Support NeoGAF

[KooopaKid]

it is not realistic,is an arcade racer. The only realistic thing is the looks, some, including myself, find strange since it is usually not the way arcade racers are.
And MK8 on gamespot earned an 8, vs a 5 for DC. Kind of strange isn't it.

Btw, i wanted DC to be motorstorm, my review

2/10

DriveClub is supposed to play like Destruction Derby now?

They are just not really able to cope with bad players. If you brake sooner for a corner than can be reasonably expected for a certain corner, the AI will run into you like any human racer would.

What about, you know, reflexes?

 

[hamchan]

Jeff has been playing all the racing games for the site for years now, so it's a fairly irrelevant point to bring up since he's more than qualified.

 

[Amir0x]

I don't think Jeff needs to even be an expert at racing games at all, and I don't know why anybody would insist on that. Would make for many bland homogenous opinions if only experts could review the genre. Shit, DriveClub could be his first racing game ever for all I care, as long as the review suggests a competence in his analysis. At best his review suggests he can write complete sentences in English.

 

[kingdoug87]

Main complaints seem to be (updated):

-No rewind (ugh)

Just so Im on the same page, is no rewind referring to the ability to restart a race from 10 seconds ago? or is it something else?

 

[blastprocessor]

Different person.

Sounds like Jeff to me. Whatever, his preview was unprofessional.

 

[tzare]

DriveClub is supposed to play like Destruction Derby now?



What about, you know, reflexes?

Driveclub is an arcade racer
So, does that well enough? Reading opinions of people playing it, seems so

 

[Surface of Me]

Are you serious? Did you watch the whole thing? He was choosing horrible racing lines, crashing into the barriers because of handbrake turns, braking mid corner etc.
It was as if I was looking at someone play a shooter for the first time.

Comparing it to an arcade or a sim is both besides the point. Judge it by what it is. PGR wasn't a sim or an arcade racer either and for some reason that worked perfectly.

Im not the best at driving games, but I enjoy them, his driving seemed a lot like my own. I cant be perfect at every turn or racing line.

I do agree with the "judge it by what it is" mentality, to a point. Games arent as easy to do that with as movies or television. Games arent as easy to simplify in a genre or into a central theme as those mediums in a lot of cases. They also have the level of interactivity, mechanics and "fun factor". Is Jeff supposed to say, "Well I didnt like it, but I'm sure someone will, 5 stars"? Furthermore, as games continue to straddle in betweens of known genres/conventions, it's harder and harder to just define a game as "what it is". Do you review Destiny in the mindset of a shooter or of a lootfest grind? Do you praise Borderlands for having accuracy tied to a leveling system of berate it because as a shooter that interferes with mechanics? It's not as clear cut as some are saying. I agree with Amir0x on the point of complaining about the non inclusion of tweaks to the car, as he was able to make a strong case about that. You cant really criticize Jeff for complaining about the mechanics or feel of it though. Similar to my example of Borderlands, it seems Jeff found the non sim feel of the cars contradictory to the way the game punishes you for hitting other cars or going off the track by a smidgen. They seem like valid points and criticisms to me.

 

[Krilekk]

Is The Crew really that bad? I was crossing my fingers that it would turn out good. :/

From what I played in the beta it's easily the worst and most boring racer in a decade. Every car felt like it was a ship.

 

[impact]

Just so Im on the same page, is no rewind referring to the ability to restart a race from 10 seconds ago? or is it something else?

The scrubs just want a get out of jail free card whenever they crash. No rewind is actually a plus for me, but then again I don't run around in Ninja Gaiden with a talisman of rebirth either.

 

[SAiLO]

A bit disappointed after seeing some of the review scores and arguments. Still, as a casual racing game, I hope Driveclub will be enjoyable.

Need a break from Destiny every now and then.

