Support NeoGAF

[quest]

This is the best review I've seen so far:

Review: Death Stranding - Hardcore Gamer

If Death Stranding wasn’t so padded out it could have been something special; instead, we're left with a repetitive letdown.

www.hardcoregamer.com

Still gave it 3.5 out 5 lol. It be like restaurant critic saying food is bland service is slow but thumbs up. To many reviews did that today out of fear of internet backlash just at honest ign guy. This sound like like a positive review or added stars to avoid fan boys.

"Death Stranding is a cerebral experience that isn’t fun. It’s a 45-hour monotonous slog that backloads everything engaging into the final act. Mission after mission we are mistreated to same old delivery formula, with a couple of fetch quests thrown in for good measure.:

 

[MiyazakiHatesKojima]

Still gave it 3.5 out 5 lol. It be like restaurant critic saying food is bland service is slow but thumbs up. To many reviews did that today out of fear of internet backlash just at honest ign guy. This sound like like a positive review or added stars to avoid fan boys.

"Death Stranding is a cerebral experience that isn’t fun. It’s a 45-hour monotonous slog that backloads everything engaging into the final act. Mission after mission we are mistreated to same old delivery formula, with a couple of fetch quests thrown in for good measure.:

It's very easy to write up a cynical review that doesn't take into account the context and nuances of the game.

I could write up a review of Shadow of the Collosus and say how boring it is with barely any variety in its gameplay loop (just killing off 16 collosus with no other variety in its game design). Very easy for me to do that, but the fact of the matter is Shadow of the Collosus is a masterpiece.

 

[Soleil rouge]

I'm waiting for impressions from hardcore MGS fans. Don't give a fuck what this gaming magazine pussy thinks.

 

[ResilientBanana]

Seems pretty unprofessional.

If the game is supposed to be this cinematic thing with story being an important factor then how can you get away with a review without finishing the game?

The only games this could be understandable for would be multiplayer or games like tetris etc where there is basically no "end" to the game.

How could you possibly find yourself competently reviewing a single player, story driven, experience when you haven't finished the game?

I suppose the key pieces of information here are "how long is the game" and "when did they receive their review copy".
A lot of other outlets seem to have reviewed it just fine.

Strange trend of videogame journalists trying to make the coverage about them rather than about the games.

Imagine being forced to play all the way through while hating every moment. That’s what I see in those tweets. Let’s face it, the story is one thing, but the game should also be fun to play, context or not.

Personally, I want to give it a try, but not at full price.

 

[Kuranghi]

It's very easy to write up a cynical review that doesn't take into account the context and nuances of the game.

I could write up a review of Shadow of the Collosus and say how boring it is with barely any variety in its gameplay loop (just killing off 16 collosus with no other variety in its game design). Very easy for me to do that, but the fact of the matter is Shadow of the Collosus is a masterpiece.

I watched my friend play Shadow of the Colossus [PS3 remaster] and he seemed to quite enjoy it and I was having so much fun just watching him. Seeing him work out the "puzzles" as I had done with three others back in Oct 2005 on my university dorm's modified PS2, this was in the UK, it was modified for NA titles, SotC came out in 2006 in the UK, and we rebought it and 100%'d the game *again* but this time in colour and with the PAL additions like the slow-mo final blow.

If you want to know why the NA copy was in black & white on my PAL PS2 its because I'm an old man and its not important anymore so don't worry about it.

At the end of weeks of playing through the game with my flatmate, I asked him what he thought of it and if he would give it a score out of 10 [absolute scale like EZA, so 6 is still a decent game] and he turned to me said "Yeah it was quite good, like say... a 7.8?"...

 

[Coflash]

IIT: Terrible analogies

 

[DavJay]

Why would someone need to finish a game before reviewing. If some one put some hours in a title and get the main idea than it’s fine imo. So Games out there are really bad and barely playable. You want someone to torture themselves to finish it? Nah

 

[Kuranghi]

Why would someone need to finish a game before reviewing. If some one put some hours in a title and get the main idea than it’s fine imo. So Games out there are really bad and barely playable. You want someone to torture themselves to finish it? Nah

lol they are being paid money to play the game though.

Would you find value in a review of a TV series where the reviewer only watched 4 out of the 12 episodes?

 

[nbcjr]

He... literally gets paid to play and review games. The big story is the implication here that Edge is fine releasing a review for a story based game with an ending, without seeing it through to the ending (not 100%'ing even, just the critical path). It follows that Edge reviews, especially ones by this guy, probably shouldn't be trusted. It's one thing for an end user to pass judgemet on a game and tell their friends it sucks without completing it, but for a professional review outlet to do this; very unprofessional.

