Does Not Finishing A Game Invalidate Your Opinion On A Game?

As others have said, of course you can have a opinion of your experience up to this point. Just because you might haven't seen the most mind-boggling twist-ending in video game history, after the most tedious and terrible gameplay, it doesn't mean your opinion isn't valid. To fully review the game as a whole, however, you should play a basic percentage of the game and see most of its gameplay features, plot elements and assets it has to offer; just because you may detest the first one or two hours it doesn't mean it can't blow you away later on.

I don't think so but I do think professional reviewers should finish it to give us the most informed opinions in their reviews. Maybe they'd even end up having some kind of change of heart for the story. Hopefully it's not too unreasonable to ask people who get paid for this to finish a game they are not particularly enjoying.

I sure as hell don't even take into consideration opinions on NieR:Automata by people who have only finished Ending A or less.

yeah. if a game is really bad that i can't finish it then my opinion is that it's a bad game.

although to be fair i will take someone a bit more seriously if they have played through it but i really don't think it's fair to disregard someones opinion because they didn't finish something. would you watch a movie, read a book, or play a game if you aren't enjoying it? not me.

A lot of people tried but gave up on Frog Fractions before they even scratched the surface.

There are two threads to this.

Narrative.

Mechanics.

People either tire of the mechanics so therefore do not finish the narrative.

Or the narrative is such that people tire of the mechanics.

The truly exceptional games are those that balance the two to drive people to complete the experience.

Depends on the game. If you say you thought the Witcher 3 was bad after a few hours, your opinion is invalid.

Depends on how much of a chance one gave it.

I've only ever played an in-development version of Devil May Cry 3 at E3 many years ago. The controls were a mess at that time, but obviously I have no valid opinion to offer of the game proper. (which I understand is beloved by many)

Conversely, I dropped Witcher 3 after 30 hours because I found it to be a boring slog. I feel that I invested more than enough time into it to offer what is largely a dissenting opinion.

Melchiah said:

So, all console shooters are mediocre and boring to you without trying, no exceptions about it?

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

Compared to playing with kb+m with unlocked 60+fps, yes, no exceptions.

The real crux of the problem here, for me, is that people who don't enjoy a game tend to say it's bad. There's a difference between you not liking something because it's not your cup of tea and the game being actually bad.

rodrigolfp said:

Compared to playing with kb+m with unlocked 60+fps, yes, no exceptions.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

Well, there we have a perfect example of an invalid opinion.

Melchiah said:

Well, there we have a perfect example of an invalid opinion.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

You wish.

No - it can make it less valid (particularly in a narratively driven experience) but not invalid. Also, if we went down that route then surely the most valid opinion are held by those that platinum a game, which seems odd.

rodrigolfp said:

You wish.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

Since your personal point of view is greatly outnumbered by the majority of people who play shooters on consoles, yeah, it's safe to say it's invalid. It doesn't give a reasonable answer to anyone who's on the fence of buying a game. It's merely stereotypical platform warring.

Aters said:

Of course not. If I hate a game, should I spent 20 more hours into it so that I can criticize it? Professional reviewers are required to finish the game though.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

Honestly I don't think they do. They should disclose that they didn't but if we're out here saying that it's okay to have an opinion about games without finishing them I think that applies to critics too.

Melchiah said:

Since your personal point of view is greatly outnumbered by the majority of people who play shooters on consoles, yeah, it's safe to say it's invalid. It doesn't give a reasonable answer to anyone who's on the fence of buying a game. It's merely stereotypical platform warring.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

Implying that a majority opinion is a "right opinion". Sure. LOL. And plus, looks like you don`t know that I can play shooters with controller on pc if I want. This has nothing to do with the plataform. It`s only about the controller options for the games.

Yabab said:

The real crux of the problem here, for me, is that people who don't enjoy a game tend to say it's bad. There's a difference between you not liking something because it's not your cup of tea and the game being actually bad.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

Yeah I agree with this. Very good example are the comments I've seen from few people who post on these forums "Witcher 3 doesn't deserve the GOTY awards it got." Then you are interfering with the opinion of people who have played through the game, compared to the 10 hours or so they played themselves. And are saying that your opinion is more valid.

