Jump to content

Bethesda wants your money before the reviews hit


Undead Wolf

Recommended Posts

Reviews don't mean jack shit. The only thing that can definitively tell you if you will enjoy a game is to experience it yourself firsthand.

 

I don't really buy into this. While it's true most reviewers are biased and/or handed extra money for saying good or bad things about games no matter how dumb it sounds (looking at you IGN with your "too much water" rating), a review can help a lot with a final decision. Saying the only way you can judge it is playing it yourself sounds like I'm being told to buy it and take a 50/50 chance on me not liking a game. While nothing too bad for physical games since you can turn those in, but digital games you buy it, you own it until Sony decides to add a refund option which will probably be never. If it weren't for reviews or other gameplay footage I probably would have bought Battlefront, or some other EA game that gets overhyped and I would find boring after a week.

 

Or worst case scenario, I buy Bound by Flame and regret that forever-- oh wait I did that. But because of reviews of The Technomancer (made by the same devs of Bound by Flame) I decided it was barely if any improvement from Bound by Flame. At the very least it would be helpful to watch reviewers you would trust or even some YouTube LP'ers. But saying I should just take a shot in the dark and play a game I may or may not like just feels wrong, especially since devs would get money from that in the end even if you didn't like it.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't really buy into this. While it's true most reviewers are biased and/or handed extra money for saying good or bad things about games no matter how dumb it sounds (looking at you IGN with your "too much water" rating), a review can help a lot with a final decision. Saying the only way you can judge it is playing it yourself sounds like I'm being told to buy it and take a 50/50 chance on me not liking a game. While nothing too bad for physical games since you can turn those in, but digital games you buy it, you own it until Sony decides to add a refund option which will probably be never. If it weren't for reviews or other gameplay footage I probably would have bought Battlefront, or some other EA game that gets overhyped and I would find boring after a week.

 

Or worst case scenario, I buy Bound by Flame and regret that forever-- oh wait I did that. But because of reviews of The Technomancer (made by the same devs of Bound by Flame) I decided it was barely if any improvement from Bound by Flame. At the very least it would be helpful to watch reviewers you would trust or even some YouTube LP'ers. But saying I should just take a shot in the dark and play a game I may or may not like just feels wrong, especially since devs would get money from that in the end even if you didn't like it.

Rent it, download a demo (if one is available) or borrow from a friend who has the game. Nothing is saying you have to buy the game to play it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Good for them. Maybe other game companies with start doing this as well.

 

Yes I'm serious, because the current video game review process/system/culture is really bad and needs to change. Look there is nothing wrong with the idea of a video game review, but there is a lot of things wrong with the whole idea of "free early review copies of games". People are complaining that website and youtubers don't get 1 or more free copies of a game that normal people have to pay $60+ for and not only that, but they get the game early. All this so they can post their opinion of a game they did not pay for, while they make money through ad revenue. That is so terrible, I feel so bad for those reviewers.

 

Seriously though, because the reviewer got the game for free their review is slanted which makes the review near worthless. How am I supposed to trust someone review if they don't have the same risks of buying a bad game? There are more problems with the current video game review process/system/culture that I don't feel like typing out, but this is a step in the right direction.

 

And no this is not anti-consumer, because the consumer will always have the ability to not pre-order/day one buy games. 

Edited by soultaker655
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Rent it, download a demo (if one is available) or borrow from a friend who has the game. Nothing is saying you have to buy the game to play it.

 

Maybe it's because I'm a filthy penny-pincher but renting costs money still and I would rather not do that. And demos just seem more rare these days. Either that or the PS Store just hides them the best way possible. I forgot about borrowing from friends... uh, yeah... I'll just call them up. My lots of friends.

 

8f7.jpg

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Except they AREN'T preventing you from making an informed decision. You, as a consumer, have zero obligation to purchase their product immediately. If you buy a game blindly and find out that's utter garbage after playing it, that's YOUR fault because you didn't research the game when it was released. If you really feel the need to read reviews then wait for those reviews. Wasting your money on a bad experience because you can't wait is not the developer's fault.

 

Yeah, they aren't preventing me from making an informed decision because I'm never going to just blindly purchase a game without researching it. I waited on buying DOOM because I don't trust any publisher who withholds review copies. I'm not just talking about me though, I'm talking about consumers as a whole. Why do you think so many people got mad when games like Aliens: Colonial Marines or No Man's Sky released? It's because people bought into all the hype and marketing before launch and pre-ordered the game because there weren't any reviews prior to launch to tell them otherwise. While yes, these people shouldn't believe all the stuff these publishers spin, what you're doing is essentially victim blaming. You think the publishers are blameless for this? They know full what the quality of the game they're selling us is, and they don't allow reviews prior to launch to stop people cancelling pre-orders. The consumers should know better, but the publishers are the real shit bags.

