-tetsuo-
Unlimited Capacity
If anything needs to be re-reviewed it is that shit.
-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
Should Driveclub be re-reviewed?
- Thread starter entremet
- Start date
If anything needs to be re-reviewed it is that shit.
SerTapTap
Member
Yeah it's easy to say "screw them it was bad at launch", but the fact is games change these days, and this case is very different from Unity (obvious problems that would have been evident in single player), this is stuff that didn't scale well.
Biggest example I can recall was SimCity 2013
bananafactory
Banned
Also, to everyone saying the game was "unfinished", that's completely false. It was a complete game that suffered massive server and network problems which made the online portion a disaster.
I don't have an XBO so unfortunately I don't know what you're getting at. A quick search tells me it got a very solid 86% and I happen to know the online doesn't always work as well. Did it have any weight in the reviews? If not, then the reviewers should have. Don't review a game if you haven't had a chance to do everything.
Yes, the game changed to reflect what the community wanted. At release, the game was the vision of Blizzard's and should be judged accordingly. Now, it's the community's game. The developer responded to needed and wanted changed and acted accordingly.
Well, also in my mind I was thinking about things like Team Fortress 2.
Reviewing that at launch, it was a fully functional game, but it's vastly, vastly different now than it was then.
Shining Sunshine
Banned
I love Driveclub, but no games should be re-reviewed.
Then again, I think no games should get review scores, so if review scores are gone, re-reviews would be okay.
Then again, I think no games should get review scores, so if review scores are gone, re-reviews would be okay.
A few years later for a highly dynamic game, perhaps it's worth it for the media at large. For each individual game like this? I think it's worth seeing a few places do this just so we can get some word on if a game's significantly improved, but at large I don't think the media should feel beholden to do so. They were supposed to release a functioning game or at least get it fixed sooner than later, and that didn't happen at all here, with how many games come out these days it's not pragmatic to go doing this unless you delay all reviews by a month or more, and that's not pragmatic for different reasons.
What if now is my time of purchase? Or six months from now?
The purpose of reviews are not to punish devs. They are to inform consumers of a general level of quality. If quality improves over time, then so should the reviews.
If you are feeling vindictive you can always include the original score in the review along with the new one.
Exactly and a few months ago they announced a new game. I think people deserve an update.
IDKAboutThat
Member
entremet
Member
The weather stuff was promised with the finished product, then delayed.
No one "deserves" it. They messed up big time and these are the consequences. When/if they release a sequel, that can be reviewed on its own merits and we'll see how it goes.
Gambit 1138
Banned
absoluetly not
Colonel Nasty
Member
Again all that stuff was working for reviewers. Even the gaffers that got it early knew that.
How would you re-review that? It's changed because of community needs and wants. Not necessarily the developers.
You have to remember that the game wasn't broken when they reviewed it. I don't think adding weather to the game should signify having to review something again. If they do something like that, then why not rereview every game after its gets a patch after 2 months.. plus most reviewers aren't gonna give it all that different a score, the core gameplay is still the same.
What would changing reviews even accomplish? Most of those asking for rereviews already have the game which is why they think its better, why would they care about a new review? You already bought the game.
What would changing reviews even accomplish? Most of those asking for rereviews already have the game which is why they think its better, why would they care about a new review? You already bought the game.
bananafactory
Banned
And someone who decides to go out and buy a game today should be able to go online and read a review for that game, not a review written 2 years ago that may contain completely false and irrelevant information.
jellies_two
Member
if i remember driveclub did not get bad reviews because it was unfinished. Journalists did not write about bugs with online. Online worked well for them.
So this whole they got punished for releasing too soon is a fantasy.
At least one publication re-reviewed lower after online was discovered to have caved, so that publication should re-review again and up its first score.
So this whole they got punished for releasing too soon is a fantasy.
At least one publication re-reviewed lower after online was discovered to have caved, so that publication should re-review again and up its first score.
GameSeeker
Member
No.
DriveClub doesn't need any more reviews. It needs continuing word of mouth, the launch of the PS+ version and a sales promotion to coincide with it.
The very, very positive reception to the weather patch that DriveClub is getting on NeoGAF and elsewhere is what Evolution needs for positive word of mouth. Evolution needs to spend Jan/Feb on getting the replay patch done and making sure the DriveClub servers are ready to support millions of additional potential users. Then, and only then, launch the PS+ version with a $30 upgrade offer to the full version.
The PS+ version will sell itself.
DriveClub doesn't need any more reviews. It needs continuing word of mouth, the launch of the PS+ version and a sales promotion to coincide with it.