 

[Footos22]

From what I played in the beta it's easily the worst and most boring racer in a decade. Every car felt like it was a ship.

yep, id agree with this.
played for about half hour. ive seen enoough

 

[fuzzyreactor]

A lot of these complaints are just weird

Main complaints seem to be (updated):

-Invisible walls - stay on the track, point of the game
-Bunching of AI cars - have reviewers never watched a race?
-AI too aggressive - not really, they will defend their line or smash into u if you break like a fool
-No replay - yes, good complaint
-No rewind (ugh) - lol
-Off track reset & notification - agree, kind of annoying
-Collision penalty - this is a good thing
-No weather day1 - would be nice, coming soon though
-Non fleshed out career - seems fine to me especially considering the game focuses on MP
-Only EU cars - reasonable complaint
-Servers down/flakey - yes, bs
-Limited gameplay modes - could def be more here
-Mulitplayer 'limited' - uh?
-Limited car customisation (design & tuning) - plenty of paint designs, game wasnt designed to have tuning
-Clubs poorly implemented - how so?
-Buggy UI - lol UI is amazballs

i feel like the majority of these criticisms are knocking the game for being something it was never trying to be

 

[DryvBy]

Main complaints seem to be (updated):

-Invisible walls
-Bunching of AI cars
-AI too aggressive
-No replay
-No rewind (ugh)
-Off track reset & notification
-Collision penalty
-No weather day1
-Non fleshed out career
-Only EU cars
-Servers down/flakey
-Limited gameplay modes
-Mulitplayer 'limited'
-Limited car customisation (design & tuning)
-Clubs poorly implemented
-Buggy UI

Does this mean what I think it means? "No rewind" as in if you mess up, you can't go back to the point before you messed up and correct the mistake?

 

[KooopaKid]

Driveclub is an arcade racer
So, does that well enough? Reading opinions of people playing it, seems so

Doesn't change the fact the AI seems shit. Opponents bump you out of nowhere.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dObkDk922Z8&t=1m45s

 

[Mr E.]

Thrustmaster T500 RS. As for the degrees, I'd have to check when I come back home tonight, didn't really test that.

Found an old interview that said this

http://www.playstationlifestyle.net...discusses-30fps-wheel-support-fame-much-more/

The 1:1 part seems certainly accurate, but I'll get back to you in about 8-9 hours.

Well that's certsinly a surprise. I own a G27/Fanatec GT2 both (last gen compatible) unfortunately.

Other titles portray loss of grip/rumble strips/collision etc via force feedback. I would have thought a sim type racer would give a more realistic experience than and arcade game.

If what your saying is correct and it is the best console game for force feedback, then thst should be noted in reviews and marked accordingly.

 

[Griss]

Hope for a better written review maybe



This encapsulates the problem with so many of the DriveClub reviews today. It's embarrassing that this is just the first paragraph, but the entire review is case after case of reviewing the game for what he wishes it was rather than what it actually is. In this paragraph, for example, he's not actually telling us why this so-called era of "arcade-to-simulation.. car upgrades" is inherently superior to the alternative, or why not having that impacts the game negatively. And he does not address that issue at any point in his review, in fact later going so far as to shamefully suggest that the lack of upgrades meant the game felt unfinished. This is an acceptable critical thought? This is the bullshit that passes muster these days? Instead, it's Jeff gleefully wishing right from the start that he was playing a completely different racing game with completely different goals, rather than evaluating DriveClub as it succeeds (or not) at its own unique racing goals.

DriveClub is a pure skill-based racer; it intentionally does not have those upgrades because it harkens to a time when racing games had no inhibition between the skill of the player and the competition on the road. There's no amount of hours you can play to earn an arbitrary upgrade to make your race ever-so-slightly better than the others around you. There's no skill bonus you get from playing 20 hours more than your next competitor. It's just your skills, your competitors and the finish line. And there's absolutely no reason why any reviewer worth their salt should be even implying that upgrades are now some necessary component of the genre. They're not. They're one specific path in the genre, of which we exist in an industry perfectly capable of having great entries in all types of racing games.

There are both positives and negatives to this design strategy, and the goal would be to discuss how exactly DriveClub mishandles this approach rather than wishing it chose goals which would make it a completely different racing game. These criticisms are from a position of someone who thinks it's his place to dismiss an entire subcategory of racing games simply because he's too daft to understand the many myriad of ways such things are positive. It's the very definition of lacking the ability to properly analyze a product, and this is his fucking job. He's reviewing from the premise that it's bad from the get go, because he feels since other racing games have upgrades, that means ones which don't feel empty or boring by comparison!

