Polygon gives high scores to games despite their anti-consumer aspects / DRM strategy
- Thread starter Vire
- Start date
They get to put out favorable review for EA in stable environment that can't be changed later. EA's PR people know Polygon plays ball. Polygon gets extra page views from having an early review.
Arthur and Polygon know MC's policy before they put their policy in place. Polygon's publishing of this review early was done for selfish reasons, not to honestly serve their readership.
I'm sure EA would have been happy to see Polygon gave it a nice score, so they're bound to get some nice exclusives or something thrown their way in the future.
When did they outside of doing those two or three edits of the trailer for Press Reset?
SatelliteOfLove
Member
The tone of this thread goes up and down more than a Polygon review, I swear.
I'm actually shaking my head in front of my computer because I'm baffled that a game review site compares unfavorably to IGN when it comes to review standards.
:lol
Not bad lol.
It's possible. But they have had an extremely good track record with reviews in the past.
They always end with a verdict too, that explains multiple facets of the game, and what to expect. Allows the readers to come up with their own opinions and respects that people look for different things. Plus the articles are always good reads.
Something like a hundred separate people have posted in here, what were you expecting?
And?
The Beta had server issues so there was every reason to believe that launch would have similar issues. If server issues are enough to knock a 9.5 down to an 8 the original score should have been an 8, given that server issues were much more likely than smooth sailing.
If you are going to give a speculative score you might as well give one that reflects the most likely scenario, rather than one that reflects the least likely one.
Maybe it refers to the whole character they cut out and put out for more money in their Deluxe edition/DLC?
It's pretty hard to gauge how much of that was true, but going by pre-release leaks, and the amount of valuable information and insight it gives within the game it's not a stretch to think that was the case.
la flama blanca
Banned
Vire
Member
Yep...
IGN has some of the best video reviews, if nothing else.
There's no way for a reviewer to review that though. They can only go by what was in the disc they played. I can tell you that ME3 didn't feel like it had a huge hole in it when played without Javik.
It's about time there's a thread about this issue.
Journalists are supposed to be helpful to the consumers. Part of the package of these games are these practices that get brushed aside as though they're non-issues if you don't care for them. But the truth of the matter is, they do affect the game and a consumer's experience with the game. If the game is not working because of these issues, impeding the player from enjoying it and playing it, the review should bring that issue to light as a negative.
I mean, Dead Space 3's ammo system was completely changed just because EA wanted microtransactions in the game. Doesn't that change how the game was developed, difficulty-wise, and also the experience of the player? Why doesn't that aspect of the game get knocked? It's sidestepped as far as I know. A anti-consumer practice changed how the game is played as a side effect. Why is that glossed over? It might be small, but really, it's there. The game could have been completely different in that department without microtransactions.
And of course microtransactions in general are horrific and I'm utterly baffled why "gaming journalists" never seem to make a mention of them existing in the game in their reviews. :S
Journalists are supposed to be helpful to the consumers. Part of the package of these games are these practices that get brushed aside as though they're non-issues if you don't care for them. But the truth of the matter is, they do affect the game and a consumer's experience with the game. If the game is not working because of these issues, impeding the player from enjoying it and playing it, the review should bring that issue to light as a negative.
I mean, Dead Space 3's ammo system was completely changed just because EA wanted microtransactions in the game. Doesn't that change how the game was developed, difficulty-wise, and also the experience of the player? Why doesn't that aspect of the game get knocked? It's sidestepped as far as I know. A anti-consumer practice changed how the game is played as a side effect. Why is that glossed over? It might be small, but really, it's there. The game could have been completely different in that department without microtransactions.
And of course microtransactions in general are horrific and I'm utterly baffled why "gaming journalists" never seem to make a mention of them existing in the game in their reviews. :S
The lack of video reviews is my largest issue with Polygon.
Just to clarify: The other responses to that question were more in line with what I meant. The above is not what I believe is actually happening here or anywhere.
