It says 20 hours in the second quote in the OP.
-
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
It says 20 hours in the second quote in the OP.
Which is what I did anyways, except I honestly can't tell you the last time I actually took the time to read a review from the gaming press.
I'm here mostly because I'm genuinely interested in the press vs community reactions to games. I honestly don't think I've posted in a single review thread other than this and DOOM 4, for that reason. I simply just don't care about reviews other than their impact on development (eg New Vegas). While I fully understand Bethesda's policy is entirely self serving, I don't know if it really even matters given the quality of reviews the press usually puts out + the growing navigation away from the gaming press and towards YTs and streaming in general.
Also, your edited in movie analogy is flawed because cinema has had a long tradition of actual, thought provoking critique of their medium and is one that genuinely evolved to that point alongside the medium over multiple generations. Can you seriously say the same about the gaming press? I know I sure as shit can't.
Like anything. "the press" is not a nebulous entity, and there are outlets that push out admirable content when it comes to reviews.
But seeing as you don't care, at all, maybe stop advocating for anti-consumer policies for all the people who do, in fact, care? I mean stands to reason they have more to gain. Since they care. And you can just read the reviews at your leisure to compare what you agree and dont agree with. Everyone wins.
I don't see how this review policy is anti-consumer. It's more shooting themselves in the foot than anything that hurts the consumer. After all, consumers can just wait another day for reviews to come out before making a decision. No skin off their back.
It's a baffling policy to be sure.
It's a baffling policy to be sure.
Seems like it's doing well, but I am not about to reward Bethesda's bad review policies.
I'll probably wait for a sale, which might happen sooner rather than later judging by Dishonored 2.
The idea is definitely to keep reviews away from the eyes of the consumer for as long as possible. How is that not a clear move against consumers?
I'll probably wait for a sale, which might happen sooner rather than later judging by Dishonored 2.
The idea is definitely to keep reviews away from the eyes of the consumer for as long as possible. How is that not a clear move against consumers?
I'm not actually advocating anything, not once did I say I wish other publishers and developers would follow the same path. Hell, I even agreed with you that Bethesda is doing this entirely for self serving corporate bullshit reasons!
I'm just interested in the experiment and the results it produces. It's fascinating, given that games are legitimately the first medium to mature with the press and the community on essentially equal standing other than artificial barriers due to the internet streamlining dilivery in a way that otherwise wasn't possible for other mediums.
Freeman76
Member
You go girl!!
(Im sure the $20 or so they would get from you wont be missed, so you are only hurting yourself with this ridiculous stance)
Because many people anticipate games and pre-order, and often many cancel said pre-orders if a game bombs in reviews. Without pre-release reviews, these same people would keep their pre-orders, pick up the game, play it and find out it sucks and that they wasted 60 bucks.
Which is actually a lot of money!
Icedburden
Member
The answer is incredibly simple: don't preorder.
Inkvoterad
Member
This is some impressive mental gymnastics
Real_Madrid
Member
It's like people are forced to buy a game at 60 dollar without knowing if it's good. Pre-ordering games without knowing if it's any good, is rather stupid and if people want to be stupid, that's their choice.
The answer is more simple: Stop being anti-consumer and release your damn games for review.
Yes, I agree I'm a consumer that rarely pre-orders anymore. YET, I like that the choice is there, and that overwhelming negative consensus before release can save my money in the event I decide to go that route.
That's inherently what being anti-consumer is about: reducing the number of "reasonable" choices a consumer can make for your product. Instead of just being able to pre-order a game from Amazon and letting it arrive on your doorstep on day one comfortable that it turned out alright, in these instances you have to wait - when some people enjoy that day 1 discussion - or just let the game arrive and hope for the best with a very real risk of wasting your money.
There is no reason to favor the corporate in this instance, and every reason to just do the right fucking thing and release your games for review early.
Okay, this makes sense. I didn't think of pre-orders.
