I started this discussion in the Dying Light thread with the below post :Ultrasoundwave wrote:Seems to split opinion so far. I personally don't think you can review anything - a game, a film, a book, whatever - without seeing it through to completion. I'm now wondering if Sterling bothered to watch the last 20 minutes of The 6th Sense......? "There's a kid who can see ghosts, Bruce Willis was there, etc. 5/10" |
Can you review a game (or anything else?) that you haven't finished?
-
Ultrasoundwave 6,440 posts
Seen 5 hours ago
Registered 11 years ago -
Not-a-reviewer 7,686 posts
Seen 1 week ago
Registered 7 years agoThis again?
Yes. Games aren't films. -
Rivuzu 18,424 posts
Seen 7 hours ago
Registered 15 years agoI'd say yes personally, if the review was centric to the mechanics and not the plot. And that's what game reviews are. Reviews the gameplay, not the plot alone.
No other medium can compare really. You would expect at least 5-8 hours of playtime to formulate an opinion for a review mind.
Edited by Rivuzu at 18:38:09 29-01-2015 -
disusedgenius 10,677 posts
Seen 16 hours ago
Registered 14 years agoI'd expect them so say if they didn't, but I don't have an issue with it. If it's not good enough to finish then that says a lot as well.
Edited by disusedgenius at 18:40:41 29-01-2015 -
DFawkes 32,791 posts
Seen 11 hours ago
Registered 16 years agoI'd be case by case, but for most games you'll know how it plays pretty quickly. So yes, in many games you can review it without having experienced it all. -
Saul_Iscariot 4,399 posts
Seen 3 days ago
Registered 9 years agoIf I can review a meal without finishing it then there is the distinct possibility I could review a game without completing it. I could play enough to form an opinion on the graphics, sound, controls etc, etc. You could argue it isn't a balanced review if my review focused on, say, the story. -
RedPanda87 2,169 posts
Seen 15 hours ago
Registered 14 years agoI don't think the film comparison works with anything but the most story driven games. I agree that you shouldn't review them if you haven't finished them though. Your opinion isn't likely to change drastically if you've already put a decent chunk of time in but it can change.
I gave the KotOR 2 example in the other thread- it just falls apart at the end.
More recently Dragon Age Inquisition took a good 20 hours for me to properly get into but I absolutely loved the final third.
Freemium games are particularly problematic as they often don't become truly intolerable until you've already sunk a lot of hours in.
Etc... -
It depends on the game. For example, you can't "complete" FIFA. You can't "complete" Destiny.
That being said, I think a lousy conclusion can really take the shine off a game. I avoided ME3 because I heard awful things about the ending and I know I'd have begrudged the time I invested in the series only to be hugely let down by the ending.
But not all games with a conclusion are so narrarive-driven. I'd say you could review Mario Galaxy and halfway through be convinced it's perfect. -
Tonka 31,980 posts
Seen 18 hours ago
Registered 18 years agoUrs -
Yeah. I think so. Depends on how much you play, watch listen to though.
If I get a half way through a film or gang and it hasn't captured me then I am entitled to say this is shit.
Had enough time.
I mean take the sixth sense that was so dull gave up half through. Crap film. -
HelloNo 2,283 posts
Seen 6 hours ago
Registered 13 years agoI see no problem with it as long as they are up front with it, hell even if they weren't I'd assume they'd put a few hours into it.
What gets my goat is when reviewers miss things or complain about plot-holes that are actually explained. Or silly spelling mistakes.
(Edit: typo! /irony)
Edited by HelloNo at 19:30:40 29-01-2015 -
RedPanda87 2,169 posts
Seen 15 hours ago
Registered 14 years agoI think my main issue is this in conjunction with scores. If you're open about not having finished the game and don't give it a score that's ok, since it's basically a preview based on a final build, but once you attach a score you're giving it a more concrete grade and I don't see how you can be in a position to do that when you've left it unfinished.
I'd be perfectly happy if review scores went away altogether, but while they exist I think you should finish a game if you're going to assign one. -
wuntyate 17,494 posts
Seen 5 hours ago
Registered 8 years agoYeah. I played through half of LA Noir then binned it. If anyone asked me for my review I would say "it's shite".
At that stage in the game I had gleaned enough of the mechanics, gameplay, plot etc etc to know I really didn't like it for a multitude of reasons that more playing wouldn't have changed my opinion of.
Crap frame rate
Dull story
Annoying lead character
Empty and lifeless city
Terrible and broken interrogation system
Borin crime scene analysis
Etc etc.
none of that would have improved and would have only annoyed me more as the game went on.
So yeah. You don't need to finish a game to critique it. -
SteJones 432 posts
Seen 3 years ago
Registered 7 years agoDepends on the type of game. The quality of a game is largely defined by its genre. If you're playing an action adventure or an RPG, you probably need to see it through to the end.
If you're playing a racing game, a fighting game, a sports game or a strategy game, so much of the games quality is just wrapped up in the immediate game mechanics. In general you can get a fairly good impression of the overall game quality in the first few hours of play. Of course is something crazy then happens later in the game and you don't mention it, you're opening yourself up for some understandable abuse.
But yeah, if someone reviews Tekken after playing it for 2 hours, I think that'll be a more accurate review than someone who reviews FF15 after playing it for 2 hours.