Nah. A bad game is a bad game and if after an extended period of time, its still bad.

eg. FFXIII is a bad game. I did finish it but the extended tutorial = it is a bad game

it depends on what the game is, and what you do not like about it. not really will need to watch the ending credits, but certain amount of time invested will be required

Games like sports or FPS that are mostly the same all the way game, can be

Games that have skills unlock able, progression, leveling ,etc, you do need to sink deeper in those

there is also the point of a games plot (if it has it)

ultimately anyone is entitled to their opinions, but if you want to publicly express em and have em view as a critique and not a "whine", having yourself being knowledgeable of the game as much as you can helps out

Opinion about game play? Of course that's fine, most games don't usually change too radically after the initial few hours with at most a couple more systems being added into the mix. I think story is a little different though. I wouldn't go so far as to say someone's opinion is invalidated because they haven't finished, but some games are really defined by their later game/ending, so I feel like it's harder to have a concrete opinion without going through them. Games like NieR:A or Steins;Gate are like that for me, where if you only got part way through, I wouldn't give the opinion as much weight as someone who actually finished regardless of if they liked it or not.

As long as you acknowledge you didn't finish the game it's fine. Life is too short to do things you don't enjoy.

Depends how you're presenting your opinion.

A person is more than welcome to speak on the experience they had with a game up until the moment they stopped progressing. If you made it 20 hours into a 60 hour experience then you can tell the world all about those 20 hours, but if you try to encapsulate the entire game based only on your 20 hours then your opinion should be taken for what it is, a sample of the entire experience.

I've played many games over my 30+ years and have lost count of the times my experience has been altered both positively and negatively in the initial and final moments of a game. So may times I've thought a game was average, or my experience with it was average, and then a twist or reveal later, and all of the sudden I'm captivated and play headlong into the night, compelled to complete it. Other times, I put a game down because I can't get through the opening. Usually I'm honest with myself about those and in the back of my mind I know I gave up and perhaps the game is more than I know it to be and so I reserve it for another try.

I don't believe in tossing any of those away and then trying to pass of my opinion as an informed one. Just because I didn't take to the game immediately doesn't necessarily mean the game is head-to-toe unworthy of my time.

Nope, games are too long and there is very few games that truly, noticeably "get better" at a certain point. If you don't like the core gameplay you won't like that acclaimed part either, which is never enough to fully redeem a game.

Musubi said:

Honestly I don't think they do. They should disclose that they didn't but if we're out here saying that it's okay to have an opinion about games without finishing them I think that applies to critics too.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

Nah. It's their job and they get paid for it. Also, most videogame companies have bonus tied to Metacrotic score. If I were a developer, I'd be piss if I miss my bonus because some lazy reviewers give my game a 6 after only playing 8 hour of it.

The game takes at least 50% of the responsibility for making you want to keep going. If you quit playing because the game lost you (as opposed to IRL shit or another game stealing your attention), that says something about the game.

As long as a person makes a real effort to play and enjoy a game, their opinion is valid.

I hate this shit so much.

"You didn't beat this 100 hour RPG and only spent 30 hours on it, your opinion on games DOES NOT MATTER!"

So fucking dumb.

It probably shouldn't get a professional review at least. Imagine if you only saw half a movie and still reviewed it. No one would take you seriously.
Depends on the game, but I think you can get a solid opinion by playing most of it though.

No, it doesnt.

Steam lets you refund within 2 hours. As far as I care, 10 minutes is enough to form a lasting valid opinion of the game.

No way. If I can't get through it because it's bad, it's still bad.

No, not at all.

If you don't like a game at all for whatever reason, why would you invest the time to complete it when you don't enjoy it?

There are quite a few games I really don't like that I haven't completed, and I never will. I can tell you precisely why I don't like them as well.

As long as someone's opinion has an actual foundation to it, there's nothing wrong with it.

It doesn't invalidate your opinion, but I'm going to believe the opinion of someone else who has completely finished a game more than someone who dropped it. I played Sun and Moon for like an hour before I shut it off because I could not stand the exposition and constant hand-holding every 2 steps, it was making me fall asleep. I still would tell someone to ask someone who has beaten the game, because my opinion holds less water than someone who did get through what I didn't like about the game.

If you're trying to do a review though, I would say play the entire game or don't review it.

Well, let's just say my opinion vastly changed from finishing Mass Effect. VASTLY

Definitely not, but you just can't say "The ending is bad" :P

Ha no. I've played monster hunter 3 on 3 different platforms for hundreds of hours and never once 'finished' it but I think I can give an informed opinion on it. Conversely I played just cause 3 for about 2 hours. That's a game with hundreds of hours of content but if you wanted a summary of how it compares to 2 then I feel confident I could give one

No but I see a lot of reviews on Steam with less than two hours of play that I automatically disregard. If I had to set a minimum, I'd say 2 in game hours. Once you're past that, your opinion carries weight.