He ends his opening nonsense salvo with an attack of "old school" racing games, as if there was anything inherently negative with those. Some of the best racing games ever made are old school, and are as no-frills and no-bullshit as DriveClub.

So many of these game reviewers don't actually understand the concept of criticism.

If there's one thing I constantly find myself agreeing with you on, it's reviews. Great post. Reminds me of that old skit article 'If films were reviewed like videogames' where the guy can't understand why proven scenes and techniques like "funny animals with glasses on" weren't included in the drama he was reviewing, but he still gave it 7/10 because 'the camera work was solid' and 'no one forgot their lines'.

Criticism is simple. Figure out what the creator was attempting to do, or to create, or to make you feel. Then search your own reactions to the work and ask 'Did they achieve those goals with me?'

I have a feeling Driveclub might be quite a limited driving game in many ways but a lot of these reviews have been mostly useless. I did like Eurogamer's, though. The fact that in such a social focussed game they don't appear to have any really great or revolutionary social / multiplayer features seems quite poor. I suppose I'll have to try it myself and see if that's true.

 

[Denur]

What about, you know, reflexes?

That's my point, the AI seem to have human reflexes, which means that when driving bumper to bumper, there is simply not enough time to react when the front car (you) brakes too soon.

 

[Jawbreaker]

yep, id agree with this.
played for about half hour. ive seen enoough

Also chiming in with a similar experience after playing The Crew. I never want to touch that game again.

 

[cripterion]

From what I played in the beta it's easily the worst and most boring racer in a decade. Every car felt like it was a ship.

Couldn't agree more.
And yeah like they said in the metro review, game has no soul. It just feels so bland.

 

[TheIdleMiner]

The scrubs just want a get out of jail free card whenever they crash. No rewind is actually a plus for me, but then again I don't run around in Ninja Gaiden with a talisman of rebirth either.

I don't understand why people who use assists such as rewind in the Forza games need to be scrubs. A racing game with a steep learning curve can get boring for some people really fast and the assists help bring beginners who are new into the genre. It's not a crutch but a learning tool that you can turn off when you feel comfortable and rewards you for doing so.

 

[RedAssedApe]

rewinds are a thing in racers? man...haven't played one of these in so long. that sounds like prince of persia heh

 

[JackAubrey]

Also chiming in with a similar experience after playing The Crew. I never want to touch that game again.

I played the PC Beta. I was disappointed, Yes the map is huge, it's a real piece of work. But it just doesn't need to be that big and it seemed very empty. And while some of it looked great, some looked really bad.

More importantly the handling did nothing for me.

 

[piccolo85]

Played a bit this morning for the first time and got to level 12. Not quite sure yet what to make of it, but overall I'm pleased with the game (I am an experienced simulation racing game player and use the T300RS). In contrast to what others say, I find the AI to be rather good and that they can make mistakes like any other human racer. They are just not really able to cope with bad players. If you brake sooner for a corner than can be reasonably expected for a certain corner, the AI will run into you like any human racer would. If you try to push them of the track, they will push back and when you are too late in trying to overtake them, they will not budge and defend their line: If this results in contact, then of course that is your fault, not theirs.

Thank god, I thought I was the only one! I played this game for only two hour now, but the criticism of the AI baffels me. Of course the AI will bump into you if you drive like a drunken idiot. If you drive properly you will have exiting and fair fight for position with it.

 

[tzare]

A lot of these complaints are just weird



i feel like the majority of these criticisms are knocking the game for being something it was never trying to be

My opinion is that the game is being knocked because it is exclusive

 

[GlamFM]

My opinion is that the game is being knocked because it is exclusive

Ahhh... conspiracy!

You think this is why everybody trashed TLOU as well?

 

[DryvBy]

I don't understand why people who use assists such as rewind in the Forza games need to be scrubs. A racing game with a steep learning curve can get boring for some people really fast and the assists help bring beginners who are new into the genre. It's not a crutch but a learning tool that you can turn off when you feel comfortable and rewards you for doing so.