On the buyouts, consider Arkane had three canceled AAA games in a row pre-Bethesda buyout and all they finished during that time was some Bioshock 2 and COD outsourced multiplayer work. Now Arkane has released two new IPs and three critically acclaimed games in five years.
But back on track, glad the game is getting great reviews. Technical issues on PC were the only worry I had, and they've passed that metric with flying colors. Otherwise, it's a new Arkane studio led by one of the co-directors to Dishonored. It was going to be sound from mechanical and world design standpoints.
Icedburden
Member
I'll never understand why people can't wait two extra days to judge/plan a purchase for a game they've already waited 2-5 years for. By then critics and other people who could no wait have played and reviewed the product, making your choice even easier.
Anti-consumer would be releasing the game in a barb-wire package that slices your fingers open. The launch day embargo is just annoying to people who crave validation for laying $60 down blindly.
it's the same for all games, if you're reading UC4/Zelda BOTW, they're the best games of all times but are really overrated in almost everything, the real critic that matter is yours but the general rating gives an idea of the quality general of the game.
More like a case of some gamers jumping to conclusions despite having only played a (tiny, compared to the size of the game) demo that isn't even remotely as bad as they'd want to make it look like (except for input lag, which is being fixed for the final release anyway). But then again, what's new here?
And by the way, reviewers are gamers.
Whilst I don't feel that strongly about something like review embargos.. I can see the problem when they're combined with the current pre-order culture.
It's pretty easy to say "then don't pre-order, duh!"... but then publishers often find ways to seemingly punish you for not pre-ordering, via pre-order exclusive bonus, etc. Even then though, I'd argue it's the pre-order incentivising that's the problem, rather than the reviews. Making the game available early for reviews is a courtesy that's just become an expected standard... I don't think it's something that's necessarily required tbh.
Because they are excited and don't want to wait any longer, and because some people want to be able to discuss the game with their friends online and offline while they are playing it too. And because nowadays they tie that dumb as shit exclusive content for pre-orders.
There is literally zero reason to defend the corporation on this. Like, genuinely: you have given zero reasons. Because there are none. Instead of just saying "you know what yeah these publishers/developers can just make sure their games are available for pre-release reviews, it'd save headaches for some consumers", you're just going on a tangent about how you don't understand why they can't do this or that.
But you don't need to understand it to still understand there is no damn reason for a developer/publisher to withhold their games for review that passes for acceptable.
Well, one minor caveat... online only games that require a player base to really explore the mechanics. In those cases, it's understandable.
Releasing a game with barb wire would ALSO be anti-consumer, but it is not the only way to be so.
Annoying your consumers when you don't have to is also anti-consumer. There are a million ways to be anti-consumer, from small annoyances like this up to the big deals like releasing Assassin's Creed in a buggy, unfinished state and then being forced to give away games for free to apologize.
bigace33
Member
😾Bruh
King Gilga
Member
How is he hurting himself, he's benefiting by saving money.
MistaBowaa
Member
"Don't care how, I want it now!"
I don't think their stance on review copies is defendable, but it's also not so egregious a policy that it's something worth getting overly heated about. I think that's why the "barbed-wire" comment was used.
I don't think their stance on review copies is defendable, but it's also not so egregious a policy that it's something worth getting overly heated about. I think that's why the "barbed-wire" comment was used.
Magic Mushroom
Member
Breath of the Wild is overrated now? What the hell? That game is friggin' masterpiece.
Eh, likely in all honesty.
I know my want for a consumer driven games critique industry is almost randian in its absurdity given the historical precedence, but that's why personally I'm not out in other threads proclaiming the Grand Truths of this path. I'm mostly watching Bethesda's recent games' reviews outcome consumer vs press out of intellectual curiosity more than anything.
FonkyByNature
Member
So far so good. I will for sure get this game in about 2 months, that is when i finish Zelda and Horizon.
I was expecting bad reviews but this is great to see.
I was expecting bad reviews but this is great to see.
