It might not be the consumer's problem, but I'm just being realistic here. You can talk about what outlet X should do, but if it's not realistic it's not realistic. And there's a lot to be said about various outlets becoming irrelevant, not updating a game's review two months after release isn't one of those reasons.
-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
Should Driveclub be re-reviewed?
- Thread starter entremet
- Start date
It might not be the consumer's problem, but I'm just being realistic here. You can talk about what outlet X should do, but if it's not realistic it's not realistic. And there's a lot to be said about various outlets becoming irrelevant, not updating a game's review two months after release isn't one of those reasons.
Memorabilia
Member
/thread
mercenar1e
Member
They should re-review it when Sony is no longer embarrassed about the game.
Kssio_Aug
Member
Well, while I agree that Halo MCC should have received much lower scores, it doesnt justify DriveClub issues. Imo, well deserved score for that time at least.
Maybe games should have ratings with periodic updates?
Since games have updates and such, they are not this thing you buy in a package from a store that never changes anymore. That time it made since.
If I want to know what a game is like after release, I could get a current rating.
Most sales are in the first x amount of days/weeks after launch so it may not be worth it. So the sales and lesson is that you get the rating you release the game at, and then that window closes regarding sales? The thing companies do have to do is cater to people that are your customers that purchased it, and brand damage. People vote with their wallets and don't always forget next time a game is released. Dragon Age?
Since games have updates and such, they are not this thing you buy in a package from a store that never changes anymore. That time it made since.
If I want to know what a game is like after release, I could get a current rating.
Most sales are in the first x amount of days/weeks after launch so it may not be worth it. So the sales and lesson is that you get the rating you release the game at, and then that window closes regarding sales? The thing companies do have to do is cater to people that are your customers that purchased it, and brand damage. People vote with their wallets and don't always forget next time a game is released. Dragon Age?
Graphics Horse
Member
Why are reviews so important? What's wrong with just letting people play a demo
Triggerhappytel
Member
It can be re-reviewed next year when they release the Driveclub Complete Edition around August with all patches and DLC included.
For what it's worth, I do think it will be worthwhile to revisit a lot of current-gen games after a certain time on the market. Not necessarily just in order to give them a better review, but because these products are not static and are constantly evolving and changing. Eurogamer has done this with MMOs for a while, and I think it would be worthwhile widening that net to include other types of game too.
For what it's worth, I do think it will be worthwhile to revisit a lot of current-gen games after a certain time on the market. Not necessarily just in order to give them a better review, but because these products are not static and are constantly evolving and changing. Eurogamer has done this with MMOs for a while, and I think it would be worthwhile widening that net to include other types of game too.
Most reviews did not give it low scores because of the broken online. Other issues were fixed to a certain degree, but I must say I still rather love it DESPITE its problems.
Weather, OK, but they should at least have waited with the two free tours until they could have made them with weather. As it is right now you need to pay extra to get weather in tour mode.
Really, redo the intitial tour with weather for free PS+ adding to the original tour, not replacing it. Then we are at how the game should have shipped in a perfect world.
Weather, OK, but they should at least have waited with the two free tours until they could have made them with weather. As it is right now you need to pay extra to get weather in tour mode.
Really, redo the intitial tour with weather for free PS+ adding to the original tour, not replacing it. Then we are at how the game should have shipped in a perfect world.
ArtHands
Thinks buying more servers can fix a bad patch
Things get messy if the review are to be periodically updated. That will mean the reviewer has to constantly go back to the game every time an update has been released. I will rather they spend the time to cover more other games.
Besides, re-reviewing the game will send the game dev the wrong message of how they can ship an unfinished product and patch them up later.
SentryDown
Member
What if the gaming press was partly responsible for this kind of relases ? I mean, we all know that games these days are still considered as products while they should be viewed as services. Currently, games are considered old and unworthy after more or less 2 months. This is partly because the industry business model is still based on movie industry where movies have to perform immediatly or die.
Now imagine consumers keep hearing about games and get updated on how they are currently (not only with bugs correction but added content, especially for f2p). Wouldn't sales be better on the long run, encouraging studios to delay unfinished games rather than throwing them in stores to grab consumers while they can ?
It seems a bit idealistic but I'm conviced that this is the future, living and breathing games that gets better and better over the time and keeps having more players, just like MMOs or F2P does.
I don't think so.
Sim City (2013) has a score of 9.5 from Polygon on metacritic while Polygon's actual updated score is 6.5.
GarciaHotspur
Member
The game is good since the beginning.
Burkatron81
Member
So what if I wanted to buy the game today? Games have a chance to evolve and grow over time these days, this is exactly why the likes of Kotaku and eurogamer do a progress recap on previously released games.
test_account
XP-39C²
I thought that they thought the game was working when they released it and the online problems were unexpected? I dont think that the lack of weather effects made that much difference in the review scores.
Reviews arent suppose to be a fame or shame kind of contest though. Reviews are suppose to give the consumers an idea on how the product is. If a product changes over time, for better or worse, the first review might not be that relevant anymore.
good to know thanks
MilkyJoe
Member
That's the one and only post required.
eso76
Member
Which could be 2 months after release or 2 years. Not necessarily launch day.