A good publisher-outlet relationship is preferable to a strained one. Just ask Ziff Davis and Ubisoft.
Vire
Member
old manatee
Banned
Any publication that gave Diablo 3 a 10 is dead to me. I could even chalk up a 9 to a difference of opinion, but a 10 is just suspect.
Dr. Ian Bogost is an award-winning designer and media philosopher whose work focuses on videogames and computational media. He is Ivan Allen College Distinguished Chair in Media Studies and Professor of Interactive Computing at the Georgia Institute of Technology, and Founding Partner at Persuasive Games LLC. His research and writing considers videogames as an expressive medium, and his creative practice focuses on political games and artgames.
http://www.bogost.com/about/about_me.shtml
I'm so glad NeoGAF apparently isn't the only place that thinks Polygon is a big fucking joke.
universalmind
Member
Hmm, never heard of this site, but that Diablo 3 review is enough to convince me they're stupid and to disregard anything they say in the future.
EmCeeGramr
Member
boy phil kollar really got owned by jesus of nazareth
Shao Kahn Brewing a Stew
Banned
I've stopped reading gaming reviews. I've stopped reading it because no one reviews it like any other product on the market. No one cares what the consumer aspect is or what the lasting feeling is or how it has many downsides that has nothing to do with the game itself but the money-making ideas behind it. There is no transparency no matter how much they try. Video reviews on YouTube are far more knowledgeable especially if any frustration is present than these reviewers who are paid money to do it.
Its a very shitty practice and its a reason why I'll always call them "game journalists" with a quote. Always.
Its a very shitty practice and its a reason why I'll always call them "game journalists" with a quote. Always.
Has a game with an always on connection ever launched well? None that I've played that's for sure.
My 9 year old son could of predicted the servers being jacked today
The review process for these games are so dumb. Everyone rushes reviews out so they can get them clickz and end up looking dumb when the servers don't work. Then in a couple days when the server issues are resolved they will look dumb again when they bump the score back up
My 9 year old son could of predicted the servers being jacked today
The review process for these games are so dumb. Everyone rushes reviews out so they can get them clickz and end up looking dumb when the servers don't work. Then in a couple days when the server issues are resolved they will look dumb again when they bump the score back up
les papillons sexuels
Banned
so... when do we start bad mouthing valve for pulling the same shit with drm?
Absolutely. Or in a game with this kind of online features. Delay the review (I know LOL) until you can review it in real life conditions since the online setting is mandatory and will reflect heavily in the experience.
Ian Bogost, whoever you are, is bringing the truth.
They should have actually waited to post the review. Their score adjustment policy in this case is weak. When you do stuff like this on the first day, because you were too greedy to wait until today to test it under real conditions. You deserve ridicule.
They should have actually waited to post the review. Their score adjustment policy in this case is weak. When you do stuff like this on the first day, because you were too greedy to wait until today to test it under real conditions. You deserve ridicule.
Even I'm not that harsh. Cold-blooded ...
This guy is a college professor? Was his twitter account hacked or something?
Vire
Member
PapaJustify
Member
Holy...
old manatee
Banned
When they start using the kind of DRM that Diablo 3 or Sim City uses?
Shao Kahn Brewing a Stew
Banned
More like the hero we deserve.
les papillons sexuels
Banned
you mean like steam?
old manatee
Banned
Doctor Decimate
Member
for a site that billed themselves as the evolution of video games journalism, it's amusing to see the reviews side of things remain business as usual
You missed what happened in 2004 with Half Life 2's release
RiccochetJ
Gold Member
Wow. That escalated.
Don't think that guy works for Ars anymore.
Just ranting and calling Polygon shit is just going to galvanize Polygon and weaken their critics.
My reaction as well.
I do like Polygon though, I don't know where all the hate comes from (and they did handle this review poorly given that they had a suspicion the servers wouldn't handle the player load)