I dont really see the point in stopping review copies for single player games unless the game is gonna be jank, especially when Bethesda is involved. This is an example of a game where review copies owuld have likely shifted an extra few copies because it seems to be reasonably well received. There is something special about getting a game day one which is intangible but still there and folks that order based on reviews could end up just waiting for it to go on sale as we have seen in this thread.
Time is a flat circle, most games get sent to the boo box after a little while here on GAF.
Phoenix RISING
Banned
So then Bethesda are when they say no review copies?
In your opinion, sure.
phantomspiker
Member
Arkane delivers yet again.
Holy shit. With sentences like this, it's easy to forget we're talking about video games.
Anyways, outside of hobbyist groups like GAF, one must remember that not everyone has the time (or desire) to watch streams, extended gameplay footage, etc in order to make a purchasing decision. It's just... not really an appropriate thing to expect of an average consumer. Nor is it what I think Bethesda is really doing here.
Call me cynical, but it's far more likely that their new practice is meant to take advantage of the fact that games, like movies, tend to perform better the closer they are to their respective release windows. And by removing the possibility of bad reviews across the board (for games both good and bad), that sales uptick can be protected and even re-enforced - especially for games with quality issues.
Unfortunately, Prey seems aces and Arkane is dope, so I'll likely be picking this up and further justifying their shady business practices.
Phoenix RISING
Banned
Dev post said between 16 and 24 hours with one member of the team taking 34. The way I'm going it's probably going to be twice that
I'm nosy and they like their email gossip.
How is nobody doing the math here? How do you already have a review for a game that nobody was supposed to get reviewed codes for,a game that is a minimum of 16 hours?
This is what they mean by ethics of video game journalism
Early retail copies I assume. Either some shop putting it out early or knowing a guy at a retailer who will hook you up.
That sentence was obviously sarcasm. I mean the entire point of the capitalization is plain, unless you spend way too much time with the far right or something >.>
It is on the shelves here for 2 or 3 days now so I guess it is not impossible for reviewers to get it even earlier if they have a good connection to their local stores.
xeroborn55
Member
I love sci-fi and what arkane does but I'm most excited to play Prey for the Mick Gordon soundtrack. I'm sort of at the point where I'll play a game just because he worked on it.
I actually agree with the sentiment above regarding Doom and how Bethesda's review policy might have benefited the game. There was something different about that game's launch. Everyone loaded it up at the same time and was (more or less) collectively blown away. That would not have happened if their were pre-release reviews.
I actually agree with the sentiment above regarding Doom and how Bethesda's review policy might have benefited the game. There was something different about that game's launch. Everyone loaded it up at the same time and was (more or less) collectively blown away. That would not have happened if their were pre-release reviews.
Bloodporne
Member
I had never checked out one of your reviews before and damn...really great job on that in every aspect. If I hadn't already been sold on the game, this would've done it.
Icedburden
Member
That's the consumers fault they are impatient though. I don't care for the policy either, because a good game is a good game and letting reviewers wait is a bit silly in the grand scheme. However, our instant-gratification consumer perspective is silly as well. Two days post-launch is nothing.
People are acting like Bethesda is shoving PTW mechanics inside the game.
No one is forcing to preorder and pick up on launch day. If the consumers can't wait, then why should Bethesda change their policy? Not you, but people are blaming the company like there is a gun to their head telling them to pick it up NOW OR ELSE.
Because there's no reviews copies I assume there is no NDA's or review release pipeline so if someone gets a copy early, which is pretty easy from a variety of mom and pop stores, they can play the game and release the review as normal. There is nothing dodgy going on here that breaches the sacred ethics of video game journalism. If anything Bethesda are being the dubious ones here.
It seemed like demo impressions turned around after the initial day or two with the complaints about input lag and weird music issues. The OT seems to be glowing so far, which I agree with. The game is great so far.
ResidentWeevil13
Member
A more stealth-styled immersive sim like Dishonored is more my style, but I gotta say I'm intrigued.
Is it too soon to crown Arkane the immersive sim masters?
Is it too soon to crown Arkane the immersive sim masters?
Similar threads
- Locked