Reviewers kept forgiving their games for their brokenness previously though. That is slowly, but surely coming to end.
-
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.
Skyrim SE and Dishonored 2 review copies will ship one day before release.
- Thread starter Gamezone
- Start date
Reviewers kept forgiving their games for their brokenness previously though. That is slowly, but surely coming to end.
BobTheFork
Member
At the same time, don't streams show off game flaws much more clearly?
I reviewer might mention some problems but if your game is looking busted live on camera, it feels much worse.
Eyeshield1625
Member
Wouldn't it be easier to give out review copies to guys like ign, but make them sign a embargo saying they can't upload any video of the game until the release date?
Petrae
Member
They can, sure. It usually has to be pretty obvious, though, and most streamers aren't going to nitpick about framerate or other visual issues.
Publishers most likely are aware that games on video need to perform well (since they're the highlight of the show).
They don't want release date reviews up, it kinda seems like Bethesda doesn't even want to risk it anymore. That's why DOOM didn't go out early even though it ended up being critically well received.
Confused Cheeseburger
Member
Aside from last guardian, dishonored 2 is the game I'm most excited for but this is gross. Gross enough for me to lean toward canceling my preorder. This is some doublespeak shit. They're sending late copies and telling people they can wait for reviews if they want, but they're already peacocking with E3 awards and likely giving streamers early access (a la skyrim SE).
They've had release day embargoes for review outlets for many years, well before Doom (or even the original Skyrim release for that matter). This is just more moving away from these particular media outlets. I really don't think they consider traditional games media to have much tangible value to their products anymore.
To be fair, DOOM ended up being excellent.
Anyway, the only Skyrim SE impressions I care about will come from Digital Foundry
Doom is the exception to the rule. Most games that avoid reviews before release are shit. Skyrim ps3 in particular.
CrichtonKicks
Member
Very possible but it's also possible that Bethesda felt like consumers may like the game more than reviewers and saw this as a way to control the narrative. Mediocre reviews can dominate discussion of a game in the days leading to release because there is no counterpoint. With the case of DOOM the initial word of mouth started out positive pretty much the moment it released and continued to build from there. By the time the first reviews were hitting a day or 2 later there was enough positive word of mouth that reviews wouldn't have mattered anyway.
If you look at something like Wolfenstein TNO the word of mouth was tremendous and it's frequently pegged now as one of the best FPS games of the generation. It's Metacritic of 81 is nothing to sneeze at but that's lower than you would think if you just went off of word of mouth. Dying Light is another similar game- great WOM but meta is only in the mid '70s.
The press didn't usually get PS3 copies of games in advance last gen. The lack of PS3 copies of Skyrim was not unusual. The situation would only have been comparable if Bethesda sent out no review copies of Skyrim.
Aztechnology
Member
Yup and highly critical coverage tends to not get as much viewership. GAF is a prime example of that phenomenon. People constantly complain about critical discussion "why can't you just leave the people who enjoy games alone." three weeks later "yup X game is shit. It got boring so quick." or I totally see the flaw now etc.
On release even GAF generally doesn't want any negative coverage of whatever game they are hyped for. People on YouTube are the same about big release titles. They want the game, they want to see positive footage and then enjoy the game.
Not being overly critical and being a hype engine is usually a net positive for the YouTuber and the Pub/Dev.
Not saying their aren't very critical youtubers who are successful (There's certainly a large niche) . But the biggest gaming youtubers really don't do a lot of serious critical work. The audience just isn't there for it.
I wasn't going to preorder Dishonored 2 anyway. I loved the first one and obviously the sequel is on my radar, but I can hold off. Skyrim has no interest for me at all. User reviews are really all I care about anyway, and I'll have plenty of time to digest those before I decide what to do with Dishonored.
orthodoxy1095
Banned
Not quite.
I spent about two hours watching Angry Joe playing Mafia 3 and I was just beginning to get a feel of what the game was (and that I didn't think I would like it). Most people don't have time to do something like that. The advantage of a real review is that it can cut through say a 20-40 game and show you highlights, the good, the bad, the ugly, the beautiful and the average in less than say 10 minutes. If you watch an hour of a YouTube stream, it might look great, but you might miss out on hour two where the game starts glitching to hell and back or hour ten when the game starts crashing constantly.