I say this about modern Mario games too. If you get bored because you're hand isn't held, then maybe find a different game. It's especially annoying when a game is dinged for not having a feature like this.

Why not, I dunno, just get better at games or not sample every genre? I suck at RTS games, but I wouldn't appreciate a game cheating me out learning how to play.

Sweat and glory.

 

[Phil S.]

rewinds are a thing in racers? man...haven't played one of these in so long. that sounds like prince of persia heh

That's the first thing I thought of too when I heard about rewinds earlier this week! hehe

 

[BouncyFrag]

Its a shame there is no replay. Any chance this will be added?

 

[intheinbetween]

My opinion is that the game is being knocked because it is exclusive

you can't really be serious

 

[mujun]

I don't think Jeff needs to even be an expert at racing games at all, and I don't know why anybody would insist on that. Would make for many bland homogenous opinions if only experts could review the genre. Shit, DriveClub could be his first racing game ever for all I care, as long as the review suggests a competence in his analysis. At best his review suggests he can write complete sentences in English.

It's another way to discredit the person reviewing the game by people who think that their appraisal is more accurate.

I find that shit pretentious and condescending.

It's the same way that some people say that you shouldn't be playing racing games if you like using a rewind function.

I think every racing game should have one (within reason). Give people the option to turn it on or off in the settings. Catering to a larger audience without hampering one groups fun for the sake of another seems like good business to me.

 

[breakfuss]

you can't really be serious

Nothing surprises me anymore after seeing the theories about Destiny getting middling scores because of the Sony partnership.

 

[TheIdleMiner]

I say this about modern Mario games too. If you get bored because you're hand isn't held, then maybe find a different game. It's especially annoying when a game is dinged for not having a feature like this.

Why not, I dunno, just get better at games or not sample ever genre? I suck at RTS games, but I wouldn't appreciate a game cheating me out learning how to play.

Sweat and glory.

You don't think that's a little unfair to beginners and people trying to get good at the game? Telling them to find a different game and that genre isn't for them? Or they they should grind through races, losing every time or having to start the race over each time from the beginning because they don't get the mechanics as quick as someone else? Come on now.

For me the feature helped me get used to breaking and cornering fairly quickly. I can backtrack to the point where I made the mistake and learn then and there what I need to do in order not to make it again. Less than a day it was off as I was starting to pay more attention to the finer mechanics of winning a race. Then take someone like my girlfriend for instance who enjoys playing the game, has no intention of learning to become a pro at it, and likes her hand held. The pros turn it off, beginners use it until their comfortable, and casuals are able to enjoy the game because they like to be assisted.

I dunno, I just agree with reviewers that it could be a good option to have.

 

[Saty]

My issue with 'Reviewing the game as what the creators wanted it to be' is that it can be abused as a cop-out for not having elements you are expected to have in your genre or not keeping up with the standards or offering basic features. It can also be used to argue that this X gameplay mechanic that most of players don't appreciate is not a negative because 'it's bad\lacking on purpose'.

I also don't know how it's expected for every reviewer to 'know' what the devs want to create before he gets on playing the game. Must have every reviewer followed the entire dev process of the game? Does every reviewer have to interview the devs to understand what they are trying to achieve? Should the devs include a pamphlet with every review copy that states what kind of game they aimed to make and therefore approach from that point of view?

*This is a general comment about reviews and criticism and not about what i think or read DC is or isn't*

 

[R1CHO]

Played a bit this morning for the first time and got to level 12. Not quite sure yet what to make of it, but overall I'm pleased with the game (I am an experienced simulation racing game player and use the T300RS). In contrast to what others say, I find the AI to be rather good and that they can make mistakes like any other human racer. They are just not really able to cope with bad players. If you brake sooner for a corner than can be reasonably expected for a certain corner, the AI will run into you like any human racer would. If you try to push them of the track, they will push back and when you are too late in trying to overtake them, they will not budge and defend their line: If this results in contact, then of course that is your fault, not theirs.

How is the control with the wheel? How is the force feedback?

And according to your experience with other sims/games how would you describe the handling of the cars?

Thanks for your opinion.

