• Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!

Should Driveclub be re-reviewed?

The thing about the Drive Club reviews, is that the versions they reviewed worked. Online and everything was fine. It got the score they think it deserved, you may think it's better than that, but they didn't review a broken product.

I don't think some pretty weather justifies another review. I mean it doesn't exactly address their issues with the game, does it?
 
leng jai said:
I don't think it should to be honest. If re-reviewing became a common practice that just gives developers even more incentive to release incomplete/broken games at launch with the "fix it later" mentality.
Click to expand...

No, because that knife cuts both ways.
I can plausibly argue the exact opposite: re-reviewing gives reviewers the freedom to slam a game they suspect might get better shortly after release. Thus, game companies will be more motivated to release a good game at launch in order not to receive 5s and 4s.

Because right now reviewers often ignore big problems when scoring, thinking to themselves, well yeah there are all these glitches and I even lost my save, but I'm sure it'll get a day one and day seven patch so I'll just gloss over these issues.
 
see5harp said:
The reviews at launch didn't even take into account the online issues. The leaderboards, the challenges. Hell, even trying to play a private game was messed up. How many reviews mentioned that stuff? Should they retroactively add that stuff was not working for the first 2 months and then add an addendum to that saying it works now?
Click to expand...

Yea, why not?

It's all kind of pointless anyway though, right?
 
The truth of the matter is all games should go through a re-review process. After each patch and the problems are addressed, the reviewer should go back and state that an earlier issue about my complaint has been fixed i.e. redact old info that no longer apply.

As far as reviewers docking this game because of the driving model. The problem is they were trying to use other games driving model for a particular cars handling and not considering Evolution had their own Simcade driving model, which means you must try to learn their driving model and instead of trying to put someones model into theirs and stating the handling bad.
 
backbreaker65 said:
The truth of the matter is all games should go through a re-review process. After each patch and the problems are addressed, the reviewer should go back and state that an earlier issue about my complaint has been fixed i.e. redact old info that no longer apply.

As far as reviewers docking this game because of the driving model. The problem is they were trying to use other games driving model for a particular cars handling and not considering Evolution had their own Simcade driving model, which means you must try to learn their driving model and instead of trying to put someones model into theirs and stating the handling bad.
Click to expand...

In an ideal world, I would agree with you. However, there are too many constraints on reviewers' time to reasonably expect them to go re-review every patch for every game out there. Reviews are pretty much snap-shots of the game at release, which is okay for some things but not others. I do think reviewers should go back and fix reviews they fucked up by not waiting to test online features in the real world, however. But if a game gets shipped playing like ass, I don't think any outlet has an obligation to go update their original review just because all the kinks were finally patched out a year later.
 
Arthr2ShdsJcksn said:
We don't need the first reviews, let alone any additional ones. Communities like NeoGaf are good enough sources of information.

Maybe that's just me though. I haven't cared about a video game review since I last had a subscription to EGM in the 90s.
Click to expand...

Better than the first (obvious) post.
Nice one :)
 
backbreaker65 said:
The truth of the matter is all games should go through a re-review process. After each patch and the problems are addressed, the reviewer should go back and state that an earlier issue about my complaint has been fixed i.e. redact old info that no longer apply.

As far as reviewers docking this game because of the driving model. The problem is they were trying to use other games driving model for a particular cars handling and not considering Evolution had their own Simcade driving model, which means you must try to learn their driving model and instead of trying to put someones model into theirs and stating the handling bad.
Click to expand...

Or maybe it's OK to dislike a particular driving model and to have your review reflect that.
 
The Icon said:
Yea, why not?

It's all kind of pointless anyway though, right?
Click to expand...

I suppose if they had some log at the end for every little change okay. I figure most sites have news posts that would cover that stuff though. I think some people underestimate the modern consumer.
 
No.

Sony had no problem asking for 60$/€ for a game that had one of its components seriously broken, so why should a reviewer be nice to Sony?

It would send the wrong message to publishers.
 
In practice? I can't see how re-reviewing Drive Club would yield a different result. The reviews were all made before the issues with the online began.

In theory? After the year we've had, I'm very much against giving publishers and developers yet another way to drop the ball on the quality of their launch products. Seriously, this year has been just abysmal in out of box functionality for consumers, in both SP and MP, across all platforms, and people want to give publishers a mulligan?
 
No game should be re-reviewed, but perhaps amending an update about a games online functionality should be pinned to the original review as well as the original writers thoughts on the game as it stands.

The score shouldn't change.
 
No, its not the reviewers fault the game was gimped and broken upon release.

That's the developers fault entirely. They got what they deserved with the lackluster scores.
 
I don't think it should be re-reviewed but certainly re-evaluated. A writeup of the changes and how it has impacted gameplay now versus release. I think some sites have put something similar up.
 
I think there's merit in telling it like it is when the game releases it and then maybe providing an update note at the end of the review when the fixes made (if they are indeed drastic) to note most of the problems don't exist in the world and therefore it would have been rated a such-and-such if we were re-reviewing it.

