Support NeoGAF

[tsumake]

Days Gone Actor Complains That Journalists Don't Finish Games | Den of Geek

Days Gone voice actor Sam Witwer says that some of the game's negative reviews can be blamed on reviewers who didn't properly experience it.

www.denofgeek.com

While I haven't put in any time in Days Gone, I think the argument Witwer made is worth talking about. Not all games have a finite narrative and reviews have a finite amount of time to reach an opinion. That said, how much time should a reviewer invest into a game before forming an opinion? Should finishing a game's story be mandatory for a review?

 

[Fake]

What the surprise? They do this all the bloody time and still got paid.

 

[kretos]

"I read a review today from a website/publication that will remain nameless. In it, the horde mechanic, the show-stopping center piece of the game, it wasn't mentioned once. Not ONCE. There were other tells, but it was pretty clear that this reviewer played the game for several hours and then wrote his review. He did not complete it."

hordes is very intense and the best thing about this game, you telling me a clown reviewed the game and gave a score without even reaching the first horde? there should be a way to verify that reviewer actually finished the game like linking their profile to the publisher or something

damn gaming journalism must be the best and easiest job right now any clown can do it and get paid for it

 

[StreetsofBeige]

Reviews not coming close to completing games before review? I agree that's not right. Although you can still get a good grasp of the game when you played a lot of it. You dont need to complete every one of the 300 quests and 100s of caves and towns in Skyrim to review it.

As for the Days Gone guy saying it sucks people post reviews which show they didn't play the game a lot. Fair point.

But also a fair point that DG got grilled for being slow and overly long. All while every preview vid Sony showed were giant horde battles making DG look like a fast paced zombie action game. Which it's actually not. And where's all the preview videos showing Deacon rummaging for motorcyle parts and gas? Never saw it.

So if reviewers arent genuine due to half baked reviews, so is Sony for half baked marketing. Tit for tat.

"Days Gone was always meant to be a slow burn game and story," Witwer says. "For better or for worse, it was designed for you to take your time. The best story beats and the best game play happen much later in the game, and it's clear that the nature of game reviews and this slow-burn philosophy of game development are not compatible. These journalists rush in, they do NOT take their time, they do NOT play the game on the terms the game presents, because it is their job to put out an article on a deadline. I think that's not only too bad, but misleading to actual audience members who would like to read an actual review of what we actually did."

 

[Fake]

Question: I know personally that I missed out on Days Gone for a long time before I sat down and fell in love with it. Due in no small way to initial reviews. How do you feel about the state of the gaming review world? It obviously impacted the games reception, and I'm personally scandalized that the game hasn't recieved the attention and praise I think it should.

Answer:
Ya know, I don't believe in arguing with people who say they didn't like something I did.
The way I feel about it is - I had my say. I made it, or I helped make it. Now the audience gets to have their say. They can say they liked it or they can critique it. It's all part of the job. I'm not the kinda guy who thinks I should go on Twitter to argue with someone's reaction.
Having said that, you're asking me about the review world. That's not quiiiite the audience.
You've asked me what i think.
Well, I read a review today from a website/publication that will remain nameless. In it, the horde mechanic, the show-stopping center piece of the game, it wasn't mentioned once. Not ONCE. There were other tells, but it was pretty clear that this reviewer played the game for several hours and then wrote his review. He did not complete it.
Days Gone was always meant to be a slow burn game and story. For better or for worse, it was designed for you to take your time. The best story beats and the best game play happen much later in the game, and it's clear that the nature of game reviews and this slow-burn philosophy of game development are not compatible.
These journalists, the ones that rush in, they do NOT take their time, they do NOT play the game on the terms the game presents, because it is their job to put out an article on a deadline.
I think that's not only too bad, but misleading to actual audience members who would like to read an actual review of what we actually did.
In any case, when I make something, I make something that hopefully is somewhat unique. Something I like. My record Revenge of the Crashtones -- I don't think it's for everyone. But if it hits with you, it may, in fact, hit you hard because I'm trying to speak through it with an honest, hopefully unique voice.
So that's all to say -
People that liked Days Gone seem to have LOVED Days Gone. That's what we set out to do, and that's gonna have to be good enough for me.

 

[ManaByte]

Should finishing a game's story be mandatory for a review?

