Not when they've only done it once and the reason they did it to SimCity was due to their own incompetence. It lowers their credibility as far as I'm concerned. It also creates a double standard when you have Diablo III with a score of a 10/10 still despite having the same issues as SimCity.
Polygon gives high scores to games despite their anti-consumer aspects / DRM strategy
- Thread starter Vire
- Start date
Not when they've only done it once and the reason they did it to SimCity was due to their own incompetence. It lowers their credibility as far as I'm concerned. It also creates a double standard when you have Diablo III with a score of a 10/10 still despite having the same issues as SimCity.
Don't listen to this man. Keep digging!
I see your point, and I personally hate always online DRM, but I just find it difficult to get upset about this. This kind of DRM always has initial problems when many people try to access the service at once, a good reason to always hold off on such titles.
As long as the reviewer made it clear that this game required an internet connection, I'm not very upset. How much should a reviewer mark down a game with AO DRM? When he is playing it is before launch and probably without a hitch, should the score be reduced because there might be problems?
My tip; take the review as a review of the game it self, and assume that the online infrastructure will break down at launch. Try to avoid buying these games at launch/full price.
I've been a defender of Polygon before: I like the site layout, and I like a great deal of their features, at least thematically. However, I've never understood the site to be the "personality-driven" thing they want it to be, when much of the staff is wanting in personality, or outright unlikeable in a few cases (and that is not meant to be an attack, simply truth; sorry) and the reviews are generally pretty lackluster. Despite having a sizable review force, they put out very little content, often only focusing on AAA and "big" XBLA and PSN titles.
The reviews are also very uneven. Just this year I've read two really embarrassing reviews from them containing factual inaccuracies or an unnecessarily obstinate and/or ignorant viewpoint, one being Ni No Kuni and the second of course being this SimCity review. The way they've gone about changing this SimCity review is pretty sad, and mostly worthless as a footnote after the fact. Either wait to publish and properly address these issues, or "man up" and stick with your work while doing a proper re-review if you think it's necessary now, or down the line. That's what Eurogamer does, and that is the proper and professional way to go about this. "Oops, looks like some of you may or may not have had issues that we also may or may not have had, so, we talked about it and are docking the game 1.5 points," is meaningless and childish.
And the circling of the wagons is getting tiresome. In the last month or so I've seen Polygon contributors getting into spats with some of the most respected people working in the medium, such as Notch, Ian Bogost and Bennett Foddy. Stop. You're embarrassing yourselves. Look inward and figure out what you need to do to avoid offending these people, instead of looking to place blame elsewhere. This isn't the opinion of a bitter "gamer," an armchair pundit eager to tear you down, it's the opinion of someone that has worked for what I perceive to be a very well-respected publication, am proud of those contributions, and realizes the audience you write for is largely unappreciative. But, man, something has to fundamentally change at Polygon HQ because, and I know you're reading this, you are looking bad. Not just to angry people on message boards and comments section, but to Everyone.
The reviews are also very uneven. Just this year I've read two really embarrassing reviews from them containing factual inaccuracies or an unnecessarily obstinate and/or ignorant viewpoint, one being Ni No Kuni and the second of course being this SimCity review. The way they've gone about changing this SimCity review is pretty sad, and mostly worthless as a footnote after the fact. Either wait to publish and properly address these issues, or "man up" and stick with your work while doing a proper re-review if you think it's necessary now, or down the line. That's what Eurogamer does, and that is the proper and professional way to go about this. "Oops, looks like some of you may or may not have had issues that we also may or may not have had, so, we talked about it and are docking the game 1.5 points," is meaningless and childish.
And the circling of the wagons is getting tiresome. In the last month or so I've seen Polygon contributors getting into spats with some of the most respected people working in the medium, such as Notch, Ian Bogost and Bennett Foddy. Stop. You're embarrassing yourselves. Look inward and figure out what you need to do to avoid offending these people, instead of looking to place blame elsewhere. This isn't the opinion of a bitter "gamer," an armchair pundit eager to tear you down, it's the opinion of someone that has worked for what I perceive to be a very well-respected publication, am proud of those contributions, and realizes the audience you write for is largely unappreciative. But, man, something has to fundamentally change at Polygon HQ because, and I know you're reading this, you are looking bad. Not just to angry people on message boards and comments section, but to Everyone.
michaeltraps
Member
Yikes, this is only going to get worse...