No, reviewers don't owe Evolution to rereview the game.
In fact I would really hope reviewers never owe devs anything.
But they owe the readers.
Their job is not pleasing devs, their job is to inform the players.
They are still "journalists" and as such they are supposed to inform people that Driveclub is a better game today.
Just like with any piece of news, a journalist is supposed to keep giving updates on the subject if what was stated in the original article doesn't hold true anymore.
If a game is shit at launch and becomes glorious with add ons, I, as a player, would rather know than skip a game i could enjoy because reviewers are having a "that will teach 'em ! " stance.
Besides, It won't. The only thing they could learn from this is forcing months long embargoes.
What could teach devs something is if people stopped rushing to shops to buy games day 1 as if games were some kind of fresh fruit that only taste good for the first couple days.
Haunted
Member
I'd make that exchange. No more launch day reviews, but every game I'd ever want to buy has a proper demo.
eso76
Member
even easier, since everything is tied to your account these days and there's no way to circumvent server authentication and pirate games...
give people a fucking 1 hour trial of complete games.
Half an hour even.
First post wins thread again.
The developers only have themselves to blame when they released a broken game.
tim_pkmn89
Member
Demos cost bandwidth and reduce sales overall
DenogginizerOS
BenjaminBirdie's Thomas Jefferson
Not sure it would make a difference. Driveclub's terrible launch and all of the negative press it deserved can only be overcome by price cuts and delivering on the free Ps+ edition. Sony should utilize Microsoft's strategy with Xbox One and slash Driveclub's price if they truly want people to play the game (and invest in DLC).
Mohonky
Member
This is a great idea. By re-reviewing games after numerous patches and updates there will be more journalists in a job as the workload increases for all media outlets!
No actually this is a shit idea right up there with developers moaning that journalists just didnt 'get' their high concept game etc.
In this specific case, the scores for the game wont even change. Outside of weather, they reviewed exactly the same game, working multiplayer and all. The game was not broken for reviewers, that was saved exclusively for consumers that had to pay money. The issues reviewers had with the game are still all there so what would be the point?
No actually this is a shit idea right up there with developers moaning that journalists just didnt 'get' their high concept game etc.
In this specific case, the scores for the game wont even change. Outside of weather, they reviewed exactly the same game, working multiplayer and all. The game was not broken for reviewers, that was saved exclusively for consumers that had to pay money. The issues reviewers had with the game are still all there so what would be the point?
ezekielpacman
Member
I think this is what Kotaku already said they were looking to do conceptually (in general, not for Driveclub), and in a world where games are increasingly becoming services it makes sense to focus on the presently existing product rather than an archived relic that in no way reflects what you now get for your money.
This is more in relation to keeping customers informed rather than updating an arbitrary figure however, and I think most of the review criticisms of Driveclub remain... unless rain provides soul.
This is more in relation to keeping customers informed rather than updating an arbitrary figure however, and I think most of the review criticisms of Driveclub remain... unless rain provides soul.
Air Zombie Meat
Member
Didn't most reviews fail to mention the broken online features? What is there to re-review? The weather patch?
-Pyromaniac-
Member
I think it should only because reviews should be a reflection of the current product, if I'm a consumer looking to buy something I don't want a review to tell me it sucks when it's actually good now. Obviously it should only be done for major changes and that would be to to the site doing the reviews what is considered major. You don't want to be doing it every time a game patches something. Game reviews are already high enough 
With that said I agree with alberto too. meh.
With that said I agree with alberto too. meh.No it should not.
For most mediocre/negative reviews not much has changed. For Eurogamer the game probably still has no romance or passion, for Giant Bomb the handling still sucks, for <insert other gamingwebsite> there's still no open world, still minimal menus, etc etc.
Their loss that they are missing out on the best racer of all time. (note: my personal opinion)
For most mediocre/negative reviews not much has changed. For Eurogamer the game probably still has no romance or passion, for Giant Bomb the handling still sucks, for <insert other gamingwebsite> there's still no open world, still minimal menus, etc etc.
Their loss that they are missing out on the best racer of all time. (note: my personal opinion)
Maastricht
Member
I do think that the value of a game is no longer what it was when the reviewer looked at it. So I think one-off reviews are becoming increasingly out-of-date, and the best reviews have stipulations and if/whens indicating what it would take to change their opinion about a game beforehand.
My personal solution recently has been to break a game down into features and issues, and track their status. This should help at least determine their current value while preserving their historical value. Imagine for instance that in some horrible future you can only install the game as it was released, and can't download any of the updates to the game? You'd then be able to see what that is like - which can be worse than what reviewers got, who may already gotten a patch before reviewing.
Of course it will only work if some more people start updating patch, feature and issue data into the site.
( www.techingames.net )
My personal solution recently has been to break a game down into features and issues, and track their status. This should help at least determine their current value while preserving their historical value. Imagine for instance that in some horrible future you can only install the game as it was released, and can't download any of the updates to the game? You'd then be able to see what that is like - which can be worse than what reviewers got, who may already gotten a patch before reviewing.
