experiencing informed the entire outcome.
But this kinda gets back to Bethesda. Without a big outlet rushing to get a review up (gonna take a wild guess reviews generate fewer clicks the further you get from release), they could have perhaps provided a PSN or XBL download code. That way readers could get a review that is at least slightly relevant to them, and IGN can post a disclaimer advising people to wait for patches on PC. As it stands, a 4.0 and the score it could have gotten, even if perceived to be average at best, is a chasm that says nothing other than one guy having one specific problem with computer.
The reason I switched years ago to watching video footage rather than written reviews is that on a 100 point scale, 59% of the scores are completely meaningless and have no real distinction. A 2.7 to a 4.5 doesn't matter with a $60 game - only a franchise die hard or importer is paying full price for that anyway. At least on a five point scale, somebody can convey what they feel is the difference in quality between For Honor and Breath of the Wild, without having 3/5 of the review scale being completely useless.
The other issue is, I doubt IGN believes it could get the same amount of traffic without a numerical score. If you just take the text of that review, and the comments about technical difficulties, nobody is talking about it. Bethesda created a situation where hot takes became final declarations, and left themselves no room to work with the outlet on remedying the situation. Arkane gets stuck in the middle, suffering from bad decision making on all sides.
That said, I'm not sure the metacritic average being ten points higher changes the game's fate. This is the third game since August of its type to seemingly not set the sales charts on fire. Publishers have created very high expectations for what $60 gets you in a single player game, with the general implication being the full scope of content is not on the shipped disc, and you're looking at a $80 - $90 purchase if you keep up with DLC. Skyrim, Fallout, Grand Theft Auto, etc. are very obvious about their product scope and where the replay value is. I do not think that is the case for these sorts of games. Nothing has really been conveyed by Bethesda or the scant "YouTube Influencer" (dry heave) coverage about how or why somebody could pour 40+ hours into the game from multiple playthroughs. If people on here hardly realized the game was coming out, the average customer probably knows jack shit about it.
If rare bugs are enough to tank his reviews he has no more credibility than the average user review.
enigmatikone
Member
If Stapleton expects to be taken seriously as a journalist, perhaps he should report the story instead of becoming part of it.
LegitMcfalls
Member
If telltale games score higher then a 4/10 i dont know how Prey got so low. I really feel for Arkane. Prey is great and if it wasn't for Zelda Horizon and Persona coming out earlier in the year, prey would be getting serious GOTY talk. 4/10 is a amazon user review not legitimate game publication level.
Journalist have been rampant with that type of shit here and there. IGN needs to clean this type of shit if they want to continue to think they aren't at Twinfinite standard.