People on this site start having an opinion of a game the second it is announced, and then the second the first trailer comes out, and then the weeks leading up until it is released, and most people here have a very concrete opinion of a game by the time they decide to hit "buy" or not. Playing the game for a lot of people I see here is just to validate the opinion they have already established prior to even buying it. Regardless, the only opinion that matters to me about any game is my opinion, and nobody can invalidate my own opinion of a game except myself, and generally I'm comfortable that my opinion is my opinion regardless of how much I have played.

No. There are times that later content may directly address your criticisms if you don't finish so as long as your open to that being the possibility and people telling you that, go right ahead and share your opinions.

That said, I will never respect the opinion of someone who just watched a Let's Play or a Stream and weigh in directly on gamplay since they have no idea of the feel of the game.

Of course not. You didn't finish a game because you didn't like it. I expect people who don't like a game to not finish it tbh. In fact I would find it stranger to complete an entire game you weren't enjoying. Unless of course the game was great right until the end.

I don't think so. The Witcher 3 is a long game and The Order is a short game. Guess which one I finished.

Of course it doesn't. It can leave you with an incomplete opinion of certain aspects of it depending on how they develop later in the game but you can have an opinion on what you played. Let's take FF XIII for example. I liked it throughout but if someone plays it for 20 hours and says they don't like its linearity and decided to drop it before it opens up, that's a fair opinion to have. Also, plenty of games can't really be 'finished'. As long as people are honest with the product, i think every criticism has some validity.

And i see the master race has already arrived and dumped a steaming pile of shit on the conversation that had nothing to do with platform wars.

You don't know how the story ends and ties everything all together, but in every other respect if a game if you've played, say 35-55% of a game you are more than qualified to talk about it. For the first ~10-20% or so you have the caveat that you've just started out, so there I'd say you don't have the full picture. But by that percentage point you've seen and done the majority of what it has to offer and got a feel for how the overall game flows, what direction everything is headed, etc. By that point you're just working towards the end.

On top of that sometimes there's rare cases like FFXV where the last few hours felt significantly different from the rest of the game, but usually you have a pretty good feeling about most of the game. Obviously if you've played that amount and didn't like it then you shouldn't have to finish something you're not really into and can work out why you feel that way.

Chandler said:

It doesn't invalidate your opinion, but I'm going to believe the opinion of someone else who has completely finished a game more than someone who dropped it. I played Sun and Moon for like an hour before I shut it off because I could not stand the exposition and constant hand-holding every 2 steps, it was making me fall asleep. I still would tell someone to ask someone who has beaten the game, because my opinion holds less water than someone who did get through what I didn't like about the game.

If you're trying to do a review though, I would say play the entire game or don't review it.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

As someone who finished both Moon and Ultra Sun (haven't tried the postgame stuff in the latter yet), I'd say your opinion after those 60 minutes is completely accurate. You'd be doing that person a disservice by not telling them what you think about the game, especially because it never gets better in those aspects (the story does become much better, but it's still plagued with tons and tons of cutscenes).

I played through Divinity Original Sin because people tore through me when I wrote a review after 30 hours. Still felt the same when I beat it. Okay mechanics, annoying leveling, utterly disrespects your time.

Aters said:

Nah. It's their job and they get paid for it. Also, most videogame companies have bonus tied to Metacrotic score. If I were a developer, I'd be piss if I miss my bonus because some lazy reviewers give my game a 6 after only playing 8 hour of it.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

They get paid for it yes but when it boils down to it reviews are just opinons. I'm fine with reviewers not finishing a game but if they don't the text of their review better explain why.

Alienous said:

It diminishes it, but it doesn't invalidate it. You can have an opinion on the parts you played.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

Pretty much. If someone writes a review I'd find it very important to disclose that

Not at all. No one has a complete or perfect opinion on anything, and don't need to. In my experience, my opinion of a game has changed for many reasons just beyond completing it. Difficulty mode matters. Similar games I've played matters. Plenty of times I've played a game years later only to have a totally different opinion because I'm in a different space, with different experiences under my belt-- God Hand, Dragon's Dogma, and Demon's Souls jump to mind.

Plus, where would it end?
"Did you actually finish it?"
"Yeah."
"But did you clear it on hard mode?"
"Yeah, actually."
"But did you get an A rank on every stage?"
"Yep."
"Don't tell me you bought that upgrade that ruins the whole game!"
"I didn't."
.
.
.
"Okay, but did you beat the game with your eyes closed, hands tied behind your back-- with your mind!?"