Vire
Member
I dunno if this is true. Take a look at any major forum, amazon reviews, metacritic fan reviews.
There are clearly people upset.
Whether or not it makes a dent in sales is another matter entirely. (It won't)
Polygon gives high scores to games despite their anti-consumer aspects / DRM strategy
- Thread starter Vire
- Start date
I dunno if this is true. Take a look at any major forum, amazon reviews, metacritic fan reviews.
There are clearly people upset.
Whether or not it makes a dent in sales is another matter entirely. (It won't)
Vane_MagicCity
Banned
Maybe most people don't give a shit about it (or so it is perceived) because the gaming media doesn't talk about it.
MegaKungFuRadio
Member
Because they care. People aren't going to go out of their way to talk about things that don't bother them.
Unstoppable Lionheart
Banned
Docking heavily is not the same thing as not docking it at all.
10 for an always online DRM game? Uh no. That's just not an objective review anyway you look at it.
Was it an amazing game? 9.5 with the DRM.
Did the DRM actually cause problems? 8.0-9.0
But 10 is just bullshit.
The important thing to realize is that none of those places represent "most people". If they did the games business would be soooo different.
I hate their entire faux-magazine layout. It's terrible. Such an inefficient way of giving people information. Also the fact they refuse to take their own screenshots of games is ridiculous, everything they use is bullshots and cut scenes and is in no way representative of the actual game. And they defend that practice too by saying screenshots don't give a true representation of how a game looks in motion. Well how the fuck do their PR shots do that?
Why can't an always online game where the service is never interrupted get a 10? What if it uses its always online nature to provide amazing never before seen experiences? (Not saying SimCity does this.)
MegaKungFuRadio
Member
Under what logic does having always online DRM warrant an automatic deduction? Just because?
Delusibeta
Banned
Reading from their scoring guide, yes, most definitely. Obnoxious DRM is pretty much a classical "big but", and hence limits such games to a maximum of 7.
Unstoppable Lionheart
Banned
It warrants an automatic deduction on any single player game. It has no right to be there on a single player game.
Now if the game is multiplayer only, then it really doesn't matter in the slightest bit. I wouldn't dock it then.
MegaKungFuRadio
Member
Vire
Member
Unfortunately it's not just up to the developer about service never being interrupted. Comcast and other major ISP services can have continued downtime and you wouldn't be able to play.
Say you are on a plane and want to play single-player Diablo 3 or Sim City, but there is no public internet access.
Woops, too bad. Sucks to be you!
You can say the same thing for for any game if the electricity died. When does it end?
Unstoppable Lionheart
Banned
I can't think of any good reason to fuck your customers on a single player game.
I didn't realize that you were in love with idea of them taking rights away just because.
Piracy is not the problem they claim it is. In fact, pirates are some of their best customers.
So no, not because I say so but because it makes no sense except that they like to fuck us constantly because they think its fun.
http://www.geek.com/articles/geek-c...proving-pirates-are-great-consumers-20110720/
Maybe you could try using some intelligence in your debates next time. I don't like to fight a battle of wits with unarmed opponents.
MegaKungFuRadio
Member
None of which has anything to do with how you score a game in a review of the game.
Unstoppable Lionheart
Banned
You're just being intentionally dense at this point.
You didn't even read their site's guidelines for how they score games.
When you feel like arming yourself, I'll talk to you.
Until then, you aren't worth any more of my time.
Vane_MagicCity
Banned
Comparing electricity to internet access is ridiculous, internet access is far less reliable than electricity. Further, always online DRM is a choice by the developer. Electricity is not a choice the developer makes.
Da1nonly J
Member
What are these rights you mention? Where are they written down? Where are the legal ramifications for violating these rights?
Darkmakaimura
Can You Imagine What SureAI Is Going To Do With Garfield?
Electricity is a lot more readily available than Internet. There's also the matter of backing up those games you love, your account getting closed/banned, etc.
Vire
Member
That's missing the point.
The point is you shouldn't have to be online to play a singleplayer game. I paid for the game, I technically own it correct? It's taking away ownership rights to a product. (Or re-writing the definition on what it means to own a product)
I'm not getting Sim City for the simple fact that I can't play it singleplayer wherever or whenever. Electricity is much more broadly available than Internet access.