We've had this thread before. Back when I worked at IGN it was a requirement, even massive JPRGs like FFIX and FFX. Anything that's not a MMO or GaaS thing like Destiny should be finished before reviewing it. My opinion of TLOU2 changed a lot for the better after finishing it.

 

[IntentionalPun]

It's an industry that stopped making sense when large open world games started being made.

 

[Denton]

Should finishing a game's story be mandatory for a review?

yes

 

[SLB1904]

yes

is not up to debate. even if the game is a pice of garbage. your job is to finish. that's what you get paid for

 

[StreetsofBeige]

Depends on the game.

If a reviewer wants to review Call of Duty or FIFA, how much should they level up? And how many matches of each mode should they need to play since different perks, weapons unlock? How many matches of each map, since some maps are better than others and show up more or less in the rotation?

For FIFA (or any sport), how many offline games and franchise seasons to play in order to gauge simmed stats and AI trade logic?

 

[Derift]

Days Gone Actor Complains That Journalists Don't Finish Games | Den of Geek

Days Gone voice actor Sam Witwer says that some of the game's negative reviews can be blamed on reviewers who didn't properly experience it.

www.denofgeek.com

While I haven't put in any time in Days Gone, I think the argument Witwer made is worth talking about. Not all games have a finite narrative and reviews have a finite amount of time to reach an opinion. That said, how much time should a reviewer invest into a game before forming an opinion? Should finishing a game's story be mandatory for a review?

Yes...

 

[sendit]

Worth re-buying for mouse and keyboard controls alone.

 

[GHG]

I know a lot of people disregard user reviews but here's the thing with days gone, there is a clear disparity between the user reviews for this game and what the reviewers think about it:

Personally I enjoyed it much more than the last of us which got 10's across the board. If you take a checklist approach then TLOU and the TLOU 2 are "better" games, it's undeniable that they are well crafted. However I had a lot more fun with Days Gone to the point that I platinumed it, and I never platinum games (it was my first platinum). On the other hand I find TLOU a slog to play.

 

[Guilty_AI]

not a big fan of Days Gone but... yeah, don't go along too much with what 'official' reviews and review scores say.

Most VG journalists are used to specific types of game and often can't or don't want to put too much time into a single title, nor want to see games through any other lens.

 

[laynelane]

Sam Witwer's comments seem to have hit a sore spot with the journalist who wrote the article:

It's unfortunate when people love a game that's slightly more mixed reviews and production problems mean that it probably won't get a sequel, but it's not a reviewers job to ensure that every game that might have adamant fans will be a critical success.

Amazing jump from actually finishing a game before scoring it in a publicized review to blah blah critical success.

 

[tsumake]

hordes is very intense and the best thing about this game, you telling me a clown reviewed the game and gave a score without even reaching the first horde? there should be a way to verify that reviewer actually finished the game like linking their profile to the publisher or something

damn gaming journalism must be the best and easiest job right now any clown can do it and get paid for it

Can't they just check their online gaming accounts for achievements and/or playtime?

 

[IntentionalPun]

Depends on the game.

If a reviewer wants to review Call of Duty or FIFA, how much should they level up? And how many matches of each mode should they need to play since different perks, weapons unlock? How many matches of each map, since some maps are better than others and show up more or less in the rotation?

For FIFA (or any sport), how many offline games and franchise seasons to play in order to gauge simmed stats and AI trade logic?

And that's the problem.

A movie reviewer has a 1.5-2 hour range for 95% of what they review, and it's passive, they just sit there... absorb.. can easily re-watch a few times really and then get to writing.

A game reviewer to do a thorough job has a massive range depending on the game; honestly "finishing the main story" is rather arbitrary considering a game might have twice the content not involving the main story as what does have it. And often in open world games, if you aren't doing side quests, the main story is near impossible due to not leveling up.. so you what? Lower the difficulty to easy?

And what they are writing about is far more extensive than something like a movie.. a longer story, controls, gameplay mechanics, graphics, stability..

As a "job" this shit makes zero sense.. a review to print/put on a web site isn't worth the time to pay someone to be so thorough.

It's all crap, but I really can't be mad at the reviewers themselves.

 

[IntentionalPun]

And while I look to user reviews.. huge chunk of those barely play a game too, then score it.

What I do?

I look for details; what am I worried about in a game? How it controls? How the leveling system works? Whatever it may be I look for descriptions of those things.. sometimes it's actually a low score review that convinces me to buy a game, because the way they describe something about the game is exactly what I want, while they hated it.