I'll take reviews over streams any day. Streams best serve as a supplement to the review process.
If I waited for reviews on Mafia 3, I would have probably skipped it. But the thing is, I have enjoyed it quite a lot. I pre-ordered and I don't regret it. I can never know if I like a game before I try it myself. I have bought games that got decent reviews and really high praise here on Gaf and was disappointed. So what's the solution, there are usually no demos.
Zombie James
Banned
Jeff Gerstmann's response on Twitter was really disappointing to me. It was along the lines of "we can't be political about this." Sticking your head in the sand on this issue does a total disservice to your readership.
Edit:
https://twitter.com/jeffgerstmann/status/791028294648868865
I have bought way more broken crap bearing big (licensed) names back in the day than during the last two generations to be honest. At least there is the internet to warn me these days, companies have always looked for ways to squeeze out extra money or reduce risks over the back of the consumers.
That said, I simply don't buy games where I don't know what to expect in terms of quality. I don't like this at all.
I've said my piece elsewhere about this, but overall I feel this is a good thing. Bear with me.
1. Publishers and critics are always on a rocky relationship, it's the nature of the beast.
2. Publishers giving some critics early copies is seedy at best, collusive at worst.
3. "Sponsored" coverage is becoming increasingly hard to identify.
4. Consumers need to learn to take things with a grain of salt, stop pre-ordering games, and stop rushing to judge games based on day one reviews.
With that all being said, I think this will be a hard pill to swallow...at first. However, I think this is a step in the right direction, as consumers will begin to understand that publishers do not and never have had their best interest in mind, and stop pre-ordering games. Review sites that publish reviews swiftly and on day one will eventually be weeded out by higher quality reviews, and consumers will learn to be more inquisitive and less trusting. Overall, it will be painful at first, but good in the long run. It's like a band-aid that needs to get ripped off.
The whole relationship between publishers and critics is already confusing and poorly segregated, with "demo days" and embargoes and the promise of free swag and benefits for reviewing well. Hell, Jim Sterling just revealed today that some publishers refuse to give him games early. And what does he say? Fine, be that way. He knows people don't read him because he's the "first", but because he's good. This whole "see the WORLD PREMIERE review here" is just a toxic, marketing mess. Bethesda is going Pontius Pilate with this, saying to hell with it, and letting consumers figure it out, as they should. I know it seems shady, but to me, it's them distancing themselves from critics.
For the best, I say. Consumers learn to be less trusting and find critics that are more reliable, and publishers and developers make games. Pubs have never ever, ever, had our best interest in mind. With this move, they are at least being honest about it. "Figure it out for yourselves." For that, I hand it to them.
1. Publishers and critics are always on a rocky relationship, it's the nature of the beast.
2. Publishers giving some critics early copies is seedy at best, collusive at worst.
3. "Sponsored" coverage is becoming increasingly hard to identify.
4. Consumers need to learn to take things with a grain of salt, stop pre-ordering games, and stop rushing to judge games based on day one reviews.
With that all being said, I think this will be a hard pill to swallow...at first. However, I think this is a step in the right direction, as consumers will begin to understand that publishers do not and never have had their best interest in mind, and stop pre-ordering games. Review sites that publish reviews swiftly and on day one will eventually be weeded out by higher quality reviews, and consumers will learn to be more inquisitive and less trusting. Overall, it will be painful at first, but good in the long run. It's like a band-aid that needs to get ripped off.
The whole relationship between publishers and critics is already confusing and poorly segregated, with "demo days" and embargoes and the promise of free swag and benefits for reviewing well. Hell, Jim Sterling just revealed today that some publishers refuse to give him games early. And what does he say? Fine, be that way. He knows people don't read him because he's the "first", but because he's good. This whole "see the WORLD PREMIERE review here" is just a toxic, marketing mess. Bethesda is going Pontius Pilate with this, saying to hell with it, and letting consumers figure it out, as they should. I know it seems shady, but to me, it's them distancing themselves from critics.
For the best, I say. Consumers learn to be less trusting and find critics that are more reliable, and publishers and developers make games. Pubs have never ever, ever, had our best interest in mind. With this move, they are at least being honest about it. "Figure it out for yourselves." For that, I hand it to them.