Hmm. My thing with Polygon's reviews happened recently when Runner2 came out. Mind you, I'm heavily biased on this one. I've been dying to play Runner2 for months now and actually beat the first game somehow in anticipation for this one. Over and over I'd go on youtube and watch videos of Runner1 to get myself ready for Runner2.
Mind you I think Runner2 deserves a 100 out of 10, but what's weird about their review is it reads like a very glowing review but still gives it a 8.5. The game has some flaws in my opinion, but this review didn't note anything of the sort and just gave it a 8.5. Just weird, that's all. =p
http://www.polygon.com/game/bit-trip-presents-runner-2-future-legend-of-rhythm-alien/7585
Mind you I think Runner2 deserves a 100 out of 10, but what's weird about their review is it reads like a very glowing review but still gives it a 8.5. The game has some flaws in my opinion, but this review didn't note anything of the sort and just gave it a 8.5. Just weird, that's all. =p
http://www.polygon.com/game/bit-trip-presents-runner-2-future-legend-of-rhythm-alien/7585
I wouldn't say a 5 is a must not play, I mean look at Polygon's Forza Horizon review, that was a 6... Is that really one point off DON'T play? ;-)
Da1nonly J
Member
No you do not own it, and previously you never owned it either. All you did was pay for a license for use.
EmCeeGramr
Member
Polygon reviews aren't written with scores in mind by the reviewer, they're decided by committee:
I'm just saying if we add too many caviats to reviews, you might be diluting the actual value of it. People will have different experiences anyway. I'm not saying you shouldn't include stuff like that in the review process but to blatantly punish games for it seems unfair.
I just feel like this is a working process. Someday somebody will figure it out.
Vire
Member
Maybe publishers would get the hint to cut that shit out if the press actually had the balls to say something.
Instead, they are too worried about if EA will send them a copy of their next game.
MegaKungFuRadio
Member
I can't find where in their review description page it says anything about peripheral elements of a game affecting its score, maybe you can point it out for me:
http://www.polygon.com/pages/about-reviews
I'm not defending always online DRM, but I'm not convinced it's something that warrants an automatic deduction of a review score. Review scores don't work that way, and trying to make them work that way only serves to make them more and more meaningless.
Vane_MagicCity
Banned
There are many people who refuse to buy games because of their DRM and since it's a consideration for many people, it should be a consideration for reviewers too.
Broder Salsa
Banned
Blacklisting polygon is good either way, that formatting is so bad to read.
Sure, but don't you think taking note of DRM issues in a game and specifically noting why this could be a problem is far more valuable than just dinging it a point from the score?
Vane_MagicCity
Banned
Why can't they do both? Aren't bonuses handed out over review scores?
Vire
Member
I'm not asking for just a points reduction.
All I wanted is an honest discussion on how this is a problem for games going forward.
If they have a significant disclaimer warning the viewer of potential Microtransaction/Always On DRM/Other issues, then it is up to the reader to parse out that information and make their decisions afterwords.
Kinda like a General Sergeants warning right?
In my world, I would deduct points, but I realize this isn't necessarily feasible for reviewers.
drkOne
Member
Pay to win is that case where you buy things that you can't get any other way.
I wouldn't classify ME3 as pay to win...
Dropping 1.5 points on a 10 scale because EA is having server problems is somewhat stupid. Wasn't he aware that this would happen?
How about dropping D3 score too? It was just as messy.
And mention the fact that the always-on justification they are giving is a dirty poor excuse.
Should they mention DRM on reviews? No. You're more than likely already informed. If you aren't, you probably don't care.
Should it impact the score? No, unless it impacts the game.
The real problem here is Polygon being a shitty site, but that isn't really surprising. It's pretty much Kotaku 2.0 when you look at the staff.
Lack of access is definitely an issue. Fighting that battle in the review score just makes reviews score an even more arbitrary metric than they already are.
It'll be like, "Hey SimCity got an 8." "That seems kind of low!" "Yeah, but it is actually a 9 because they take off a point for having to be online or something."