 

Good for them. Maybe other game companies with start doing this as well.

 

Yes I'm serious, because the current video game review process/system/culture is really bad and needs to change. Look there is nothing wrong with the idea of a video game review, but there is a lot of things wrong with the whole idea of "free early review copies of games". People are complaining that website and youtubers don't get 1 or more free copies of a game that normal people have to pay $60+ for and not only that, but they get the game early. All this so they can post their opinion of a game they did not pay for, while they make money through ad revenue. That is so terrible, I feel so bad for those reviewers.

 

Seriously though, because the reviewer got the game for free their review is slanted which makes the review near worthless. How am I supposed to trust someone review if they don't have the same risks of buying a bad game? There are more problems with the current video game review process/system/culture that I don't feel like typing out, but this is a step in the right direction.

 

And no this is not anti-consumer, because the consumer will always have the ability to not pre-order/day one buy games. 

 

Yes, let's hope all publishers follow Bethesda's lead so hype culture can take over. Screw reason and logic. Who cares how good a game actually is? It all comes down to who has the best marketing team, baby! GET HYYYYYYPED! :dance:

 

But really, I really don't see your point about how because they don't pay for the game, it suddenly invalidates their opinion. That would be like saying a food critic's opinion is worthless because he didn't pay for the meal. Yes, because he clearly must be biased if that's the case. :rolleyes:

 

If this isn't anti-consumer, then neither are microtransactions, or day one DLC, or pre-order bonuses. Who do you think benefits from this stuff? Well it's certainly not us, the consumer. It benefits the publishers, and only them. That my friend, is anti-consumer.

Edited by Undead Wolf
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

As I never pre-order games for myself, this is pretty much a moot point. Truthfully, I can't remember the last time I paid launch price for a game for myself. Been burnt by hype way to many times in the years long gone and $80 (Canadian) is too much for me to say "Oh well" over. Hard to come up with a game I felt was worth $80 period this generation..

That said, my kids pre-order but those titles are almost impossible to screw up (Pokemon, Lego, and Zelda) and they generally get exactly what they expect.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This thread makes my brain hurt. 

 

Let Bethesda do what it wants. If they put a lousy product on the market, they'll get called out for it. So many of us like to think that our fellow gamers are so much dumber than we are (a lousy sentiment, BTW - we are probably the lousiest community in regards to supporting one another out there).

 

But, they're not. The market is ultimately very savvy. Yes, we might get burned on a single bad experience, but we rarely keep handing our money over, again and again. If we think a bad deal is coming, we don't usually take it lying down.

 

I promise you that if Bethesda puts out a glitch-filled nightmare when Skyrim, or Dishonored 2, etc., is released, they'll pay dearly for it, and more so if they cleave to this policy. Maybe not immediately, but they will pay. No need to get yourself in a philosophical dander.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not only shouldn't you preorder a Bethesda game, you shouldn't buy it on launch day...or even for the 1st year of it's release. Usually by that time, they have the majority of the system crashing bugs fixed and the games are somewhat playable...however, even then, you aren't safe... i.e. Fallout 3 and New Vegas are prime examples. Even the GOTY editions aren't major bug free.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, let's hope all publishers follow Bethesda's lead so hype culture can take over. Screw reason and logic. Who cares how good a game actually is? It all comes down to who has the best marketing team, baby! GET HYYYYYYPED! :dance:

If someone gets swept up in hype and pre-order/day one bought a bad game that is their own fault. The fact that they could not wait 10 days to 1 month to see if the game was good is their problem as a consumer.

 

But really, I really don't see your point about how because they don't pay for the game, it suddenly invalidates their opinion. That would be like saying a food critic's opinion is worthless because he didn't pay for the meal. Yes, because he clearly must be biased if that's the case. :rolleyes:

That food critic's opinion is worthless if he didn't pay for that meal. A reviewer/critic job is to review/critique something as a consumer. If they don't pay for what they are reviewing/critiquing they are not consumer, they turn into something that is above a normal consumer which weakens the normal consumer trust and ability to connect to the reviewer/critic. Even a small bias caused by getting something free is still a bias and that bias will weakens a critical opinion.

 

If this isn't anti-consumer, then neither are microtransactions, or day one DLC, or pre-order bonuses. Who do you think benefits from this stuff? Well it's certainly not us, the consumer. It benefits the publishers, and only them. That my friend, is anti-consumer.