However, I think there's also merit in never touching it or re-reviewing it, since it means applying the same noncontroversial standard to all game releases and punishing developers/publishers for rushing products out the door. There's no disputes over how conveniently a site decides to choose which games to re-review (*cough* polygon *cough*), it's just "did your game suck when it launched? Yes it did. Next time make sure that doesn't happen"

So I don't know. As it stands, for the sites that HAVE committed to doing re-reviews as a matter of policy, Driveclub is as drastic an improvement as any game I've seen in such a few short months. The mechanics were already incredible on launch day, pure racing at its finest, but it was marred by a shitty online functionality, completely daft balance, and missing many of its most anticipated features from both a gameplay/visual point of view (some real inconsistencies in track quality here and there both visual and design, weather wasn't there, and a ton of other things both major and minor).

So, I am not sure which path is better - but I guess I'd believe the one that puts every developer on equal footing is the way I'd go.
 
In this particular case, would the scores be any different? DC already reviewed poorly before they even knew about the broken online. Most of the reviews attributed their score to the driving model and barebones presentation, none of which have been rectified by any updates (besides photo mode I guess).
 
just-a-spaz said:
You make it sound so easy. How about you try to make a video game that is even 1% of what Driveclub is and see how that goes.
Click to expand...

What a pathetic argument. I can't be a critic of the developer because I haven't made a similar game? I assume you avoid game reviews because the reviewer hasn't made a game either? Maybe you refuse to vote because you've never been a politician, and therefore have no right to have a say on the job government's been doing?
 
No it shouldn't be re-reviewed. It's completely unrealistic to expect outlets to re-review every game that makes changes over time, and it's far too subjective as to what warrants a re-review.

Do you re-review Titanfall now it has more content (and the removal of AI and Titans for additional players was proven to suck)?
Do you re-review Killer Instinct each time the roster expands?
Do you re-review something like Quake as a result of bunny-hopping being discovered?
Do you re-review MVC3 because Jean Grey turned out to be some BS?
Do you re-review Anarchy Reigns because gamers everywhere failed it?

There are so many different ways a game can change over time, not simply limited to content updates, and it would lead to endless complaints and accusations of bias as people argue over which games deserve another look. Hell, even with the weather being added, it not being in the game at launch results in it not actually being in any campaign races at all. I'm not sure how much people are expecting the reviews to change when virtually nothing the reviews complained about have actually changed since then.

xxracerxx said:
Halo: MCC says hello about lower scores.
Click to expand...

Neither Driveclub or Halo: MCC got their scores based on their online state post-release. The reviews that on average reviewers believed a working MCC to be significantly better than a working Driveclub. If MCC was to have its scored slashed to reflect the online issue, than Driveclub's would logically become far worse than they currently are too.

IKizzLE said:
I wonder what he thought of project Gotham racing 3 and 4s handling since they have the exact same driving model.....
Click to expand...

This is bullshit. Quit it.
 
No. It sucks maybe for the developer but the game released is the game reviewed. If you started re-reviewing games then every game would get re-reviewed any time a patch came out. AC Unity would have been reviewed about 4 times by now. Bethesda games would get 9 reviews in a year!
 
every big exclusive should just have a full point added to its score with each new OT. all those fairweather critics shouldn't be the arbiters of a game's value, those who continued to champion platform specific duds with the loudest and most persistent voices should be.
 
No, they don't need to re-review Driveclub.

In fact, Sony and Evolution Studios should thank their lucky stars that the majority of gaming sites don't have a policy of revising their reviews. If they did, and updated their reviews a week or two after the game came out, most of the review scores would be even lower than they are now.
 
Personally no

shouldn't give free passes to these people for evening delivering an unfinished product. it'll make them even more complacent.
 
I think it should. We should encourage developers who keep supporting their output.

Remember The Witcher? The vanilla game was buggy POS and censored for some region.
Then they released Enhanced Edition and review websites essentially re-review the game. Why should this be any different?
 
Even if it were to be re-reviewed, I doubt it would earn more favor by those who reviewed it poorly. Those who didn't enjoy the game had problems with it's presentation and driving model, but not so much the lack of weather or photo mode.
 
Maybe keep the score the same, but update the review to note that online issues have been fixed or improved and content patches issued.
 
In my opinion the moment a score is updated it loses value, if the game changes after some patches the review should change too, because the score is a review's complement, the number is meaningless without a text to justify it.
 
No, because the reviewers didn't play the broken version. Online was fine before public release.

All those mediocre scores? Nothing to do with the online disaster.
 
I think given how open Evo have been about the issues paired with the free DLC they've given as compensation should warrant a re-review. However it didn't work for weeks, some stuff still doesn't work like my pre-order cars for example and theres ongoing connection issues they haven't fully ironed out yet.

When the PS+ edition drops then yes imo.

^ Fair point actually. What were we talking about again?
 
King_Moc said:
What a pathetic argument. I can't be a critic of the developer because I haven't made a similar game? I assume you avoid game reviews because the reviewer hasn't made a game either? Maybe you refuse to vote because you've never been a politician, and therefore have no right to have a say on the job government's been doing?
Click to expand...