Edited by SteJones at 19:57:44 29-01-2015 -
SteJones 432 posts
Seen 3 years ago
Registered 7 years ago -
If you think the game is rubbish then you can review it without completing it, but if you like it then you really need to finish it to be able to give a proper assessment, otherwise you may miss that a game becomes dull in the last quarter, for example. -
There can't be one "rule".
As has been pointed out already, not all games can be finished or completed.
Elite: Dangerous
Destiny
FIFA
Project Gotham Racing
Links Golf
Wii Sports
Each of these has received full, comprehensive and meaningful reviews. -
beastmaster 22,373 posts
Seen 2 days ago
Registered 17 years agoMost people work to deadlines and may not have the time to do so. There's probably a lot more reviews out there than you think which were not played to the end.
And no, you certainly don't need to finish it. -
wuntyate 17,494 posts
Seen 5 hours ago
Registered 8 years agoI'm not sure and I know these guys are professionals but...would the fact that, say, the game has been played for 20 hours straight over two days affect the review? Surely a game has to be played and digested over a longer spell of time. Hell, I'll get bored of ANYTHING after two hours or so, let alone a concentrated spell of two or three times that. And sometimes we're just not feeling a game that day, or that type of game, which could skew our perspective of it.
So say this Jim guy plays Dying Light solid over two days because he has to, because he's only just got a copy and bless his cotton socks really wants to get a review out. He's burned out from playing it, bored of the visuals by then because he needs a break. That would affect his judgement wouldn't it? Or would it.
Who knows.
Not me!
*disclaimer: this post probably doesn't make any sense, please discard. -
PazJohnMitch 17,276 posts
Seen 15 hours ago
Registered 14 years agoThere was a PS2 JRPG called Rogue Galaxy which was excellent for the first half and terrible for the second. It got very mixed reviews. -
@wuntyphyve - that is a really good point, I imagine it impacts reviewers of any form of media. If you're not in the mood to play a game but you have to to meet a deadline, you're simply not going to enjoy it as much. -
andytheadequate wrote:
Which begs another question.
@wuntyphyve - that is a really good point, I imagine it impacts reviewers of any form of media. If you're not in the mood to play a game but you have to to meet a deadline, you're simply not going to enjoy it as much.
As a reviewer, is a person genuinely writing about their own enjoyment of a game, or are they putting together a professional written piece that describes what they think other people will feel?
Not wishing for this to stray into "the gaming press is corrupt" territory, but how honest are any of today's major review outlets? -
SteJones 432 posts
Seen 3 years ago
Registered 7 years agowuntyphyve wrote:
Absolutely. See "the familiarity heuristic".
I'm not sure and I know these guys are professionals but...would the fact that, say, the game has been played for 20 hours straight over two days affect the review? -
@wuntyphyve That's where the element of objectivity should come in I reckon.
Some websites hide behind cock-ups saying oh it's all subjective, if you don't like the review it's only one man's opinion.
Well, that's not true. If I wanted some random persons opinion I'd look up you tube comments. Professionalism should be being able to assess things properly with some objectivity - whether it's in a genre you don't like, whether it's how crappy or good you feel that day, or anything. -
People seem to demand objectivity and honesty in their reviews, but it's impossible to try and do both. If you try review a game as what you think it's quality is rather than how much you enjoyed it then you're lying.
I imagine it happens a lot, but it's probably the readers demanding it that's at fault as the reviewers are probably scared to admit they didn't like a popular game.
Edited by andytheadequate at 20:39:17 29-01-2015 -
sanctusmortis 9,914 posts
Seen 3 weeks ago
Registered 15 years agoIt's very much a "piece of string" question. It depends on the game type, length, and how much if at all it's likely to ever change. For instance, if you've played enough Dying Light to know its mechanics, and others have told you it never changes, how can seeing the ending really change your review?
Destiny's a really weird case; the gameplay changes depending on the whims of Bungie, after all, and you can't really review it all. I mean, do you have to review just the plot, or do you have to do one of every Public Event, Special Event (Queen's Wrath and Iron Banner are all we know right now) and so on? Is the DLC truly separate for review? How much of that do you have to have done?
Basically, you review what you can within the timeframe. It's why Polygon's shifting review scores are great, even if they don't really do enough with it. -
I'm baffled by the notion of objectivity in games reviews.
Professional or not, I don't expect anyone to objectively review a game because I don't believe such a thing is possible.
Clearly there are technical elements about which one can be objective - framerate, bugs, etc. - but the "quality" of the game is inherently determined by one's enjoyment of it. To draw a parallel, one might be very annoyed by the poor spelling and grammar in a novel but find the story itself fantastic; you would score it accordingly, but don't kid yourself that your enjoyment is objective.
"Professional" reviewers get where they are a) because they're very good writers first and b) people who enjoy playing games. I don't understand why anyone would think there's any more to it than that. -
So enjoyment is the paramount thing, and always equals quality? What about games that are tediously boring as single player and really fun multiplayer? What about if you enjoy a farmville because your off your tits on valium? -
No, cuz what if u dont like a game then u end up liking iyt AMIRITE lads?
Sometimes posts may contain links to online retail stores. If you click on one and make a purchase we may receive a small commission. For more information, go here.
