|
Meanwhile, other professional reviewers are playing the game to completion and reviewing it properly..... Sterling gets away with only reviewing half of it because.........? |
Can you review a game (or anything else?) that you haven't finished? • Page 4
-
Ultrasoundwave 6,440 posts
Seen 5 hours ago
Registered 11 years ago -
nickthegun 87,711 posts
Seen 8 hours ago
Registered 16 years agoHe stated he only played a bit of it fairly explicitly and that's how he does things.
I don't really see how this is such a difficult concept to grasp. -
disusedgenius 10,677 posts
Seen 16 hours ago
Registered 14 years agoBecause people want to know what he thinks about computer games. -
The RPS review even advises people to just skip the storyline and cutscenes entirely. How very dare they. -
munki83 1,853 posts
Seen 11 hours ago
Registered 15 years agodue to how quickly consumers want reviews I can't blame any website for releasing reviews as soon as they can. Unless you're a big name your review will be ignored by the vast majority of people if it's not one of the first to be reviewed. Publishers don't help with their embargos and it's not often we ge a review for a game weeks in advance. -
RedPanda87 2,169 posts
Seen 15 hours ago
Registered 14 years agoActually if anything an embargo does help from that perspective as long as they send the games out well in advance as you don't need to rush to be the first one to get a review up. -
@Cappy
Good points. I love my iPhone but can't stand the keyboard as I often hit the wrong jetter. -
@Cappy
Good points. I love my iPhone but can't stand the keyboard as I often hit the wrong jetter. -
If devs were making decent games all through to the end, then surely they would provide review copies a month prior to release and not do this embargo nonsense.
They know they are making sub par games and minimise the chances of a negative review before the initial sales.
Edited by Madder-Max at 17:14:25 30-01-2015 -
I really don't agree with the "but what if the ending sucks?" argument. That assumes 1) a bad section/ending in a game automatically invalidates all the fun the player had with the rest of the game and 2) that most gamers play games to completion.
Inversely, if a game has a poor start and opens up later I still think it's valid to rate it based on that start alone. How likely is it that gamers will trudge through said poor start in order to find the good bits, after all?
I won't finish a plate of poop because I know I can enjoy a wonderful course after that. Difference is, with a meal I can skip the poop if I want. Modding/exchanging savegames aside I can't skip sections of games at will though.
So I definitely don't think playing games to completion is a must. -
You can see everything on offer, on a plate. You can't with a game -
Not-a-reviewer 7,686 posts
Seen 1 week ago
Registered 7 years agoUltrasoundwave wrote:
Do they?
Meanwhile, other professional reviewers are playing the game to completion and reviewing it properly.....
What if it's all a big lie!? -
Ultrasoundwave 6,440 posts
Seen 5 hours ago
Registered 11 years agoJoeBlade wrote:
What about the "but what if the ending is fantastic?" argument?
I really don't agree with the "but what if the ending sucks?" argument. That assumes 1) a bad section/ending in a game automatically invalidates all the fun the player had with the rest of the game and 2) that most gamers play games to completion.
Bioshock went from a 9 to a 10 (for me) because of it's ending. -
Not-a-reviewer 7,686 posts
Seen 1 week ago
Registered 7 years agoI can tell whether a game is shit after about 20 minutes of play. The quality doesn't tend to change that much after that for 90% of games.
Obviously if it was my job then I'd put in at least a day's worth of effort into it. -
Not-a-reviewer 7,686 posts
Seen 1 week ago
Registered 7 years agoUltrasoundwave wrote:
And the difference between a 9 and a 10 in terms of a review and usefulness to a reader is?
JoeBlade wrote:
What about the "but what if the ending is fantastic?" argument?
I really don't agree with the "but what if the ending sucks?" argument. That assumes 1) a bad section/ending in a game automatically invalidates all the fun the player had with the rest of the game and 2) that most gamers play games to completion.
Bioshock went from a 9 to a 10 (for me) because of it's ending.
It's only on a game where the score would change from a 10 to a 5 that this is an issue. If it's shit for the first 5 hours then it's a waste of anyone's time; if it's great for 5 hours then goes shit then that's rare but you've already got a good few hours of decent entertainment out of it.
Other than Fahrenheit, how many story driven games drop off in quality that much? -
It's worth saying that Bioshock was an exceptional game with wonderful, evolving combat mechanics and a compelling story that led to a mind-blowing conclusion. There was no way you weren't playing it to the end and the whole package was magnificent.
Bioshock Infinite was far less compelling. The mechanics were largely the same but made less sense in the context and I felt the ending was a massive letdown.
I felt I had to play them both to the end to form a full conclusion, though.
I don't get that from Lego Marvel Superheroes. It's a class act but I don't get the same sense that I must finish it to understand how it works as a whole.
Edited by GoatApocalypse at 17:48:26 30-01-2015 -
I think some games pose the question, "Where is this going?" in a positive way, and some in a negative way - but they ask it, and to fully review the game, you should see them to conclusion.
Some don't. And that's not necessarily a bad thing. -
Derblington 35,161 posts
Seen 2 days ago
Registered 17 years agoUltrasoundwave wrote:
You seem really caught up on minor details. You're talking about really small things in the grand scheme of the review. If he's given this game a 5, think about the scope of what would have to change in the second half. Then realize that it's blatantly obvious the design isn't going to change that much, if at all.
JoeBlade wrote:
What about the "but what if the ending is fantastic?" argument?
I really don't agree with the "but what if the ending sucks?" argument. That assumes 1) a bad section/ending in a game automatically invalidates all the fun the player had with the rest of the game and 2) that most gamers play games to completion.
Bioshock went from a 9 to a 10 (for me) because of it's ending.
I'm getting impression that you don't like starling for reasons other then him not finishing Dying Light. -
Serious question: do you generally agree with his reviews? -
Saul_Iscariot 4,399 posts
Seen 3 days ago
Registered 9 years agoMadder-Max wrote:
Is that in reference to my point about being able to review a meal without finishing it? I'd have still tried it before giving up on it.
You can see everything on offer, on a plate. You can't with a game -
Cappy 14,394 posts
Seen 4 hours ago
Registered 16 years agoIf you get served something unpalatable, it only takes a taste to realise that it's not for you and clearing the entire plate is unnecessary. -
Ultrasoundwave wrote:
I'd argue that shouldn't be the case because the rest of the game should be compelling enough to want to play through to the end in the first place.
JoeBlade wrote:
What about the "but what if the ending is fantastic?" argument?
I really don't agree with the "but what if the ending sucks?" argument. That assumes 1) a bad section/ending in a game automatically invalidates all the fun the player had with the rest of the game and 2) that most gamers play games to completion.
Bioshock went from a 9 to a 10 (for me) because of it's ending.
If a review score took the quality of specific sections into account I'd be a bit pissed about it to be honest; a fantastic ending does not redeem a dozen hours of mediocre gameplay for me. Which is, ironically, the main critique I've seen levelled at Infinite (I loved it myself, for the record)
I'd rather have hours upon hours of great fun with a game I never finish than give up one hour in because I think the mechanics are frustrating, even if things really improve later on. The former is good value, the latter isn't.
The one exception I can think of is when a game is great overall but includes one part that is particularly poorly designed, frustrating or infuriating, to the point where most players would give up.
A review based on an unfinished game could miss that, whereas I definitely would want to know about it.
Still, overall I assume a good reviewer - which I consider Jim Sterling to be - intuitively knows when he/she's seen enough of a game to judge it.
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.
