Kenzodielocke
Banned
But he is pretending to be Mr. Perfect. That's his whole shtick. And hey, mistakes can be made and I applaude him for correcting it.
-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
Hellblade: Senua's Sacrifice - Review Thread
- Thread starter Savantcore
- Start date
But he is pretending to be Mr. Perfect. That's his whole shtick. And hey, mistakes can be made and I applaude him for correcting it.
OrbitalBeard
Member
You and I are just going to fundamentally disagree on this issue. It is in no way Jim's responsibility to contact the devs regarding bugs. I mean, that's great if he goes that route, but he's not in the wrong in any way if he chooses not to.
If an embargo is pre-launch, it gives the devs time to address the bug for consumers. Consumers are really the only audience that matters when it comes to a review. I have respect for Jim's transparency regarding this issue and fully support whichever decision he decides to pursue. HIS decision. It's his review and he has every right to handle it in the way he sees fit.
What am i missing? I am reading through the thread, but its a lot of the usual fanfare of review threads about clickbait and ruining the metacritic, its honestly annoying to read that kind of drivel.
Jim encountered a game breaking bug preventing him to complete the game, no? And even though he liked what he did manage to play, he couldnt progress anymore.
If the bug is an easy fix, all the better, fix the score after the patch is out? Not using scores would also be an option, but if you care so little about the scoring system, read the review in the first place.
The world would be a better place if people didn't become drones.
There's place for their voice in this industry.
GhostTrick
Banned
OrbitalBeard
Member
That's fine if he thinks he should have contacted them, but that doesn't change my stance in any way whatsoever. A review isn't a back and forth between the critic and the creator. Jim's main point of regret seems to be his mental state at the time of the review. He was angry and he regrets composing it in that state of mind. I can respect that and think he's done good to address it.
If I were a reviewer, would I try to contact a developer in this situation? Maybe. But if I chose not to, there would be absolutely nothing wrong in that decision.
I think when they're using their voice to call the developers artistic vision moronic they're not really adding anything of value to the discussion
This wasn't due to the permadeath function.
Besides, even if you encounter a game-breaking bug, I say you review a game as if the credits rolled there and then. 'Incomplete', 'Unsatisfying', but not outright broken.
But thats the definition of broken.
matrix-cat
Member
Game-breaking.
Not outright broken.
Bruh.
Hopefully Jim's retraction doesn't lead to said bug being swept under the rug; it's obviously still there until Ninja Theory patches it.
IdreamofHIME
Member
Maybe if reviewers weren't desperate to finish games so they get put up at that stupid embargo lift time....they might have more time to be with their thoughts on the experience rather than just throwing impressions and emotions into a blender.
Kenzodielocke
Banned
Subtitles in games continue to suck.
It's only going to get better from here on out.
this is actually annoying..
she reviews games as a deaf reviewer..
I like to play games with captions on... and I hate games that have bad captions..
That's definitely disappointing. I won't have to use subtitles on this but I would have expected Hellblade of all games to be a bit more aware of these kinds of accessibility issues. Not to mention that many hearing people will need to use subtitles, as well, since the game only has English audio AFAIK.
There are certainly levels of brokenness. There's 'I can't even play it brokenness (such as DRM)' and there's 'I can't even finish it brokenness (such as a bug)'.
I just think there's a way to review it without condemning the entire experience as broken, which it wasn't. And the way I'd do that is treating an inability to progress as the functional 'roll credits' end of the game, and base my review on that experience.
That's why I prefer the RT system over the MC system.
RT ranks how wide the appeal of something is (e.g. 91% of people who experienced this product enjoyed it) vs MC who try to quantify how good something is (e.g. this product has an avg review of 81%).
It's less affected by outlier reviews like that though, admittedly, it works best when there are a higher number of reviews available.
Considering how worthless I consider gaming review scores (70% is the equivalent of a 1 star review for movies) I'd choose any system that devalued the actual review score of game critics.
Are we watching the same videos? He never said that he's perfect - more than often stated that he isn't and is doing as many mistakes as everyone else. Being a critic doesn't mean that you're criticizing others for imperfection while the critic is perfect themselves. Maybe you don't get the whole sarcasm thing but where do you get the notion where he's stating to be perfect?