 

[intheinbetween]

Nothing surprises me anymore after seeing the theories about Destiny getting middling scores because of the Sony partnership.

wait, what? smh

people should start enjoying games instead of spending their time thinking about stupid conspiracies, or moaning for reviews. this hobby is about enjoying games, not cheering games to score higher than others

 

[Tekku]

From what I played in the beta it's easily the worst and most boring racer in a decade. Every car felt like it was a ship.

That's too bad. I really liked the open world concept with different kinds of terrain and cars.

 

[Friction]

Nothing surprises me anymore after seeing the theories about Destiny getting middling scores because of the Sony partnership.

I love destiny (level 28 hunter). But destiny deserved the score it received IMO.

On topic, I dont think drive club score will deter people from trying the game. And the concerns brought up in this thread isnt new. AAA games are usual designed to review well, to please critics. DC wasnt it seems, doesnt mean that its a bad game.

 

[DryvBy]

You don't think that's a little unfair to beginners and people trying to get good at the game? Telling them to find a different game and that genre isn't for them? Or they they should grind through races, losing every time or having to start the race over each time from the beginning because they don't get the mechanics as quick as someone else? Come on now.

For me the feature helped me get used to breaking and cornering fairly quickly. I can backtrack to the point where I made the mistake and learn then and there what I need to do in order not to make it again. Less than a day it was off as I was starting to pay more attention to the finer mechanics of winning a race. Then take someone like my girlfriend for instance who enjoys playing the game, has no intention of learning to become a pro at it, and likes her hand held. The pros turn it off, beginners use it until their comfortable, and casuals are able to enjoy the game because they like to be assisted.

I dunno, I just agree with reviewers that it could be a good option to have.

No, that's not unfair to me. If you're not good at something, you practice. A master of a game has failed it more times than you.

What you want, and players that like features like this, is instant gratification without learning the inside of a game. This is why so many people love the Souls games. You figure things out through trial and error.

What's the challenge in giving you a rewind feature?

 

[tzare]

Ahhh... conspiracy!

You think this is why everybody trashed TLOU as well?

Most exclusives get 'special' treatment from both media and forums. They generate long discussion threads with very confronted opinions. So yes, reviewers are also part of this world and have preferences and those affect their reviews.

 

[Spineker]

Considering this game was delayed for a year, those reviews are an eye opener.

 

[DevilFox]

Hope for a better written review maybe



This encapsulates the problem with so many of the DriveClub reviews today. It's embarrassing that this is just the first paragraph, but the entire review is case after case of reviewing the game for what he wishes it was rather than what it actually is. In this paragraph, for example, he's not actually telling us why this so-called era of "arcade-to-simulation.. car upgrades" is inherently superior to the alternative, or why not having that impacts the game negatively. And he does not address that issue at any point in his review, in fact later going so far as to shamefully suggest that the lack of upgrades meant the game felt unfinished. This is an acceptable critical thought? This is the bullshit that passes muster these days? Instead, it's Jeff gleefully wishing right from the start that he was playing a completely different racing game with completely different goals, rather than evaluating DriveClub as it succeeds (or not) at its own unique racing goals.

DriveClub is a pure skill-based racer; it intentionally does not have those upgrades because it harkens to a time when racing games had no inhibition between the skill of the player and the competition on the road. There's no amount of hours you can play to earn an arbitrary upgrade to make your race ever-so-slightly better than the others around you. There's no skill bonus you get from playing 20 hours more than your next competitor. It's just your skills, your competitors and the finish line. And there's absolutely no reason why any reviewer worth their salt should be even implying that upgrades are now some necessary component of the genre. They're not. They're one specific path in the genre, of which we exist in an industry perfectly capable of having great entries in all types of racing games.

There are both positives and negatives to this design strategy, and the goal would be to discuss how exactly DriveClub mishandles this approach rather than wishing it chose goals which would make it a completely different racing game. These criticisms are from a position of someone who thinks it's his place to dismiss an entire subcategory of racing games simply because he's too daft to understand the many myriad of ways such things are positive. It's the very definition of lacking the ability to properly analyze a product, and this is his fucking job. He's reviewing from the premise that it's bad from the get go, because he feels since other racing games have upgrades, that means ones which don't feel empty or boring by comparison!