His arguing on Twitter makes him come across as really gross. He really needs to just back away and stand behind any convictions he makes, rather than trying to defend himself in a fight that, ultimately, nobody wins.
Well yeah, but I was mainly talking about what Notch said. In the age of patches some games actually improve a lot after release. Minecraft is probably one of the more crazy examples of that. Developers asking for another look at the score when they've fixed issues will become the norm with this score changing practice.
Hot Coldman
Banned
Exactly. Look, in a profession like "games writer" you can pretty much stick your guns on most things, but that doesn't mean you need to fight everyone who goes against your word and way.
Klendathu Club Owner
Member
Don't know why people think Game Journos actually know what the fuck they are talking about when it comes to rating or reviewing games.
Never forget this gem.
This example is fucking ridiculous. First of all, this is half of the review. The very next sentence is this one:
This is review has something that's called structure. It talks about the negative aspects of a good game first, then it's about the aspects that are good about it.
The reception of this "gem" is an example that people only care for the number at the end of a review.
http://www.1up.com/reviews/gears-of-war_2
Mavromatis
Member
Be careful they might claim that you are stealing their money by sending people away and killing their ad revenue.
I think people need to write the reviews a week later or play the game and have someone else write it by what you tell them. People over score the games they are playing at the moment and paid reviewers over score games already so we always get 10s.
Don't know why people think Game Journos actually know what the fuck they are talking about when it comes to rating or reviewing games.
Never forget this gem.
...So? I don't see what's wrong with it.
And as I see when quoting you, the fact that image comes from a site called sonydefenseforce is rather telling. Which is what too much of these "games journalism sucks" threads are, unfortunately, platform warriors bitching and grudging.
It's better to have a re-review at some point even if it doesn't give the full picture. You can choose to re-review at the stage for all games: after 3 months, after 6 months, after a year. For games-as-service you can tell the milestones even before the are officially out. In TF2 for example you could have done a re-review after the first round of class updates was over; after the game switched to F2P; after the co-op horde mode was introduced.
In regards to GOTY editions, the DLC's are reviewed on their own so they almost always suffer because of their price. but if the GOTY edition has the base game + all the DLC's for 35-40$ then it's another proposition all together for somebody who never played the base game and doesn't have to fork out more money.
I'm really not sure how busy reviewers are with new games. The summer months are always light on new releases so that would a be perfect time to re-visit some games. I doubt the Polygon Simcity reviewer is assigned with another game that is releasing this month. Therefore, he should be playing Simcity and by the end of the month has a mini-update\report on how the servers handled in those weeks and how it affected his experience.
Dark Octave
Banned
Is the game actually good?
That's the only question on my mind when reading game reviews.
I couldn't care less about the package it came in. Let me decide if the DRM method they used is a good or bad thing. All I want from reviewers is how does the game play, look and sound.
That's the only question on my mind when reading game reviews.
I couldn't care less about the package it came in. Let me decide if the DRM method they used is a good or bad thing. All I want from reviewers is how does the game play, look and sound.
Jake Tower
Banned
CoachKevin
Member
After all of this stuff went down, it can only help make Polygon and other reviews more cognizant of the repercussions from reviewing a game that has online components pre release.
Just copy what Giantbomb does. They are never the first review up, but they almost always get it right.
Just copy what Giantbomb does. They are never the first review up, but they almost always get it right.
I don't know that review about Fire Emblem sucking because it didn't use the Wiimote and had no Mii integration was pretty damn stupid.
Or the other pointing how Football Manager sucked because it wasn't FIFA...
Seriously game journalism sucks whether or not you're a console warrior.
Yes, there are certainly plenty of bad reviews out there. But that Gears of War one is not one of them even though it is often put up as an example.
lol brb making huge list of negatives, then giving a perfect score. Are you high on Mtn Dew bro?