I'm just saying... people are quick to call the developers incompetent. I think there's more to it than that. They're certainly not incompetent, they just made a mistake. It sucks, but you get on with your life.
 
It depends on what you want to say with a review. If a review is direct purchasing advise for someone reading it then yes every game should be re-reviewed as (or if) it improves. If a review is more of a statement of your beliefs at a time, be they a reverent praising of a games brilliance or a vindictive tear down of a game you think is crap, then no. As a consumer I would appreciate the former however. It's not like companies have anything to gain from higher scores 2 months out. The initial buzz was already negative and hurt sales. Suddenly raising scores to reflect the actual quality of a game won't put the money lost back in their pockets.

Edit: In the case of driveclub it just seemed like a case of people just didn't like the handling model, lack of options, or lack of open world. The improvements since have made the game better but they didn't address the problems most people had with it. I liked everything about driveclub except the fact that I couldn't get online with it. Now that that is fixed I can return to it and the weather is just icing on the cake.
 
The game should be re-reviewed. It's a completely different game now that everything is up and running and they have added photo mode, weather, new tracks, new cars and all that. They really went above and beyond to get the game working 100% over the past 2 months as well as add in all of the additional features they have in such a short time and anyone still bitter about the launch should pack up and move on already.

The game is incredible and it certainly does not deserve the low scores that it received because of some unexpected server issues at launch.
 
ShockingAlberto said:
I mean


maybe they shouldn't release an unfinished game
Click to expand...

Exactly.

To add to this wonderful point, does anybody really care anymore? Including the reviewers?

It's great that most people who bought Driveclub seem to be pretty happy with it, but I think everyone else has moved on, at least until the PS + version comes, if it comes.
 
entrement said:
should this become de rigueur due the dynamic nature of game development these days?
Click to expand...

There's something to be said for this, and it's what the thread should be about instead of Driveclub. Fact is, launch-day reviews are based on a model where games are static entities, and that model died a good 8-10 years ago.
 
I don't think it should be re-reviewed, I think a lot of the reviews were pre meditated and determined to mark it down at any opportunity, wouldn't matter if the game released with a free blow job they would still find stuff to hate.
 
dreamstation said:
The game should be re-reviewed. It's a completely different game now that everything is up and running and they have added photo mode, weather, new tracks, new cars and all that. They really went above and beyond to get the game working 100% over the past 2 months as well as add in all of the additional features they have in such a short time and anyone still bitter about the launch should pack up and move on already.

The game is incredible and it certainly does not deserve the low scores that it received because of some unexpected server issues at launch.
Click to expand...

This seems like satire, but, I'm not sure....
 
Could they get away advertising the patch as a new(free) expansion pack? technically an expansion pack would be a new game so they would have to re-review it...

"Driveclub: Apocalypse"
 
Haven't gone trough the whole thread, but OP is lacking reviews where the broken online had an influence on the final score.

Are there some?
 
On one hand it's now a great game and I would like more people to enjoy it. People who may have been deterred due to the low review scores. I'll admit i'm a little biased here.

On the other hand they completely screwed up the release and should not be rewarded for eventually fixing things. One or two days of problems is one thing, but it's clear there were some serious issues that made the game almost unplayable for several weeks.
 
wenis said:
No game should be re-reviewed, but perhaps amending an update about a games online functionality should be pinned to the original review as well as the original writers thoughts on the game as it stands.

The score shouldn't change.
Click to expand...

If a game gets substantial changes then a re-review is fair (especially if many of the changes/extra content are free). I don't know enough about Driveclub to say if it deserves a re-review, but there have been games that deserve them. For example I've seen re-reviews of Team Fortress 2 (such as Eurogamer's re-review) due to the substantial amount of free content and major changes that have come to the game since it launched in 2007.
 
I'm still waiting for the PS+ version to try it out, so I can't speak about whether DC in particular should be re-reviewed. But in general, if a game has changed enough, whether it be with bug fixes or additional content, then I'm totally in favor of new/updated reviews. A major purpose of reviews is to inform a potential customer's buying decision. A customer thinking about buying the game today would not find much help by reading outdated reviews that no longer reflect the current state of the game. And this works both ways. If a game launched as a 10/10 masterpiece but for some reason drastically changed for the worse, reviews and scores should reflect that, lest new customers think they're still buying that original masterpiece.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Larian studio boss Swen Vincke thinks game reviewers should be graded by people similar to metacritic user scores
Opinion  2
89
859
crackajack replied
Apparently Ed Boon is tweeting about how should a Killer Instict game be released ...
35
456
Moondoggy replied
  • Poll
What category should Steam Machine be classed under?
4 5 6 7 8
382
3K
AZRoboto replied
NateTheHate on the next State of Play: “Should be well before June based on what I've heard”
Rumor Event 
26
370
pqueue replied
blizzard should some offline games
42
646
Radical_3d replied
Top Bottom