None of those things are anti-consumer because the consumer does not have to buy any of them. The phrase anti-consumer get thrown around a lot nowadays (I blame people like TotalBiscuit and Jim Sterling). When people say the phrase anti-consumer they are insinuating that the consumer has lost power or control over what they buy. None of those things you mentioned can cause the consumer to lose power or control over what they buy. If a consumer buys any of those things, that was their choice. No one forced them or left them no other choice but to buy those things so those things are not anti-consumer.

Edited by soultaker655
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Speaking of Jim "Fucking" Sterling, he just uploaded a Jimquisition discussing this very topic. Since people clearly won't listen to what I have to say, maybe you'll listen to him instead. :P

 

Thank God for him. :)

Just a normal Jim Sterling opinion video. He tends to be 50/50 on a lot of things. He is a reviewer so of course he is going to say Bethesda is wrong. However, he is also the type of reviewer I was saying we need more of because he buys most of the AAA games he reviews, which makes people trust his opinion on games. 

 

Just because I want to here your opinion on it. Who benefits most from day one/week before reviews?

Edited by soultaker655
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you're going to buy a game based on the reviews it receives then wait until the game is reviewed. Let the developers wait for their money until you're confident that the game is worth paying for.

 

If you're adamant in pre-ordering because you get a nice poster or a shiny badge or whatever or get to play it before your mate Frank then will a mediocre review change your mind anyway?

 

As most have said, this is Bethesda and from what I've read all their games are a mess at launch. So my review is wait until patch v1.04 which for the most part fixes the "Walking through the scenery glitch".

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think this is a good thing. We're not talking about Hello Games here, it's Bethesda. I'm going to pre-order the next Assassin's Creed regardless of reviews and I feel like everyone getting access to the game at the same time would be a good thing.

 

Big devs like Bethesda, Ubisoft, Rockstar etc etc can very well handle not everyone buying the game right at launch. Personally, I value a fan of a series/developer being able to play the game first. They deserve it more than professional critics or youtube channel persons. I have enough games on pre-order to not be interested in the upcoming Bethesdas at launch but I would not mind review copies being held back until launch for more games.

 

 

If you're going to buy a game based on the reviews it receives then wait until the game is reviewed. Let the developers wait for their money until you're confident that the game is worth paying for.

 

Almost literally what Bethesda themselves said in their quoted post, and I agree. If you feel like the game needs positive reviews to persuade you to buy it then don't get it at launch, wait a while until other gamers can give you their opinions and see if that helps.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bethesda's "we want everyone to experience it at the same time" line is bollocks, clearly demonstrated by the fact that they're still going to be sending out review code a day early to publications. They know this isn't enough time to get a review done, so if they were serious about they're statement they'd just send them out at launch.

 

Personally, I value reviews. I have a few reviewers that I have read for years and whose opinions I know more or less align with my own. It's not about "trust". I see what they say about something before I buy. I couldn't give a toss about the number at the bottom - I actually read the reviews for the context.

 

I have enough games in my backlog that I don't need to buy everything that comes out on launch or at all.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I never get why people Read Reviews honestly as Markus said i don't care of them.

 

I Stopped reading Reviews after seeing a 2 On Hyperdiemnsion Neptunia based just on the Turial and a 68 to Atelier Totori in a magazine when they gave CoD MW3 97 -_- Ok after that i got it all reviews are just bullshit.

So Just ignore them that's it, i base my valutations on what i see from Trailers or gameplay of for example with Xcom if i discover them from who i watch on YT, that's it.

 

I Think what Bethesda is doing for what i got is nothing strange honestly like 90% of SH do this pretty much Nowadays, because the bullshit of releasing 3 Days Before Battlefield for who spent 90 € for the Pre-Order of the Digital deluxe edition? So Really Is Just normal that bethesda want your money is stupid every company want them just Wait and see for youself if it's worth it or not, for example i ahve Skyrim on Ps3 with even the DLCs so this Definitive edition Yeah cool and i like the game but more than 20 € won't be spend by me for it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bethesda's "we want everyone to experience it at the same time" line is bollocks, clearly demonstrated by the fact that they're still going to be sending out review code a day early to publications. They know this isn't enough time to get a review done, so if they were serious about they're statement they'd just send them out at launch.

 

Personally, I value reviews. I have a few reviewers that I have read for years and whose opinions I know more or less align with my own. It's not about "trust". I see what they say about something before I buy. I couldn't give a toss about the number at the bottom - I actually read the reviews for the context.

 

I have enough games in my backlog that I don't need to buy everything that comes out on launch or at all.