You are on point It is a travesty that gamers accept review of unfinished plays. Gaming has evolved to a billionaire industry, it is time for gaming media to evolve also.

 

[Azelover]

Sometimes, you don't really need to 100% a game to get a good feel for it, and how it plays. However, for story-driven games, it is super important that you finish the main story, at least..

 

[noqtic]

I'm surprised that so many of you guys didn't know that a lot of reviewers don't finish a good portion of the games they review. A lot lot of these guys have multiple games to preview/review, game shows to go to, and other content to make. Not making excuses but it is a common practice.

I can't get mad at this guy for not finishing the game especially if he put 40 hours into it since that would at least indicate that he gave it a fair chance. Forcing him to finish it will probably not change his opinion much. This game seems to be pretty divisive

 

[Ogbert]

I don’t see what the big deal is?
He thought the game was shit. That’s it.

 

[SLoWMoTIoN]

Professional reviewers can't finish a measly 40 hour game in days?

 

[StreetsofBeige]

Game A: This game sucks. Can't wait to give this game a big fat 5/10 in our next issue

Game B: This game sucks. Oh shit, Sony and Kojima hinted they won't give us early previews or info on their next games or PS5 specs............... uhhhhh gamers, we aren't going to bother publishing a review because we don't feel like it.

Game A or Game B, guess which game is Death Stranding?

 

[Coflash]

I don’t see what the big deal is?
He thought the game was shit. That’s it.

1. If he doesn't finish it and doesn't want to review it, people will complain about him
2. If he does finish it leaves a review that he didn't like it, people will complain about him (as they did with IGN)
3. It he doesn't finish it and doesn't like it and still reviews it, people will complain about him

There's a theme here...

Imagine being this hung up on reviewers in this day and age, with all of the gameplay footage out there.

 

[brian0057]

He played the game for 40 hours and didn't bother to finish it. What are you folks expecting?
He said it himself: "Print deadline was a factor, but we ran out of enthusiasm long before we ran out of time."
It's like people glossed over that sentence and jumped straight to "Oh, he didn't finish it because of deadlines."

Forty hours of gameplay seem like enough time to judge if you like a game or not.
The whole "It gets good after 25 hours" meme is supposed to be just that... a meme.
Jesus Christ, people.

 

[AstroRhino]

Fuck this cunt.

You don’t like the game, that’s absolutely fine. I’m not sure the game is for me either.

As a journalist he should either write a considered review, explaining in detail why, or he should shut the fuck up.

Don’t make snarky bitch remarks on Twitter without any substantive critique. Show a bit of professionalism.

Fucking idiot.

Rant over.

 

[StreetsofBeige]

1. If he doesn't finish it and doesn't want to review it, people will complain about him
2. If he does finish it leaves a review that he didn't like it, people will complain about him (as they did with IGN)
3. It he doesn't finish it and doesn't like it and still reviews it, people will complain about him

There's a theme here...

Imagine being this hung up on reviewers in this day and age, with all of the gameplay footage out there.

So much for reviews.

1. Gamers want a big number of reviews so they can see different opinions and info about the game.

2. But gamers want review scores to be in a narrow band of scores or they get mad

3. Or gamers only want their fanboy game to get high scores only

So much for the point of reviews.

Pretty obvious why one reason reviews scores trend to that 6-10 range. Don't piss off publisher freebies and ad revenue, and don't piss off fantards.

You don't even get this craziness in movie reviews, where movies can be scored with 5% or 95% Rotten Tomatoes. And nobody seems to care. But do that to video games and people go ape shit.

 

[angelic]

The editor is egotistical, and making it about himself. As usual.

Dreadful politics too, it's full of anti Trump drivel.

 

[Pallas]

Man what a shitty reviewer, he couldn’t even be professional enough to give it a proper review.

 

[lame gag1990]

this rules set for review are dumb as fuck anyway.
you don't need to 100% or finish a game to give a review about it at all.
esp with how samey some games are these days.

imagine reviewing diablo 3 when you beat chapter 5. not seeing anything of endgame.

You should have to finish a game before you decide to review it. You wouldn't watch half of a movie or listen to half of a music CD and release a review. It's fucking stupid.

 

[Wolfgang Jr]

I think a game about trying on different backpacks would be better than this dumpster fire.