I haven't seen much on this game other than PlayStation Access stuff this past week and they didn't pass any load screens
I don't care about mods or 60FPS. I don't moan about dips in framerate unless it grinds to a near stop like Fallout 3. Once it doesn't freeze the console I am happy enough with Bethesda games.
TheFurizzlyBear
Member
Why is it always "Don't preorder." When it should be "Don't pre-order digitally." You can always return an unopened physical game to whatever store you bought it from or just decide to cancel it before ever picking it up.
Unless it's a special edition that's gonna run out of stock, I haven't seen many games that require a pre-order.
I guess I'm so used to waiting on games at this point. Wait for reviews. Wait for feedback. Wait for patches. Wait for DLC to be released. Wait for GOTY editions for a fraction of the price.
I pay less for more content that plays better than anything people pay and play on day 1.
It's a good habit to get into.
Indeed. Also, it seems like YouTubers already have access to Skyrim Special Edition way before release...Looks like this is just for the press.
CyberPunked
Member
You can return Steam games within 2 hours of play time. Free 2 hour demo for every game
texhnolyze
Banned
Wrong. You can always cancel/refund your digital pre-order.
Golden_Pigeon
Banned
Golden_Pigeon
Banned
On PSN it's a little more tricky. Last time i tried they told me that it would be a "one-time thing" since "all sales are final". I felt like a grateful peasant before getting my mind straight against this obvious scam. I also have read on reddit that some people didn't manage to get their pre-order canceled.
Forsaken82
Member
Anyone who grew up with Doom didn't buy it for Multiplayer. Having it (and snapmap) included was simply a bonus.
I can understand the spirit of them holding the review copies, but when they insult my intelligence with things like this:
And there are tweets from Bethesda's Twitter account promoting streams of the game THREE DAYS before release. I kind of want to refuse to patronize them out of principle.
This is actual lying.
And there are tweets from Bethesda's Twitter account promoting streams of the game THREE DAYS before release. I kind of want to refuse to patronize them out of principle.
This is actual lying.
Grim Patron
Member
The problem with this approach is lots of stores in certain regions have been selling the game for a few days. The negatives will be highlighted sooner than later before release.
Doom is defo the exception to the rule.
Doom is defo the exception to the rule.
GillianSeed79
Member
Ummm....Bethesda already gave out early Sky rim SE copies to YouTube shills/streamers so I call epic bullllshiiiit on their explanation
Grim Patron
Member
Do a search on instagram with the skyrim or skyrimspecialedition hashtags and see how many consumers already have it through early copies being sold.
My policy: if I'm interested in the game AND it is a Best Buy $10 certificate game then I preorder.
I have never actually got less back in a tradein + the $10 cert when trading a game in 1 week or less after release. Typically, I end up a few dollars in credit ahead of what I spent.
Otherwise, I always wait for reviews.
I have never actually got less back in a tradein + the $10 cert when trading a game in 1 week or less after release. Typically, I end up a few dollars in credit ahead of what I spent.
Otherwise, I always wait for reviews.
I didn't really think of that but it's true I've seen a bunch of youtubers do videos of Watch Dogs 2 and other unreleased games. I wonder if publishers will eventually focus on them and ignore traditional websites.
OriginalJonty
Member
As a reviewer for a traditional site it feels that way. While we were waiting for Mafia 3 copies YouTubers were getting copies of the game, the soundtrack and record players days in advance. Publishers care about hype and high sales. They see reviews as obstacles that could hurt those figures.
Demoskinos
Member
You can't on PSN in North America. Money is taken right away and unless there is some instance like with South Park where the bumped the game to next year there are never any refunds.
newtypepilot
Member
the same publisher that rolled out paid mods. I saw the Jimquisition video and it's spot on.
I now have no expectations for Dishonored 2, even though I enjoyed playing the first game.
Sadly, these kind of things will only get worse because people keep buying into the bullshit by preodering games and/or defending microtransactions in non f2p games.
I now have no expectations for Dishonored 2, even though I enjoyed playing the first game.
Sadly, these kind of things will only get worse because people keep buying into the bullshit by preodering games and/or defending microtransactions in non f2p games.