The very, very positive reception to the weather patch that DriveClub is getting on NeoGAF and elsewhere is what Evolution needs for positive word of mouth. Evolution needs to spend Jan/Feb on getting the replay patch done and making sure the DriveClub servers are ready to support millions of additional potential users. Then, and only then, launch the PS+ version with a $30 upgrade offer to the full version.
The PS+ version will sell itself.
SerTapTap
Member
Exactly. I bought the game post weather patch, would love to have proper reviews at this point in time.
There's also games like Octodad that add significant free content post launch and fix issues, though the game was hardly "broken" at launch
Word of mouth is cool, and reviews arent' what they used to be, but I don't think it's a valid reason to be like "eh, reviews don't remotely reflect the actual game anymore? That's fine"
If you have a re-reviewing policy, then it should be re-reviewed. Otherwise, you're re-reviewing policy exists only as an excuse to rush out reviews for online games. Publishers get to keep their Metacritic score despite the game working like shit later.
Polygon loves using this feature to give games like SimCity a 9, satisfying EA's desire for a high MC score, while at the same time changing the score to make themselves appear to be "hard on crime." Perfect mechanism that rarely gets called out.
Polygon loves using this feature to give games like SimCity a 9, satisfying EA's desire for a high MC score, while at the same time changing the score to make themselves appear to be "hard on crime." Perfect mechanism that rarely gets called out.
CambriaRising
Member
Publishers should think about that before releasing broken games.
bananafactory
Banned
Weather was never promised with the finished product, nor was it in the original scope of the game when it was announced. They started showed it at closed events and demonstrations after the original delay and always said it would be coming after launch.
WelfareBurger
Member
It wouldn't matter since I believe most reviews didn't mention the online problems, since they didn't face it at the time.
My thoughts as well.
Freedom = $1.05
Banned
you review what's in the box. DriveClub should've launched not broken and feature-complete if it wanted scores that comes with that.
Correct, but what I am getting at is when they go to re-review these games they should include a changelog process if you know what I mean. Why these changes lead to a better game and etc.
viveks86
Gold Member
If Driveclub should be re-reviewed, then every game going forward should be periodically re-reviewed, since most of them are constantly changing/improving with fixes and DLC.
The real question is: should ALL games be re-reviewed? My answer - as long as there are noteworthy changes, they absolutely should. Otherwise the reader is being fed obsolete information.
Having said that, I don't think the scores will really change all the much. The game was reviewed before shit hit the fan.
The real question is: should ALL games be re-reviewed? My answer - as long as there are noteworthy changes, they absolutely should. Otherwise the reader is being fed obsolete information.
Having said that, I don't think the scores will really change all the much. The game was reviewed before shit hit the fan.
Didn't stop dishonorable game journalists from awarding Skyrim 10/10.
No, it wasn't. It was always slated to come after release.
In what sense? I realize the community makes a fair share of new content, but Valve did release a bunch of new modes, maps, and class remakes for the game.
Rarely is this the case. Especially when outlets are content to publish reviews before online communities are established or retail servers are up and populated.
bananafactory
Banned
It's not about games being broken, it's about games evolving over the course of their life and receiving new content and features, especially games like MMOs.
nrvalleytime
Member
Yeah, those kind of games almost deserve a year long look from a review site. Didn't Kotaku just shift towards this kind of reviewing? I remember reading something about if a game had a substantial online component, they would be willing to allow writers to continue writing about that experience as changes and updates impact the nature of the experience.
Driveclub seems a bit different from Team Fortress 2, but there should be some consideration given. Another question is how long is long enough - at this point in it's life, I can't imagine many people are reading reviews to determine if they want to start playing that TF 2.
Then you rely on communities such as this, or people who have played the game.
The very fact that we're talking about this shows what a sorry state the industry is in. It's a real shame that developers and publishers can dupe people out of $60 for something that might be radically different in 6+ months.
As someone else said earlier, it gives developers and publishers a reason not to release unfinished shit in the future.
could you pls tell me why they dont review it again ?
Its a shame that Games like BF4 get +85 scores, but everyones know how buggy the game was.
After 5-7 months it was playable, but look on DC
They add free content, dynamic weather and always listening on Twitter
Thats not fair.
Its a shame that Games like BF4 get +85 scores, but everyones know how buggy the game was.
After 5-7 months it was playable, but look on DC
They add free content, dynamic weather and always listening on Twitter
Thats not fair.
Bluekaveli
Member
If Lair wasn't, then nope.
ComputerMKII
Banned
I'm against re-reviewing games. It's their fault for not shipping a finished game so they have to deal with the consequences.
They'd already gotten a year long delay approved by Sony and by the devs own accounts they didn't realize they had reason to delay further anyway.
It's a slippery slope for outlets that do reviews though especially now that patches are the norm and not the exception. I get why most places don't update reviews. I also don't *cough* get why Polygon selectively updates their scores.