They exist to be information to use to determine if you want to purchase/spend time with something. People need to let go of this passion they have for the games they have ALREADY BOUGHT and what the score is lol

Really a review should describe right up front, like stats, how much time the reviewer spent.. what percentage of side missions, etc. That information could then be used to judge the review.

For me personally? I'd throw out a review that played 100% of the story, and a small fraction of the side content.. and focus on reviews that completed 100% of the side content, and barely paid attention to the mains story.. because that's what I do lol

 

[Bear*Walken*the*Sweeper]

Days Gone Actor Complains That Journalists Don't Finish Games | Den of Geek

Days Gone voice actor Sam Witwer says that some of the game's negative reviews can be blamed on reviewers who didn't properly experience it.

www.denofgeek.com

While I haven't put in any time in Days Gone, I think the argument Witwer made is worth talking about. Not all games have a finite narrative and reviews have a finite amount of time to reach an opinion. That said, how much time should a reviewer invest into a game before forming an opinion? Should finishing a game's story be mandatory for a review?

IMO yes

 

[SlimySnake]

Can't they just check their online gaming accounts for achievements and/or playtime?

Jaffe had the creative director of the game on his podcast and he said that they know that some reviewers didnt finish the game.

 

[StreetsofBeige]

And while I look to user reviews.. huge chunk of those barely play a game too, then score it.

What I do?

I look for details; what am I worried about in a game? How it controls? How the leveling system works? Whatever it may be I look for descriptions of those things.. sometimes it's actually a low score review that convinces me to buy a game, because the way they describe something about the game is exactly what I want, while they hated it.

They exist to be information to use to determine if you want to purchase/spend time with something. People need to let go of this passion they have for the games they have ALREADY BOUGHT and what the score is lol

Really a review should describe right up front, like stats, how much time the reviewer spent.. what percentage of side missions, etc. That information could then be used to judge the review.

It's different now as there's many sites that focus on these stats, but way back before frame rate analyzing sites, my biggest skimming of review articles was seeing if they said it was 30 or 60 fps. 60 fps games will always get a brownie pt as the game looks and plays much better.

 

[GuinGuin]

I had a lot of fun with the game but I think the poor reviews weren't down to people not finishing the game I think it had more to do with the game targeting a blue collar audience and gaming journalists deciding that "zombie" games are no longer trendy even though everyone then forgot about that and gave Resident Evil 2 Remake and TLOU2 great scores.

 

[jakdex]

Days Gone and gaming "journalists" a match made in heaven...

 

[Yoboman]

I still haven't played Days Gone

I think though there is a responsibility for the developer to ensure that the game is enjoyable right away

That Days Gone apparently becomes way better later in the game is a bit of a mark against it.

 

[GHG]

Days Gone and gaming "journalists" a match made in heaven...

Some of these are spectacular.

The guardian guy sounds so bitter.

 

[laynelane]

Days Gone and gaming "journalists" a match made in heaven...

Jesus Christ.

 

[The Cockatrice]

Why are you people complaining? You still make threads and are excited for these dumb ass garbage journalists every time a new game comes out. Your double standards are horrible gaf. If you want these shit journos to stop, then STOP GETTING EXCITED AND STOP GIVING THEM CLICKS. "Oh no! "x"site has done some dumb shit! Oh nice the "x" site gave my favorite game a 9!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!"

 

[kyussman]

Seems increasingly so many US game journalists are all aboard the woke train.....so finish the game,don't finish the game,I really couldn't give two shits what their opinions are most of the time anyway.

 

[DenchDeckard]

I definitely agree with slogging through a game for a deadline is in no way indicative of what the general user may think of a game. A game like days gone, I would probs play an hour or two every few days and I may love it. Similar to ghost of Tsushima, I'm still playing it and I started it a probs around two to three months ago. I check of a few things then jump onto something else. It's allows me to really enjoy the gameplay loop without burning out on the similar mission structure.

i can deffo see how it affects reviews, also Days Gone was heaviky patched and improved after launch. It's also 60 FPS on ps5 so someone's experience today is going to be drastically different to some launches day rushed review.