I Stalk Alone
Member
Most people are not that critical of the games they will play. Critics ruin the fun for everyone because they are too nitpicky to begin with and opinionated to boot. As a critic this is great but you only really cater to other critics, that is the not so great part. Its like being a wine expert, their sensitivity to taste and their descriptions only cater to other wine connoisseurs not the general wine drinker. Same thing for games, while most games will be good enough for 95% of the population, there are those 5% in the interval who are critics positive and negative.
Needing approval from a critic will ruin most peoples experience of the game especially if they are not afficionados of the genre. Appealling to authority is not the smartest thing to do at all times especially if the authority does not cater to the general experience of the rest of the population
Yes you will get bad games and when it comes out people will discuss about it in social media. I hope the critics realise they are not that important but inportant enough however in the end their opinions are just opinions just like anothers and the decision for companies to pick the most profitable reviews that are likely to come out may seem unfair but if i was a game maker it would be the smart thing to do.
Needing approval from a critic will ruin most peoples experience of the game especially if they are not afficionados of the genre. Appealling to authority is not the smartest thing to do at all times especially if the authority does not cater to the general experience of the rest of the population
Yes you will get bad games and when it comes out people will discuss about it in social media. I hope the critics realise they are not that important but inportant enough however in the end their opinions are just opinions just like anothers and the decision for companies to pick the most profitable reviews that are likely to come out may seem unfair but if i was a game maker it would be the smart thing to do.
Karak
Member
Was that legit copies from PR though?. All 15 of the streamers I was in contact with prior to its release used(most of the big twitch folks) used the same retail source as there are retail source posts you can find and utilize.
This was post the website based visits. So technically their previews came after most web-based got to visit if invited. In regards to WD2.
All that being said from what I have heard from 1 ex PR rep but backed up by 2 current ones to a bit of a lesser degree.
Twitch is the end game(less so youtube simply due to streaming share). Because even bad games can sell well if a twitch broad-castor is sold on how to present it and have fun. We see many B movie style games getting very popular like that(the goofy simulators and such). But the idea was, prior to their leaving, to get people to use twitch and its short snippits as launch pads for talking regardless of game quality. Make folks feel like they are missing something if they aren't playing the title as soon as they can get it, even if its just being a part of the discussion. Twitch folks were categorized in a very calculated way for things like energy regardless of activity, and sell-ability.
I am sure not all PR companies are doing that but they can't be the first that have tried to sell their slapchop by using interesting salesman versus a good product
The Praiseworthy
Member
Well.. I have a blind fait in Dishonored 2 won't even care for the reviews.
I don't have sliver of respect for Bethesda, but wow this is truly a new low for them.
Dismissing score review from the press while using praise and award from those said press to promote your pre-released game? What the shit.
and people asked how modern games feels so similar to each other or plainly ridden with technical mess
i like it that, when people dismiss a long written, thoughtful critic...I'm sorry, opinion, is just the same thing as a one liner "this game sucks"
IbukiLordSA
Member
Perfectly acceptable in my mind, reviewers should be happy they even getting a game. Seems like a far better decision to go after youtubers and streamers, I would much rather see someone playing a game and hearing their thoughts while making up my own through their experience than reading a review done by someone who may or may not even like the genre.
i can't even remember the last time i read a review, i don't think i have for any game this gen...i like to just buy a game i like the look of due to promotional material and footage, form my own opinion when it arrives. and on the unlikely chance it ends up being completely shit/broken...well, that's exactly what ebay is for.
i don't lose out at all as a consumer. but i can see why review sites have issues with this, a review that appears late doesn't work as well at creating traffic to their sites. meh
Darkstorne
Member
Seriously? They specifically selected Youtubers who are huge fans of their games. One of them previewed Skyrim by genuinely saying the game's forests were more immersive than real life forests.
It's not hard to see how this benefits both parties. Youtubers make money from ads. Youtubers know that by praising Bethesda as gods among men and pretending their games are the pinnacle of brilliance they'll stand a chance of getting exclusive early access copies of their new games to stream for more revenue. Gamers will HAVE to watch these videos if they want impressions of the games before launch, since professional critics and journalists are essentially all blacklisted now in favour of Youtube shills.