Basically sums up gaming journos. They are unable to critically pick apart games. Bugs/ glitches, design problems can all be overlooked because the game is "cool". Gimme a break.
You should maybe read the rest of the review.
HamPster PamPster
Member
CoachKevin
Member
Jesus this is
I know it gets pulled from time to time but I never really paid attention to it or even read it so I don't think I ever commented on it.
I learned to avoid US gaming journalism like the plague though, they're rarely anything but some PR mouthpiece or worse PR mouthpiece wannabees.
So I get by using other ways to get what reviews used to provide.
EmCeeGramr
Member
Can't tell if my smile is because of Justin not remembering what games the guy he's talking to has actually released and Polygon has reviewed while still attempting to talk down to him, or if it's because now all these developers are going to ask where their re-reviews are.
I don't think some of you guys understand reviews, which is why I often hear, "how can anything be a 10?! That means it's perfect and there's no such thing!" No, a top score just means the reviewer liked it a lot. You can like something a lot while acknowledging its flaws. I think 2001 is the best movie in the long and rich history of film. It is also overly long, self-indulgent (wormhole scene) and cryptic.
this made me laugh.
Polygon is definitely the most pretentious games site on the web.
WrenchNinja
Member
Javik was ripped from the game, the demo leaks prove as such. Hell, GAF got a cease and desist just for talking about the leaks.
Jigolo
Member
lol
All of this stuff is just sad on the part of Polygon.
la flama blanca
Banned
This is amazing lmao.
I am pretty sure this comes from a time when EGM reviews would just get posted with the 1UP scoring system, so 10/10 would just get translated to A+. I think it's important for even positive reviews to be able to identify what issues the game does have, and I tend to find those are the most complete and informed reviews.
SteveWinwood
Member
I'm so glad Polygon was here to change the future of game journalism.
VeryGooster
Banned
I don't know why some writers don't take their Twitter discussions/arguments to a Tumblr or a Skype chat or something.
To be fair, this misconception comes from a time when review site use to label 10/10 as perfect. That has since changed, but it's still not peoples fault for starting it.
The easy out for Justin is to say that review was written when they were The Verge/gaming and not Polygon. Easy peasy, all responsibility out the window!
JonathanEx
Member
I don't get why this whole 'how do you review SimCity when it's down for people' is such a hard thing for reviewers.
It's easy, see: http://www.jonathancresswell.co.uk/2013/03/review-simcity/
It's easy, see: http://www.jonathancresswell.co.uk/2013/03/review-simcity/
10 is not meant to represent absolute "perfection," but being at the top of the 1-10 scale means that it should represent a level of quality that is altogether rare and hard to achieve. On the same token, 9 out of 10 should be right up there with it.
But game reviews are absolutely BROKEN in this regard. It is arguably more common for a game to receive a score between 8 and 10 than it is to get something 5 or less. Even though 5 is supposed to represent an average, mediocre game, it is only given nowadays to a completely broken, unplayable mess.
Essentially, it's rare that any heavily marketed game will ever average less than an 80% now, regardless of its actual quality.
The game seems to have turned out to be absolutely playable without ever buying anything, yes.
Edit: And this whole Mojang vs. McElroy thing is absolutely hilarious.
Which is the fucking problem.
Reviews are not meant to be opinion pieces. Gimme the facts. Game has bugs, game mechanics are broken, matchmaking doesn't work, ai is shit. If you're going to print a score, then this shit better fucking affect it or else it makes no god damn sense. Instead we get shite like 8/10 for sound, weapons sound weak, when it should be 5/10 fucking ai sucks, or level design is shit.
AcceptableGhost
Member
In the same way you can play some F2P games without paying, yes. But man, just think - don't you want to buy the coin doubler in Dead Space 3????
I understand this, but game sites use to put the words "perfect" under the 10 scores. Today, IGN puts the world "masterpiece" under 10/10 scores, but in the past it was "perfect." Game site realized the mistake of putting perfect under the scores and changed that, but the misconception of that still continues because of that.
slightconfuse
Banned
Justin keeping digging himself a bigger hole .dude needs toget off his high horse an realize polygon dun goofed.