Just lost a little respect for him.
Polygon gives high scores to games despite their anti-consumer aspects / DRM strategy
- Thread starter Vire
- Start date
Just lost a little respect for him.
Riposte
Member
In addition to game academia, Ian Bogost's games are now also jokes. His contribution to the industry is felt most by the grin on my face.
Pachterballs
Banned
justin mcelroy.
embarrassing.
embarrassing.
Yeah, this is where I get confused. How is knocking it down a couple points helping anyone? Especially for something as specific as bad launch server reliability.
I would like for him to expand on that. I think something more originated this hate towards Polygon than a mere badly written non-sensical sentence and a fluctuating review score.
cutmeamango
Banned
I'm personally against a review accounting DRM into it's scoring/ranking system.
DLC themselves and strategies either unless they meet a (some) criteria of influence to the game.
It may be part of the product, but it doesn't concern the game itself.
But they certainly should be mentioned and when necessary, stressed.
It is important to correctly inform consumers.
DLC themselves and strategies either unless they meet a (some) criteria of influence to the game.
It may be part of the product, but it doesn't concern the game itself.
But they certainly should be mentioned and when necessary, stressed.
It is important to correctly inform consumers.
Can Crusher
Banned
So the problem is the re scoring? I don't see how that warrants this sort of aggressive reaction. They reviewed the game in perfect conditions which allowed them to essentially judge the game on its merits. The game comes out and the service isn't rocking like it did in their private servers, then the released product has flaws that the review product didn't.
From a 9.5 to an 8, to me means that these folks are trying to be a bit more correct toward those who read the review, because a service on launch that doesn't allow plenty of people to play the game is a really negative point, and a 1.5 deduction seems pretty fair. You have to be connected to the service to play it after all.
He's acting like a moron.
njean777
Member
Meh, people are way to sensitive these days. Having to apologize for calling somebodies work shitty is sad. Is there a nicer way to say it? Sure there is, but it still means the same thing in the end. Your work sucks. No reason to jazz it up.
What, he's excited about Skyrim?justin mcelroy.
embarrassing.
If there is no way to play the game without the DRM, the two are inextricably linked.
Goldenroad
Member
I bought and played the collectors edition of Mass Effect 3, and I agree wholeheartedly that having Javik in the game makes it a better game, but it's not any more of a game. I would have been pissed off if this character/story arch that I'm paying an extra $10 for didn't end up being something relatively major. I think $10 is a significant amount more to ask for a game and giving gamers a piece of content any less than what they delivered would have been a far more egregious offense.
I'm just saying, if that's what the OP is referring to, DLC, be it day one, or 6 months later, should not be factored into the review, but maybe Polygon is onto something by updating their reviews for games as more content becomes available. I mean think of what Team Fortress 2 is now compared to when it came out. Does a review of TF 2 from 2007 mean anything to a person thinking of getting into it today?
Changing a score and modifying a review is hard to do because you are kind of changing the past by changing the score. I mean if a game like Legend of Zelda came out today would it receive nearly the universal praise it did at the time?
I know it's only two days later, but maybe they should have just put up a new review or a modified version of this one while maintaining the original because that score did reflect how it felt when he played the game before it started having all these issues. I think there may have been a better way to handle this.
Games are constantly changing now and that needs to be reflected in their critiques. But how do you shoot a moving target like that?
They rushed out a review for a product that doesn't exist in the way that they played it. They serve only their own ego by adjusting now. If they cared about having integrity they would have waited until at least playing the game under normal conditions to publish the review. They didn't. They knew what they were doing by rushing the review out.
Dorito Pope
Banned
What's wrong with game journalism?justin mcelroy.
embarrassing.
Except for the part where it makes no sense at all. For those who can play it's still a 9.5, for those who can't it's sure as hell not a very good game or an 8.
Not scoring it all would've been the way to go. If publishers want good ratings for their products, they need to have their shit together for the release. Easy as that. Don't sell us broken products.
