this post was submitted on 22 Mar 2024
400 points (94.6% liked)
Games
16407 readers
1758 users here now
Video game news oriented community. No NanoUFO is not a bot :)
Posts.
- News oriented content (general reviews, previews or retrospectives allowed).
- Broad discussion posts (preferably not only about a specific game).
- No humor/memes etc..
- No affiliate links
- No advertising.
- No clickbait, editorialized, sensational titles. State the game in question in the title. No all caps.
- No self promotion.
- No duplicate posts, newer post will be deleted unless there is more discussion in one of the posts.
- No politics.
Comments.
- No personal attacks.
- Obey instance rules.
- No low effort comments(one or two words, emoji etc..)
- Please use spoiler tags for spoilers.
My goal is just to have a community where people can go and see what new game news is out for the day and comment on it.
Other communities:
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
This kind of behavior should be enough for outlets to blacklist developers. But since they don’t/wont/can’t band together to do that, they have no say in how games are reviewed.
Not mentioning micro transactions is equivalent to not mentioning the price. Why review a game if you don’t know if it will be $50 or $100 at launch?
Capcom basically asked them to review a game that doesn’t even exist, they asked them to review a dev build.
They should automatically deduct 3 points from the publisher's titles for "X" amount of time when they pull this shit.
Anyone that reviews a game in advance of release knows they are playing a different game than the release version. The guy in the article even stated they told him exactly what he was getting, but he didn't READ it. Then afterwards felt entitled to those things in another SKU and so wrote a hit piece that everyone, that also didn't look at the store page, is now all fired up about.
EDIT s/did/didn't
This is only partially true. Reviewers know that the exact build and exact code aren’t final when reviewing, that is true and normal. The reviewer does however expect that gameplay systems, graphics, audio, and the rest are mostly complete with only minor tweaks needed. The game should be 99% done by the time reviewers have it.
Yet nowadays the game is not 99% done. This even applies to huge day 1 patches. Like great you patched stuff but also reviewers can’t assess performance and bugs properly for consumers that way. Same is true of monetization which is a huge factor for enjoyment in modern games.