 

[Yoboman]

I just read the PC reviews and it's filled with a lot of the same nonsense about how generic it is

Maybe I'm blanking but I can't think of any other single player open world zombie games? Let alone ones with giant hordes and a focus on bike gameplay

In fact this one review seems like an active campaign against it getting a sequel

Days Gone PC review - good port, bad game

Sony’s second PC conversion from the PlayStation 4 brings back the zombie hordes of the surprisingly controversial Days Gone.

metro.co.uk

 

[Guilty_AI]

I definitely agree with slogging through a game for a deadline is in no way indicative of what the general user may think of a game. A game like days gone, I would probs play an hour or two every few days and I may love it. Similar to ghost of Tsushima, I'm still playing it and I started it a probs around two to three months ago. I check of a few things then jump onto something else. It's allows me to really enjoy the gameplay loop without burning out on the similar mission structure.

i can deffo see how it affects reviews, also Days Gone was heaviky patched and improved after launch. It's also 60 FPS on ps5 so someone's experience today is going to be drastically different to some launches day rushed review.

Its one of the reasons why gaming should really stop relying on release hype

 

[GHG]

I just read the PC reviews and it's filled with a lot of the same nonsense about how generic it is

Maybe I'm blanking but I can't think of any other single player open world zombie games? Let alone ones with giant hordes and a focus on bike gameplay

In fact this one review seems like an active campaign against it getting a sequel

Days Gone PC review - good port, bad game

Sony’s second PC conversion from the PlayStation 4 brings back the zombie hordes of the surprisingly controversial Days Gone.

metro.co.uk

In the opening paragraph:

"... surprisingly controversial Days Gone."

How and when was this game controversial?

 

[ManaByte]

In the opening paragraph:

"... surprisingly controversial Days Gone."

How and when was this game controversial?

Certain nutbars on Twitter got offended at the "ride me like your motorcycle" line.

 

[Alandring]

It's all crap, but I really can't be mad at the reviewers themselves.

Yes. And remember than sometimes, journalists only receive the game a few day before launch (or even on launch day). So they could take their time and publish their review two weeks after launch, but nobody would read them.

 

[Guilty_AI]

Maybe I'm blanking but I can't think of any other single player open world zombie games? Let alone ones with giant hordes and a focus on bike gameplay

You are, there've been enough open world zombies to become a joke. Bike aside, the others all also have their own particularities.

 

[IntentionalPun]

Yes. And remember than sometimes, journalists only receive the game a few day before launch (or even on launch day). So they could take their time and publish their review two weeks after launch, but nobody would read them.

And nobody would pay them for it lol

People also on day one if a game they like doesn't do well in reviews post user scores as a "SEE USERS LOVE IT"... users who've had the game for a few hours? lol

Like I said.. get what you actually find useful out of a review and ignore the rest.. talk about the games you like online, talk about why you like them.. word of mouth is king.

 

[laynelane]

In the opening paragraph:

"... surprisingly controversial Days Gone."

How and when was this game controversial?

I've only paid attention to what people here have to say about the game which has helped me decide to pick it up at some point. However, after a quick google search, there was controversy surrounding:

1. Whether it was a generic zombie shooter before it even released.
2. Newt zombies encouraging the player to shoot children.
3. Its "B-Movie charms" - eg. ride me as much as you ride your bike
4. Twitter.
5. Perception of it being of a lower status than other Sony exclusives.

etc. etc. on an on.

 

[Yoboman]

You are, there've been enough open world zombies to become a joke. Bike aside, the others all also have their own particularities.

Like what? And I don't mean the DayZ style resource management or more multiplayer style ones

 

[bitbydeath]

I still haven't played Days Gone

I think though there is a responsibility for the developer to ensure that the game is enjoyable right away

That Days Gone apparently becomes way better later in the game is a bit of a mark against it.

It's great when you see the big picture.
The game begins as more of a survival horror which appears to be where it was largely rated.

Guns: They shoot poorly and have barely any ammo requiring you to rely on stealth

Bike: It doesn't handle well and needs to be filled frequently.

Melee: Your equipment breaks easily

That's what a lot of reviews had commented on making it obvious they didn't play for too long.

As you progress everything upgrades and the further you get the much more dramatic that change becomes.

Not many games show such a dramatic curve in playstyle but I appreciate it much more than beginning and ending with your character barely evolving outside of the story.