And their justification was they wanted to get the review out as close to launch as possible, as if that's truly what their readers wanted over a legitimate review of a real product. Notice virtually no other outlet, not even IGN, did what they did. This was a massive mistake I hope they learn from.
He's also the guy that gave Nier a 0/5 and then proceeded to portray himself as the journalist video games deserve.
SatelliteOfLove
Member
He doesn't deserve this for the reviews, he deserves this for misusing "evolve" and calling games services.
partyphone
Banned
Polygon isn't much better than kotaku. Most of their content is just regurgitated press releases. Reviews and previews are whatever. Those things are basically dead I don't know why anyone cares except to use them as fuel for forum pissing contests.
And then you have "reporting" like this: http://www.polygon.com/2013/3/4/4064300/n64-controller-deviantart
That article is 100% kotaku. They don't reach out to get the guy's real name? This is just a fluffy reblog. Congratulations on having the world's most expensive tumblr.
And then you have "reporting" like this: http://www.polygon.com/2013/3/4/4064300/n64-controller-deviantart
That article is 100% kotaku. They don't reach out to get the guy's real name? This is just a fluffy reblog. Congratulations on having the world's most expensive tumblr.
Good for you. Meanwhile, those particular games have demonstratively influenced the way industry people approach their design and procedural messages, along with informing how people in general can understand games as procedures of meaning. Thus, you're frankly pretty ignorant if you think something like September 12th is a "joke". And I bet you probably never read any of his academia to know anything about what you're talking about, judging from your generalizing knee-jerk reaction.
Post better and stop trying to shit up the forum with ignorant trolling.
Permanently A
Junior Member
OMFG wtf 2
lol
Is Bogost bipolar? Seriously fucking confused by his tweets
Yeah, I can see why so many people seemingly don't like him very much here on GAF.
Pachterballs
Banned
what, that's completely rubbish. it should matter just as much as
a) skyrim 0fps on ps3
b) any DLC hooks - see dead space 3.
Aside from being kind of bland, what exactly is wrong with this post? Why is it so important that they hunt down the name of someone who intentionally goes by a screen name online?
Why? Can you explain why you think this?
Goldenroad
Member
None of that is true.
Not gonna sit here and defend the guy all day, but he didn't review Nier. He refused to because he got to a point in the game he couldn't get past, so just posted a video telling everyone he wasn't going to review it, which got taken as a negative. I think a lot of writers would have just posted an uninformed review based on the part of the game that they did play. He's a pretty straight up guy I think.
The other part of your sentence doesn't really make sense.
abstract alien
Member
That doesn't concern me if what I paid for is awesome. I don't really care if it's anti consumer. It has nothing to do with the actual game itself. Review what's in the box, and do a separate review on the company/publisher if you want a score based on their business practices.
partyphone
Banned
It's cheap and easy page filler that lacks any substance. Why not hire an Etsy reporter who makes a post any time someone puts NES controller earrings up for sale?
Their business practice of invasive DRM is affecting the quality of the game. See: Server queues.
I can't believe they changed the score. McElroy should have probably run it by someone with critical thinking skills before editing.
Holy crap.
Also, while I don't disagree with anything Bogost said, he could have crushed them much more effectively by picking them apart in a calm manner. He just sort of went off the rails.
Holy crap.
Also, while I don't disagree with anything Bogost said, he could have crushed them much more effectively by picking them apart in a calm manner. He just sort of went off the rails.
Because those controllers are really cool and worth sharing? There's absolutely nothing wrong with post like that. Don't be ridiculous.
I feel like there should be the LTTP heading in for this thread. We're gonna fight the anti-consumerism in games now? Better late than never?
I don't give a fuck about polygon or their reviews but I feel like it would be a disservice to those that do by docking a (hypothetically) great game because a section of people disagree with a method of monetization/distribution employed in it. Just vote with your wallet.
I don't give a fuck about polygon or their reviews but I feel like it would be a disservice to those that do by docking a (hypothetically) great game because a section of people disagree with a method of monetization/distribution employed in it. Just vote with your wallet.