Fantastapotamus
Wrong about commas, wrong about everything
The only "problem" I have with Jim's review is, and I know how this is going to sound, well...he gave Fallout 4 a 9,5
I know, I know this is one of those terrible "let's look back at some years old thing and try to use it" argument but Fallout 4 was filled with tons of bugs. I find it inconsistent to completely ignore bugs on one occassion but not on others. It's not like only gamebreaking bugs should matter.
Ood on himfor correcting that, shows so!e backbone
I know, I know this is one of those terrible "let's look back at some years old thing and try to use it" argument but Fallout 4 was filled with tons of bugs. I find it inconsistent to completely ignore bugs on one occassion but not on others. It's not like only gamebreaking bugs should matter.
Ood on himfor correcting that, shows so!e backbone
Kenzodielocke
Banned
Where did I claim he is Mr. Perfect in the video he made? I think you don't get the whole sarcastic thing.
Game-breaking bugs matter a lot more than a character walking away mid conversation, or even a broken side-quest.
Game-breaking bugs effectively steal money or time from a player. You either get less content than you paid for, or you have to invest more time than you intended to. They should have a significant impact on the score of a game, more than even a 100 bugs that are only an annoyance.
StrikeFirst117
Banned
This game is something I have been keeping my eye on over the months and will probably pick it up next month.
With regards to Jim Sterling's review, I appreciate the fact that he originally reviewed it, has taken proper criticism, realised his mistake and has apologies plus scrubbed the review score that everyone cares so much about.
This is another reason why review scores need to go and we can then just read a review without an objective score for people to start complaining bashing reviewers over.
This permadeath mechanic for dying too much, I get the justification for it but personally I feel there should have been a difficulty included where that doesn't become a factor so that some people who aren't as good or new to these types of games don't become incredibly frustrated due to it.
With regards to Jim Sterling's review, I appreciate the fact that he originally reviewed it, has taken proper criticism, realised his mistake and has apologies plus scrubbed the review score that everyone cares so much about.
This is another reason why review scores need to go and we can then just read a review without an objective score for people to start complaining bashing reviewers over.
This permadeath mechanic for dying too much, I get the justification for it but personally I feel there should have been a difficulty included where that doesn't become a factor so that some people who aren't as good or new to these types of games don't become incredibly frustrated due to it.
Jim loves attention, his defense force on GAF loves to support his flippant disrespect of devs and publishers, Hellblade actually got really great scores, and the game is finally out. Wins all around, I'd say. Everyone got what they wanted.
Y'all don't worry about the metascore. No one is using that to make their buying decision anyway.
Y'all don't worry about the metascore. No one is using that to make their buying decision anyway.
Another potential barrier could be with multiplatform releases. If you're rating each version separately like Metacritic does, then like you said the RT system wouldn't work too well when one version could have ninety reviews and another version could have less than twenty. You could always group them together, but then if one version has huge technical problems it's possible the overall score will be brought down.
I prefer the RT system as well though, so it'd be nice to see an aggregate site appear that starts scoring games using a similar method (or for RT itself to start scoring games).
Papo Swing
Member
Might get it after work.
And fuck Jim Sterling. He just wants attention to himself first for the low review then for his retraction. All a fucking act to get attention and it sucks because people suck uo to him and will defend his bs.
I hate when people shit of the hard work of a small team just for attention. I hate this "you had one chance to impress ME" attitude. I really hope the go back and correct it if a patch comes put, but damage is done.
And fuck Jim Sterling. He just wants attention to himself first for the low review then for his retraction. All a fucking act to get attention and it sucks because people suck uo to him and will defend his bs.
I hate when people shit of the hard work of a small team just for attention. I hate this "you had one chance to impress ME" attitude. I really hope the go back and correct it if a patch comes put, but damage is done.
Hentailover
Member
Lord Panda
The Sea is Always Right
Cut Jim some slack ... not many critics would reconsider their stance and offer an apology particularly in such a sincere and thoughtful way. Some double down while others pursue a Masters of Fine Arts.
D
Deleted member 325805
Unconfirmed Member
It's perfectly fair IMO, I'd be pissed as hell if I bought the game and it happened to me.
A broken side quest is game-breaking as well. At least for completionists or people who don't only want to rush the main quests. If anything, that thing should be treated the same way.
But giving FO4 a 9.5 at launch is hilarious in retrospect. Wow. Blatant hypocrisy.