He ends his opening nonsense salvo with an attack of "old school" racing games, as if there was anything inherently negative with those. Some of the best racing games ever made are old school, and are as no-frills and no-bullshit as DriveClub.

So many of these game reviewers don't actually understand the concept of criticism.

So much this. I'm really tired of all this ignorance and incompetence.
I don't need a random guy with a pen, there are plenty of bloggers for that. For official reviews that actually matter in the metascore, I want some damn professionists.

 

[driver116]

Just so Im on the same page, is no rewind referring to the ability to restart a race from 10 seconds ago? or is it something else?

Does this mean what I think it means? "No rewind" as in if you mess up, you can't go back to the point before you messed up and correct the mistake?

Yes, like you smashed into a wall so you press the rewind button to back to point where you can try it again.

 

[Spookie]

So yes, reviewers are also part of this world and have preferences and those affect their reviews.

You realise most press have both consoles to do their jobs? It could simply be there is no grand cover up or bias. People simply don't like the game. Some of these posts in this thread are more reaching than gamer gate comments on Twitter.

 

[GlamFM]

Most exclusives get 'special' treatment from both media and forums. They generate long discussion threads with very confronted opinions. So yes, reviewers are also part of this world and have preferences and those affect their reviews.

I don´t believe this is true at all.

 

[tzare]

So much this. I'm really tired of all this ignorance and incompetence.
I don't need a random guy with a pen, there are plenty of bloggers for that. For official reviews that actually matter in the metascore, I want some damn professionists.

This, but i just refuse to believe that those reviewers are so ignorant yet they keep their jobs. So it must me something else.

You realise most press have both consoles to do their jobs? It could simply be there is no grand cover up or bias. People simply don't like the game. Some of these posts in this thread are more reaching than gamer gate comments on Twitter.

So they are robots and do not have preferences that affect a subjective review? I also have all consoles yet i have preferences.
Oh, and is not a console exclusive thing, happens in most topics, just see how iphone vs android reviews are on 'Professional' sites like the verge

 

[driver116]

I don´t believe this is true at all.

So you believe all those 10/10s from PlaystationX, XboxY and NintendoZ? Reviews can easily be slanted by preference.

 

[Jimrpg]

Hope for a better written review maybe



This encapsulates the problem with so many of the DriveClub reviews today. It's embarrassing that this is just the first paragraph, but the entire review is case after case of reviewing the game for what he wishes it was rather than what it actually is. In this paragraph, for example, he's not actually telling us why this so-called era of "arcade-to-simulation.. car upgrades" is inherently superior to the alternative, or why not having that impacts the game negatively. And he does not address that issue at any point in his review, in fact later going so far as to shamefully suggest that the lack of upgrades meant the game felt unfinished. This is an acceptable critical thought? This is the bullshit that passes muster these days? Instead, it's Jeff gleefully wishing right from the start that he was playing a completely different racing game with completely different goals, rather than evaluating DriveClub as it succeeds (or not) at its own unique racing goals.

DriveClub is a pure skill-based racer; it intentionally does not have those upgrades because it harkens to a time when racing games had no inhibition between the skill of the player and the competition on the road. There's no amount of hours you can play to earn an arbitrary upgrade to make your race ever-so-slightly better than the others around you. There's no skill bonus you get from playing 20 hours more than your next competitor. It's just your skills, your competitors and the finish line. And there's absolutely no reason why any reviewer worth their salt should be even implying that upgrades are now some necessary component of the genre. They're not. They're one specific path in the genre, of which we exist in an industry perfectly capable of having great entries in all types of racing games.

There are both positives and negatives to this design strategy, and the goal would be to discuss how exactly DriveClub mishandles this approach rather than wishing it chose goals which would make it a completely different racing game. These criticisms are from a position of someone who thinks it's his place to dismiss an entire subcategory of racing games simply because he's too daft to understand the many myriad of ways such things are positive. It's the very definition of lacking the ability to properly analyze a product, and this is his fucking job. He's reviewing from the premise that it's bad from the get go, because he feels since other racing games have upgrades, that means ones which don't feel empty or boring by comparison!