RPS used to be better but these days they seem obsessed with either hyperblic ranting about the game or trying to interpret the games as harshly as possible so they can jump back on their hobby horse about racism/sexism/whatever other ism they feel will bring the clicks. The sites declined in general over the last few months.
I'm gonna have to disagree with this. I don't care what part of the product is broken: whether it's the game design, whether some programmers fucked up the technical side or whether the delivery mechanism/DRM doesn't let me play the game.
Yes, it is part of the product and must be accounted for!
Not taking parts of the product into account is illogical and shows clear bias.
cutmeamango
Banned
It is a prerequisite to allow the execution as is minimum specifications.
It just happens to have other motivations (that can be understood as sensible, but I won't argue this) and be a bigger deterrent (since you should not expect a continuously available connection).
It doesn't constitute the game, it isn't a content of it.
Skyrim at 0fps matters, since it interferes with the usability and playability as intended by the creator.
As for Dead Space 3 DLC strategy, I am not really aware of it aside from weapon crafting components. Find it hard to believe they make it relevant or necessary to the participation, progression or conclusion of the game.
Bitmap Frogs
Mr. Community
Game reviews are a joke, news at 11.
It doesn't matter how edgy or modern Polygon pretends to be, they are another marketer for the big publishers like IGN and the rest of the gaming press.
And yeah, ripping Javik out of the game to sell as day one DLC was a travesty. In ME2 Zaeed was only available for new copies as he was behind a one time use code, so there are alternatives.
It doesn't matter how edgy or modern Polygon pretends to be, they are another marketer for the big publishers like IGN and the rest of the gaming press.
And yeah, ripping Javik out of the game to sell as day one DLC was a travesty. In ME2 Zaeed was only available for new copies as he was behind a one time use code, so there are alternatives.
What's worse, rating a game a zero, or being bested by an X on a minimap?
Or as The Dark Id put it in his LP
Spider from Mars
tap that thorax
Yea, he couldn't follow the large X on the mini-map in an optional side quest so he decided to just not review one of the best games of the generation.
Kazuma Kiryu
Member
and polygon continues to be a joke. so much for the evolution or whatever of games journalism.
Goldenroad
Member
Rating the game a zero.
I'd rather that a journalist be honest than be great at all video games.
partyphone
Banned
Yeah it's disappointing. But twitter is pretty terrible for anything but snark.
And it's hilarious that they changed the score. It doesn't make any sense. In what way were the server problems unexpected? This happens to online games almost without fail. Especially ones with incredible amounts of hype.
Are they gonna change it back next week when things have stabilised and nobody has any issues anymore? Because that'd be fair. I bet they don't though. The server problems weren't even as bad as I was expecting. I expected a really slow download and not being able to get into any servers. The game came in within a couple of hours which was reasonable. The NA servers were full but I got into the Oceanic server no problems and it was pretty smooth sailing overall.
partyphone
Banned
It's not that there's anything wrong with the post. It's just that it's fluff from people who were talking big talk about elevating games journalism. I have twitter and tumblr for fluff and places like neogaf for regurgitated press releases. I don't need to sift through terrible web design to find the meaty articles.
Actually it was a trick question because both scenarios render his vidcons opinions, past and future, completely meaningless
EmCeeGramr
Member
RedNumberFive
Banned
justin mcelroy.
embarrassing.
This picture is going to follow him for the rest of his career, and deservedly so.
They said they would, but if that's the case they shouldn't have arbitrarily adjusted the review now.
It doesn't feel fair because it's just misleading to the consumer and feels like they aren't confident in their reviews.
They themselves had mentioned before launch that the review wasn't representative of how the game will end up being - if they feel that then why would they even post it?
For a publication that tries to carry itself as if it's the beacon of gaming journalism, this seems exploitative for page views.
I would rather a review released after launch and representative of the actual product it's meant to be informing you about.