However, he stood up to his mistake with this review. That's good and shows that he at least reflects about the past and himself.
As someone who plays all games with subtitles turned on this sort of information is really useful to me. Things are improving but I wish critics and developers would pay more attention to accessibility issues.
this is actually annoying..
she reviews games as a deaf reviewer..
I like to play games with captions on... and I hate games that have bad captions..
I was one of Arthur's (and Jim's for that matter) biggest critics, but the last dig in this post is just completely unnecessary and in poor taste.
I hope the devs see the issues related to text readability and fix that for those who rely on it. Super cool to see someone reviewing games with that mindset. There's certainly an underserved audience right there.
Just wanted to point out that Bethesda games have sequence-breaking bugs that sometimes don't reveal themselves for hours. Even if you have multiple saves, they could all be fucked.
OrbitalBeard
Member
I disagree strongly with his Fallout 4 review, but it's not blatant hypocrisy. Hellblade has one save file, so a gamebreaking bug is also game-ending. Not the case for Bethesda games.
Ok, well in light of that, if this were to occur to a reviewer, they'd have every right to rip the game to shreds. Since nothing like this happened to Jim Sterling during Fallout 4 though, using that review as evidence of hypocrisy doesn't work.
Jim if you're reading this I think you've handled this well. It's certainly a peculiar situation, and I'm not sure how I would have handled the scoring were I in your position. In any case I look forward to seeing your final review. Get some sleep.
If he realized that he has to drop the review than obviously he didn't handle the review well, it's pretty simple really.
Though I do appreciate him listening and removing it and apologizing.
I mean, did he get a broken side quest? If not then how is that hypocrisy?
Like, this is one of the special things when it comes to game critique--things that hinder your experience may or may not happen to other people. Especially when it comes to a game on a larger scale like Fallout, you may see some general jank issues but otherwise have a smooth time. Someone else might have something shitty happen to them, but if YOU didn't why would you condemn the game for it?
And that is still a far cry from a linear game lock. What happened to him in Hellblade made the game totally unable to be finished.
Agreed, a game breaking bug that actually breaks the game for 100% of the people that experience it is the same as a broken quest (that you can still continue past) that effectively breaks the game for the 6% of the people that experience it and are also completionists
I meant he handled the reaction to his review well.
Edit: posted this before your edit so I read your original post as snarky. Apologies for my snarky reply!
Fantastapotamus
Wrong about commas, wrong about everything
Absolutely.
I don't argue that he should have rated Fallout a 1 (and again, he corrected this so it's basically a non issue now) just that completely ignoring 100 bugs simply because they are not gamebreaking seems dumb to me.
Edit: Not "as bad", thats not true, sorry. Corrected it
Salty Rice
Member
Well luckily he came to the conclusion he reviews the games he plays and not the mood he has while playing the game.
Well, this is from his own review
"Which brings us to the less savory matter at hand. Its time to talk about bugs Fallout 4 has them, and Im not referring to Radroaches. Being a Bethesda open-world game, you might be inclined to expect glitches and, well, those expectations will yield frustrating fruit. Pretty much everything youve seen impact Bethesda games of the past can be seen here, from a handful of potential quest bugs to wacky A.I. pathfinding and a number of physics-based anomalies. Im also not sure whether or not an early story mission became unbeatable on a test file, but Im sure the raiders I needed to kill werent spawning.
Fallout 4 is not worse than prior Fallout or Elder Scrolls games when it comes to thinks being borked, but its certainly not better, and youll have to bear that in mind. I advise autosaving regularly, just in case.
Bethesdas always gotten some leeway with its quality control, mostly due to how expansive its games are, and Fallout 4 is certainly of a high enough quality overall to where I find myself more forgiving than I otherwise would be. Its certainly nothing like Assassins Creed Unity, where the bugs were constant and often devastating, and the fact the experience is so damn good that Im willing the fight through even the most persistent annoyance says something about how great Fallout 4 is in spite of itself."
He says he's more forgiving of it than he usually would be and I feel like his reasons to support it work. He certainly didn't ignore anything.
dragonfart28
Banned
benicillin
Banned
So happy for Ninja Theory, I've been following their development for years and to have it come out and get some great scores and impressions is incredibly heartening. There is room in the industry for this style of budgeted, niche artistic game. Hope it's successful for them, I think I'll pick it up as soon as I get home from work.