 

[lame gag1990]

Why would someone need to finish a game before reviewing. If some one put some hours in a title and get the main idea than it’s fine imo. So Games out there are really bad and barely playable. You want someone to torture themselves to finish it? Nah

When it's their job, yes I do. He get's paid to play and review games. Nobody should be releasing a review of anything if they haven't seen the thing they're reviewing to it's conclusion. I understand he couldn't be bothered finishing Death Stranding and he's not reviewing it, so he's doing a "preview" of sorts instead. That's absolutely fine. But anyone releasing a review of a game without finishing said game are amatuerish and should look for a different profession.

 

[JLB]

No it should have that rule to every game.

Yes sure, good luck finishing forza 7 end to end and all modes before 2037.

 

[nush]

I don’t see what the big deal is?
He thought the game was shit. That’s it.

It's a story that perfectly bisects people already unhappy with modern "games jurnolizm" and pisses off console/game/developer fanboys over one of the most anticipated titles of the year.

 

[FMXVII]

They did review it.
Too shit to finish seems to be the verdict. That's enough for me.

EXACTLY.

He said it was too bad of a game to bother finishing it to give it a full review.

That's a pretty straight forward <1.

 

[Strife In a Teacup]

I know it's different people now but i still can't take the mag seriously after this

I love the last sentence "If only you could talk to these creatures"

1994, yeah just two years too early for that. But 2 years later? Oh we got to talk to them creatures all right:

 

[MagnesG]

So which one is it? You guys want a review or not?

 

[sonomamashine]

I just discovered the existence of this man (Nathan Brown) and i like him.

 

[DynamiteCop!]

So which one is it? You guys want a review or not?

If the guy ended up finishing it even though he clearly hates it they wouldn't want it. Either way they're panning him, the fact that after 40 hours invested he said "screw this" speaks volumes.

 

[mcjmetroid]

Did they just literally admit they don't finish their games before they review them?

As well as that literally highlighting the weaknesses of being a magazine?

 

[DynamiteCop!]

Did they just literally admit they don't finish their games before they review them?

As well as that literally highlighting the weaknesses of being a magazine?

No, what he said is the requirement for a review to be posted is that the game be finished but he hated it so much he simply stopped playing and didn't bother even after 40 hours. It wasn't worth continuing to even review.

 

[StreetsofBeige]

Did they just literally admit they don't finish their games before they review them?

As well as that literally highlighting the weaknesses of being a magazine?

No.

They didn't publish a review because the guy thought the game was so boring, he didn't bother finishing the game. So no review.

So instead of slogging through it (like any bad game and doing a review), Death Stranding gets a break as the reviewer called it quits.

In other words, the Edge reviewer thinks DS is a crap game.

 

[mcjmetroid]

No, what he said is the requirement for a review to be posted is that the game be finished but he hated it so much he simply stopped playing and didn't bother even after 40 hours. It wasn't worth continuing to even review.

That's pretty much the same thing I said though.

That's nonsense drama from Edge.
They review far worse games on a monthly basis for their magazine but yet decided to make a stink about this one because they were required to finish the game which I thought was a requirement of all reviews...

So 1: admitting that they almost never finish games before reviews even though they have a month to do it and
2: pretty much telling you that magazines are worthless because it'll be too late by next month.

Sorry but that's not professionalism.

 

[mcjmetroid]

No.

They didn't publish a review because the guy thought the game was so boring, he didn't bother finishing the game. So no review.

So instead of slogging through it (like any bad game and doing a review), Death Stranding gets a break as the reviewer called it quits.

In other words, the Edge reviewer thinks DS is a crap game.

You think this is ok?

Like I probably won't like Death Stranding and I've no dog on this fight if there is one.

But I personally think it's absolutely shocking they're openingly talking like this about the biggest game of the month. Surely they're on thin ice as it is being a magazine as opposed to a website. This isn't going to convince people to stick to magazine if they're not going to finish playing a game and openingly admitting to it on social media lol.

 

[StreetsofBeige]

You think this is ok?

Like I probably won't like Death Stranding and I've no dog on this fight if there is one.

But I personally think it's absolutely shocking they're openingly talking like this about the biggest game of the month. Surely they're on thin ice as it is being a magazine as opposed to a website. This isn't going to convince people to stick to magazine if they're not going to finish playing a game and openingly admitting to it on social media lol.

Definitely not, but I have to say this is the first time I remember hearing someone not post a review because they think it's boring and crap.

So got to give Edge credit for being honest.

Just imagine how often this has been done in the past from any other game site or reviewer and we gamers didn't know.