 

[kittoo]

Days gone is a great game. Fuck the journalists who gave it a bad review either because of their political beliefs or because they couldn't be arsed to complete the main story at least. The main story wasn't all THAT long.

 

[Guilty_AI]

Like what? And I don't mean the DayZ style resource management or more multiplayer style ones

Dying Light and 7 days to day are probably the cream of the crop.
Besides those theres also the Dead Risings, States of Decays, Dead Island, some special cases like the prototypes and RDR Undead nightmare.... you can probably find way more too if you look around.

Also, even if you complain about resource management, almost every zombie game has that, including Days Gone.

 

[JoeBudden]

Yeah, you can tell most Days Gone reviewers never beat the game due to how you never see anyone mention how the game picks up extremely in pacing and overall story quality half way into the game. The game also had a cool cliffhanger ending and it tied into Syphon Filter.

 

[Yoboman]

Dying Light and 7 days to day are probably the cream of the crop.
Besides those theres also the Dead Risings, States of Decays, Dead Island, some special cases like the prototypes and RDR Undead nightmare.... you can probably find way more too if you look around.

Also, even if you complain about resource management, almost every zombie game has that, including Days Gone.

Fair point. I don't play too much of these games to feel burned out by them. At a glance 3 of those 5 are first person so are considerably different when taking these surface level generic comments.

State of Decay goes heavy on being a resource management game whereas Days Gone is more narrative focused. Dead Rising probably comes closest in terms of the horde dynamic but fills quite a different niche and isn't really open world

To me it still seems like Days Gone fills a niche in the zombie market that others weren't doing and it seems to be only one actively penalised for being part of the genre

Maybe Days Gone just doesn't do enough to overcome genre fatigue.

 

[Vae_Victis]

Some gaming journalists not bothering to play much of a game before reviewing it is not news. It's often really obvious just by reading the review, but there were a bunch of instances were journos were caught red-handed and/or called out by the developers. I remember at some point 10-15 years ago a journalist reviewing an MMO and giving it a terrible score, and the developers replying that his account had a total of like 2 hours of combined playtime.

Everybody needs to understand that there is zero vetting process in the creation of a video games journalist. All that is required for you to be one is to either be hired by an existing magazine/website, or start your own blog/website with some other people and be barely popular enough to emerge over the absolute bottom of the quagmire. Websites earn from number of clicks and comments, not professionalism, dedication or knowledge in your writing. You get hired at a high level either if you make the website clicks or you are close buddy with somebody in power inside the company; knowing what you are talking about or being good at talking about it are essential requirements for neither.

 

[TexMex]

The prime example why I don't even bother with reviews anymore. I heard more about that one line of dialogue than I did anything about the game for a month. And honestly, it isn't even especially egregious. All of the people up in arms of it are just revealing themselves to have never been in a serious relationship with someone because if you want me to believe that they've never said some cornball, horny shit like that to their partner, they're either lying or in one one really dull, pent up relationship.

 

[Biff]

Uhhh quite the revisionist timeline in this thread.

Days Gone came out as a piece of shit buggy mess of a game. I had it pre-ordered and played it when I got it. Huge letdown. I understand they've fixed a lot of the problems with patches but it took months and I loooooong ago traded this turd in so never went back to it.

Maybe don't release supposed AAA games in a shit state if you want to have a shot at a good first impression? It's not rocket science.

 

[Thief1987]

Uhhh quite the revisionist timeline in this thread.

Days Gone came out as a piece of shit buggy mess of a game. I had it pre-ordered and played it when I got it. Huge letdown. I understand they've fixed a lot of the problems with patches but it took months and I loooooong ago traded this turd in so never went back to it.

Maybe don't release supposed AAA games in a shit state if you want to have a shot at a good first impression? It's not rocket science.

Yeah, like this pic, it's full of complaints about game's buggy state on release

 

[Fake]

Days Gone and gaming "journalists" a match made in heaven...

Depressing.

 

[lh032]

yes

but i dont want to finish BALAN WONDERWORLD.

 

[IbizaPocholo]

Days Gone is an interesting game. It's deeply flawed in some ways and excels in others. I don't think it's Sony's best game, but I do think that the PC release allows it to be the game it probably should have been at release, a couple of technical issues aside.

Days Gone may be flawed and a bit generic, but I did enjoy playing it, and getting to know Deacon and company, more than I thought I would, and the PC version of the game is easily at its best.