Of course it will only work if some more people start updating patch, feature and issue data into the site.
( www.techingames.net )I see your admiration of Driveclub constantly, but I haven't seen any details on why you think it's so great? I would love to see why exactly you like it so much as to call it the "best racer of all time".
I've put around 3 hours into the game. But I'm having a hard time figuring out why I should care about anything of it, except for the graphics. Everything just feels barebone. All you can do is to hunt stars in SP or be a dork in MP. Heck, there's not even a replay function.
When Driveclub isn't a real sim racer like GT, then why did Evolution decided to make the game this boring? Seems like they just wanted to see people jizz all over the interwebs when seeing the pretty graphics.
black_spear
Neo Member
Same here.
They released an unfinished product, so they have to take on the consequences of their own acts.
Evolution has polished the gameplay and the online and the challenges are already available, but all these changes have been made after the official release. Medias have to keep the first reviews for the record.
I am agree If some Medias publish an article describing the current state of DriveClub.
The combination of the graphics, sound, handling, sense of speed and track layouts, combined with the dynamic lighting and now weather.
Everything clicks, for me.
I also don't hunt stars or be a dork in MP (well the latter sometimes haha), I like to race... Ready, set, go, and try to do better than the last lap/time..
There are definitely instances where I think a game should be re-reviewed, but I don't think Driveclub falls in that category. Reviewers never mentioned server problems and nothing has fundamentally changed. They added weather and more content. It's not like they introduced new mechanics or altered existing ones.
ChaosInTheRain
Member
I get the principle of people saying that they should not have released an unfinished game, but my case I only consider think that it was unfinished because they patched in the weather. That is an amazing addition to the game and should have been there for day one.
The server issues were an unforeseen problem and doesn't really count towards calling the game unfinished. Ubisoft and various other companies are testing our patience on that issue it needs to be stopped. In those cases it is a strategic decision on behalf of the publisher to remove the normal polishing time at the end of a release and instead replace with a day one patch, thus shortening the dev cycle. This has gone way way overboard now and we have a bunch of game released this christmas that are completely bug ridden.
The above does not really apply to Driveclub. The question is do we want it do go down in the annals of gaming history as the broken game with mediocre reviews that was initially released or as the relatively excellent game that it currently is?
In this case I would support a set of new reviews because I believe the server issues were a genuine unforeseen event and not a strategy ala Ubisoft.
The server issues were an unforeseen problem and doesn't really count towards calling the game unfinished. Ubisoft and various other companies are testing our patience on that issue it needs to be stopped. In those cases it is a strategic decision on behalf of the publisher to remove the normal polishing time at the end of a release and instead replace with a day one patch, thus shortening the dev cycle. This has gone way way overboard now and we have a bunch of game released this christmas that are completely bug ridden.
The above does not really apply to Driveclub. The question is do we want it do go down in the annals of gaming history as the broken game with mediocre reviews that was initially released or as the relatively excellent game that it currently is?
In this case I would support a set of new reviews because I believe the server issues were a genuine unforeseen event and not a strategy ala Ubisoft.
SomedayTheFire
Member
Nah they fucked up the release. It's a great game, fantastic looker but they shot themselves in the foot etc.
There could be parallel reviews, basically a LTTP/RTTP situation. That would be interesting. maybe get the initial reviewer to go back to it see how it's like now and get someone who's never played it. Though I think all sites should do something like that
There could be parallel reviews, basically a LTTP/RTTP situation. That would be interesting. maybe get the initial reviewer to go back to it see how it's like now and get someone who's never played it. Though I think all sites should do something like that
Static reviews scores are cheaper for the marketing departments.
LiquidMetal14
hide your water-based mammals
Given other types of review tend to do this from time to time I see no issue with something like this.
It's just as fair to criticize a game rightfully as it is to write separate articles or amend some text into a review score.
Or we could even go a step further. I'm not saying it's okay to ship rush games but if there is vast improvements or additions of an already good game, let's say around 6 months down the line, then it would be worthy of having like a six month check in to see how certain games progress with stuff like downloadable content or overall enhancements.
A company could have a whole different mode or change the game entirely via a separate portion of the game that would warrant almost being a new game. Now that would be something really cool because not only does a potentially change the game but add value to it. We can kind of get into all these details pending the circumstance but I don't see this as a bad idea.
Didn't DriveClub work fine for online play during reviews? Why re-review a game when all it has done is add weather?
Some folks didn't like the game because they didn't like the game. A re-review because of weather seems unnecessary as it doesn't change much of anything other than visuals.
EDIT: what has changed that will change the opinion of GiantBomb, among others?
"Driveclub looks nice and has a couple of good ideas about handling leaderboard challenges, but the core of it--actually driving a car--drags the entire thing down."
Some folks didn't like the game because they didn't like the game. A re-review because of weather seems unnecessary as it doesn't change much of anything other than visuals.
EDIT: what has changed that will change the opinion of GiantBomb, among others?
"Driveclub looks nice and has a couple of good ideas about handling leaderboard challenges, but the core of it--actually driving a car--drags the entire thing down."