 

People who've pre-ordered (non-digital) will often get games a day early as well... I got Rise Of The Tomb Raider four days early even.

 

I don't care for official reviews, I care for the opinions of the many so I can see a main consensus and then I'll still want to make up my own mind.

 

Personally I only buy day one if there's an awesome collector's edition, a good pre-order deal, a series I have loved with every iteration, or all of the above. Reviews have nothing to do with it.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is no sense in making preorders on anything these days as far as video games are concerned. I mean, it made sense waaaaaay back when there was a limited quantity and you could guarantee that copy of the game instead of camping out at your local Blockbuster or video store trying to beat the crowd for that 'next big game'. Back then it was very likely for high profile games to sell out and having to wait untold amount of time for another chance at it.

 

But today? In the world of digital goods and distribution? What sense is there in preordering a digital good? It's not limited in quantity, it is likely to be sold 'til the cows come home and then some. So what's the benefit? Some paltry rewards? some non-content that makes no difference in the long run? Bah! It's ridiculous. It's more like a gamble of trust. A gamble to trust that a developer will deliver a finished product. Oft times a promise broken with day one launch patches or installing chunks of your game before you can play it when you have it on disk as shown with some recent releases.

 

I kind of wish that the multi disk game system was still used, but I'm not even sure such things can be supported anymore. But usually those were complete games, no installing, just plug'n'play. Done with disc 1? Pop in disc 2. It was so easy then and it's a damn shame it's still not the case.

 

Now seeing how Bethesda is a big name in the industry, it is concerning to think how other players in the mix of things may follow suit. I mean, people will still play and buy and preorder, but honestly, it just seems to be another measure of distance between consumers and developer/publishers in the assurance of quality and convenience. What if a modern Superman 64 hit and there would be no early review to speak for it? I mean, you could always get a refund, maybe, depending on platform and service.... but that shouldn't be the plan B. I should know as much as I need to know going in that my purchase is one of quality that won't be a waste of time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

There is no sense in making preorders on anything these days as far as video games are concerned. I mean, it made sense waaaaaay back when there was a limited quantity and you could guarantee that copy of the game

 

Going to stop it right there because that's the exact reason I pre-order: collector's editions, which are limited in release - even more limited than games themselves are/were because even back in the day there were later shipments with additional games, but a collector's edition is gone forever unless it's not completely sold out (infamously, some big editions of Skyrim with the Alduin statuette went very cheaply a year or so after release).

 

Personally I also don't get why you should pre-order unless either there is some kind of additional benefit of some sort - personally I go for the physical goodies but some people prefer digital stuff like additional missions. Unless of course it's a game you absolutely want to play day one but even then there's often such a big physical supply that pre-ordering is not necessary, exceptions like GTA V notwithstanding.

 

On the rest of your post, I actually think it closes the gap between fans and devs since the fans can now be the ones to play first along with reviewers, instead of having to wait for release while knowing some reviewer has already played it for two weeks.

Edited by BillyHorrible
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Going to stop it right there because that's the exact reason I pre-order: collector's editions, which are limited in release - even more limited than games themselves are/were because even back in the day there were later shipments with additional games, but a collector's edition is gone forever unless it's not completely sold out (infamously, some big editions of Skyrim with the Alduin statuette went very cheaply a year or so after release).

 

Personally I also don't get why you should pre-order unless either there is some kind of additional benefit of some sort - personally I go for the physical goodies but some people prefer digital stuff like additional missions. Unless of course it's a game you absolutely want to play day one but even then there's often such a big physical supply that pre-ordering is not necessary, exceptions like GTA V notwithstanding.

 

On the rest of your post, I actually think it closes the gap between fans and devs since the fans can now be the ones to play first along with reviewers, instead of having to wait for release while knowing some reviewer has already played it for two weeks.

 

There is merit in that there are additional things that go with a limited edition, but I do not ship a limited edition in the same regard as a pre-order. You get the limited edition because you want the content that is available from that limited service, but the pre-order of the base game, regardless of the paltry content given with it does not hold up to that same standard that an order for a limited edition gives you.

 

I would argue in that you place an order for that limited service and not so much the game that comes with it whereas there are people who preorder their games, the base game mind you, with nothing more than a chance to acquire a unique cosmetic in game skin or extra money or whatever, which is not a lasting reward. A limited edition that gives you a statue or unique case or figurine or whatever is a physical lasting reward but a digital in game preorder bonus is a pointless gesture and has no lasting value.

 

That is my opinion as the original concept of 'preordering' was so that you could guarantee the acquirement of a limited source (game, movie, board game) which is not the case today as their is rarely anything 'limited' to most modern preorder opportunities.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...