 

[mcjmetroid]

Definitely not, but I have to say this is the first time I remember hearing someone not post a review because they think it's boring and crap.

So got to give Edge credit for being honest.

Just imagine how often this has been done in the past from any other game site or reviewer and we gamers didn't know.

Agreed, I just think it does them no favours and they have the benefit of time at the very least compared to websites. Finish the game in a month or a few weeks before the writeup is required.

It's like they got ratty that they had a requirement to finish the game which I think a lot of us expected them to do anyway.

You would never review anything else like this.
An music album would never be reviewed without listening to the whole thing
A movie?
A book?
A TV show?

Gaming is such a joke sometimes and gaming journalism..don't trust reviews and here's literal proof why.

 

[Rest]

People review games without finishing them? Is this a common thing and I'm just super naive about it?

You don't need to finish a game to know whether it was good or not. Was it good enough to finish?

 

[Dr.brain64]

Finally someone honest. Best review out there.

 

[Silent Viper]

H

People review games without finishing them? Is this a common thing and I'm just super naive about it?

He saying he can't finish it coz it's boring to play. You not getting what he trying to say?

 

[Pallas]

H
He saying he can't finish it coz it's boring to play. You not getting what he trying to say?

Shit is still unprofessional, and unfair to their readers for anyone who was interested or had high expectations in the game. Giving the reason “It’s too boring to play to review” is bullshit. It’s his job.

 

[FMXVII]

Shit is still unprofessional, and unfair to their readers for anyone who was interested or had high expectations in the game. Giving the reason “It’s too boring to play to review” is bullshit. It’s his job.

It is a food critic's job to review restaurant food.

Should a food critic have to finish a revolting dish, to be able to say that it was awful?

 

[Pallas]

It is a food critic's job to review restaurant food.

Should a food critic have to finish a revolting dish, to be able to say that it was awful?

Comparing food to video games? Kind of a ridiculous analogy, Reviewing/sampling both of these items aren’t comparable.

If the game is awful then tell us why it’s awful . If the review stipulation required him to finish the game, then finish it. Don’t leave your audience fucking hanging because you decide to be a bitch because the game was awful for you. For fucks sake, it’s his job.

 

[MagnesG]

If the game is awful then tell us why it’s awful . If the review stipulation required him to finish the game, then finish it. Don’t leave your audience fucking hanging because you decide to be a bitch because the game was awful for you. For fucks sake, it’s his job.

They will release a 4 page preview for his 40 hours time in.

 

[Pallas]

They will release a 4 page preview for his 40 hours time in.

Should be an interesting read then! Going by the twitter posts, it seemed like he had abandoned it entirely.

 

[FMXVII]

Comparing food to video games? Kind of a ridiculous analogy, Reviewing/sampling both of these items aren’t comparable.

If the game is awful then tell us why it’s awful . If the review stipulation required him to finish the game, then finish it. Don’t leave your audience fucking hanging because you decide to be a bitch because the game was awful for you. For fucks sake, it’s his job.

How so?

Video games are meant to be consumed.

Even more so these days, with the way they are designed as appetizers for additional courses down the line (DLC), or as Chinese takeout meant for a quick meal, then disposal at the GameStop bargain bin... with a coupon attached to the bag in the form of 25% new retail in store credit, for the inevitable hunger setting in about an hour later.

 

[Enjay]

Imagine being forced to play all the way through while hating every moment. That’s what I see in those tweets. Let’s face it, the story is one thing, but the game should also be fun to play, context or not.

Personally, I want to give it a try, but not at full price.

I have a feeling this is gonna drop as fast as Control did. There's been no talk of outstanding preorder numbers nor is there really any buzz beyond kojima gimmick online personalities.

 

[Wolfgang Jr]

It is a food critic's job to review restaurant food.

Should a food critic have to finish a revolting dish, to be able to say that it was awful?

You don't need to eat the whole cake to know it's been made with rotten eggs.

 

[burningheart]

To be fair, if a game is shit the last act is unlikely to save it or change the reviewers opinion. Not feeling like finishing a game is indicative of how good/bad it actually is. The great games make you want to finish them.

I’m with Edge on this one.

Although the point is these people are PAID to see these things through. It’s not just a hobby when you get paid.

I have to do things I dislike in my job; but that’s part of the very nature of work, not free fun time.

 

[vkbest]

I’m not english native speaker, so maybe I didn’t understand completely, but they complained because they couldnt review before they could finish the game?, so they give reviews of games they didn’t complete?