He ends his opening nonsense salvo with an attack of "old school" racing games, as if there was anything inherently negative with those. Some of the best racing games ever made are old school, and are as no-frills and no-bullshit as DriveClub.

So many of these game reviewers don't actually understand the concept of criticism.

This is a pretty good summation of the reviews so far.

Especially when reviewers seem to pick and choose what they like and what they don't without ever explaining why. Why can some games get away with terrible game play design like Assassin's Creed but scores high because its an open world game even though its plagued with fetch quests issues. I remember reviewers railed on Uncharted being linear until later on they finally understood that's what the developers were going for.

Some games can be lauded for being retro, but others denounced for being old fashioned and past it time. I don't want to put all reviewers in one basket, but there are certain driveclub reviews that stick out like a sore thumb.

 

[Prototype Viktor]

Does this mean what I think it means? "No rewind" as in if you mess up, you can't go back to the point before you messed up and correct the mistake?

it means that if you mess up you are responsible for messing up and should avoid doing that without a "feature" cheat

 

[mrklaw]

This is a pretty good summation of the reviews so far.

Especially when reviewers seem to pick and choose what they like and what they don't without ever explaining why. Why can some games get away with terrible game play design like Assassin's Creed but scores high because its an open world game even though its plagued with fetch quests issues. I remember reviewers railed on Uncharted being linear until later on they finally understood that's what the developers were going for.

Some games can be lauded for being retro, but others denounced for being old fashioned and past it time. I don't want to put all reviewers in one basket, but there are certain driveclub reviews that stick out like a sore thumb.

I'm sure it isn't, but it feels like distraction tactics. Pile a bunch of distracting side stuff in your game and it'll keep people busy with the impression they are doing something meaningful. That kind of stuff bores me rigid though.

 

[BruceWayneIII]

Hope for a better written review maybe



This encapsulates the problem with so many of the DriveClub reviews today. It's embarrassing that this is just the first paragraph, but the entire review is case after case of reviewing the game for what he wishes it was rather than what it actually is. In this paragraph, for example, he's not actually telling us why this so-called era of "arcade-to-simulation.. car upgrades" is inherently superior to the alternative, or why not having that impacts the game negatively. And he does not address that issue at any point in his review, in fact later going so far as to shamefully suggest that the lack of upgrades meant the game felt unfinished. This is an acceptable critical thought? This is the bullshit that passes muster these days? Instead, it's Jeff gleefully wishing right from the start that he was playing a completely different racing game with completely different goals, rather than evaluating DriveClub as it succeeds (or not) at its own unique racing goals.

DriveClub is a pure skill-based racer; it intentionally does not have those upgrades because it harkens to a time when racing games had no inhibition between the skill of the player and the competition on the road. There's no amount of hours you can play to earn an arbitrary upgrade to make your race ever-so-slightly better than the others around you. There's no skill bonus you get from playing 20 hours more than your next competitor. It's just your skills, your competitors and the finish line. And there's absolutely no reason why any reviewer worth their salt should be even implying that upgrades are now some necessary component of the genre. They're not. They're one specific path in the genre, of which we exist in an industry perfectly capable of having great entries in all types of racing games.

There are both positives and negatives to this design strategy, and the goal would be to discuss how exactly DriveClub mishandles this approach rather than wishing it chose goals which would make it a completely different racing game. These criticisms are from a position of someone who thinks it's his place to dismiss an entire subcategory of racing games simply because he's too daft to understand the many myriad of ways such things are positive. It's the very definition of lacking the ability to properly analyze a product, and this is his fucking job. He's reviewing from the premise that it's bad from the get go, because he feels since other racing games have upgrades, that means ones which don't feel empty or boring by comparison!

He ends his opening nonsense salvo with an attack of "old school" racing games, as if there was anything inherently negative with those. Some of the best racing games ever made are old school, and are as no-frills and no-bullshit as DriveClub.

So many of these game reviewers don't actually understand the concept of criticism.

This is one of my pet peeves. It's the sole reason why I often find myself stop reading a review and use Gaf impressions instead: I am basically reading a review of their expectations instead of a review of the actual product. I don't care about a reviewer's expectations unless I am interested in the reviewer him- or herself. Which I'm not.