I'd much rather just see how good the actual game is from the score, but also get the info about any potentially annoying issues like DRM or microtransactions and whether they actually affect the actual experience of playing the game.
Edit: Your most recent response reclarifies your position to mostly in line with mine. So, yay.
Vire
Member
MegaKungFuRadio
Member
To me, the DRM doesn't affect the quality of a game, which is what (again, to me) a review and its score reflects. While other things like DRM or price will affect whether or not I will buy a game, it doesn't make a game better or worse and has no business having a direct correlation with a score. I don't think it should be swept under the rug and ignored, but devoting such a significant portion of a review to it doesn't sit right with me.
Vire
Member
Value is a part of a game.
DRM/Or other annoyances removes value from the product.
Something like Journey, even though it's an exceedingly short game. I still gained lot's of value from it because it was a beautiful experience.
drkOne
Member
The press does a good job of informing you about DRM.
Also, it's the consumer job to defend their position, by not buying.
I think it worked for Dead Space 3. And the press wasn't even too harsh on it. Will EA get a clue? No, they'll just close the studio.
Nothing the press could've changed, to be honest.
MegaKungFuRadio
Member
I disagree. Value affects how you perceive a game, but not how good the game itself is. If Journey were $30 would it only be half as good?
Edit: Damn, beat me to the punch.
Lactose_Intolerant
Member
Pay to win is where you spend money to gain an advantage over what a nonpaying customer would have. That can be experience, time, weapons, abilities, etc.
Vire
Member
Apparently not though, key developers from the Dead Space crew said that Visceral Games is in stable condition and that they will continue to make Dead Space games.
So maybe (hopefully) the devs will say, look we did it your way EA, that didn't work. Let's get back to basics here.
That's probably being way too optimistic, but hey it could happen... :/
Vane_MagicCity
Banned
Unless you are pirating a game, the DRM is as much a part of the game as any other part. When you buy Diablo III, you buy the DRM with it and that DRM will be there everytime you start the game.
When DLC is somewhat incorporated into the main game, they need to review the game with that in mind -- ie; if the game is made significantly easier by purchasing DLC, or if the game is significantly harder and "grindier" without it. Or is it balanced with and without DLC?
They need to start exploring this and write about it now that more games come with this type of DLC. People need to know if the DLC is an obstacle or not.
Games with poorly balanced DLC should take a significant hit in the reviews, because it might incentivize the developers to focus on balancing the DLC if they have to add it.
They need to start exploring this and write about it now that more games come with this type of DLC. People need to know if the DLC is an obstacle or not.
Games with poorly balanced DLC should take a significant hit in the reviews, because it might incentivize the developers to focus on balancing the DLC if they have to add it.
Vire
Member
In the end though, I'm really glad I made this thread because there has been some really good discussion and debate over Always Online DRM, Reviews and even a bit drama thrown in thanks to the Sim City debacle.
Thanks everyone.
EDIT: A response from a Polygon writer has been written on a personal blog to Ian Bogost:
https://patrick-stafford.squarespac...-ian-bogost-is-wrong-and-maybe-a-little-right
Thanks everyone.
EDIT: A response from a Polygon writer has been written on a personal blog to Ian Bogost:
https://patrick-stafford.squarespac...-ian-bogost-is-wrong-and-maybe-a-little-right
MegaKungFuRadio
Member
I agree that DRM is part of the package. I do not agree that it is as much a part of the game as any other part.
old manatee
Banned
For the first month that Diablo 3 was out the DRM was pretty much the only part of the game.
I think there is room for evaluation of DLC but I don't think it should happen in the main review of the game. For a normal retail game the review should just be "exactly what you get in the box if you buy it off the shelft the day it comes out" IE no preorder bonuses or limited edition stuff or Day 1 DLC. I could maybe see an argument for including a day one patch, but still not a fan of that.
A lot of the potential problems that come from DLC will still come out with this style of review. If it had turned out that Dead Space was just impossibly difficult without microtransactions we certainly would have heard about it. And similarly if a game feels like it is missing large swathes of plot or content (because they had been pulled out for DLC) it would also get docked for that.
Jake Tower
Banned
Not only are you right, your awesome Powerslave avatar makes you irrefutable!