-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
-
We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.
Battlefront IIs review copies needed a lower amount to unlock heroes (Update: false info, check OP)
- Thread starter Chairmanchuck (另一个我)
- Start date
- Status
They saw that reviewer who couldn't jump in the cuphead demo.
That is completely and utterly unacceptable. Scummy is an understatement. I've read about this before with other games, eg review copies coming with super ultimate type editions of games that come with tonnes of credits, XP boosts, unlocks etc, that differ greatly to the base retail experience.
No review outlet or journalist should be reviewing ANY version of a game except the absolute base retail version, unless they expressly specify and state as much in their review if they happen to be reviewing a version that differs from base retail in any way.
This is a real issue with reviews that I think needs more attention and change.
No review outlet or journalist should be reviewing ANY version of a game except the absolute base retail version, unless they expressly specify and state as much in their review if they happen to be reviewing a version that differs from base retail in any way.
This is a real issue with reviews that I think needs more attention and change.
Its just scummy and deceiving bullshit. Gonna avoid this game so much.
"Make it easier for reviewers" my ass. Its just you dont get ripped apart for your garbage in reviews.
Its so sad that the Star Wars IP is hostage of shitty EA.
Also holy shit 137.000 downvotes for their comment? EA really tries so hard to be #1 of the worst companies.
"Make it easier for reviewers" my ass. Its just you dont get ripped apart for your garbage in reviews.
Its so sad that the Star Wars IP is hostage of shitty EA.
Also holy shit 137.000 downvotes for their comment? EA really tries so hard to be #1 of the worst companies.
A reviewer imo should play the game on the same terms as the customer. If the game enforces a stupid grind it should have a direct impact on the review - here, I played for this many hours for the review and even with so much time devoted to the game I didn't unlock everything. Besides you can publish a review in progress or, you know, play more instead of trying to post the review after the embargo ends no matter what.
Previews are supposed to be the one to be played based on a pre-prepared part of the code, not reviews.
Hey supplying reviewers with cheat codes used to be standard practice.
Nowadays, they want to make paying for cheat codes standard practice too.
It all checks out.
Nowadays, they want to make paying for cheat codes standard practice too.
It all checks out.
The best part is they're not even denying that the amounts on EA Early Access are accurate, they're just saying they plan on "tuning it". As many others have said already, if they didn't intend to nickel and dime you from the outset they would be pleading their case from the rooftops.
He gave the first one a 7/10, and no longer gives review scores (right?), so does he even end up on aggregate websites anymore?
In the interest of journalism review sites / magazines should note how many hours played, difficulty attempted, special conditions i.e. DLC unlocked. Not only would it be transparent but also would foster trust rather than the rather cosy "promotional" relationship many perceive the industry to have.
I wouldn't expect a film reviewer to only watch half a film before making a judgement, so why should games be any different?
I wouldn't expect a film reviewer to only watch half a film before making a judgement, so why should games be any different?
It's very similar to when reviewers are checking free to play games. They usually receive a code from the dev/publisher to fast-track them through the game, ignoring most of the grind needed to advance after the initial burst. Never liked it, but that's something most reviewers don't care about.
I find it very fitting how Star Wars is being milked like a cashcow from Disney and EA at the same time. Star Wars is the biggest bitch IP on the planet.
That said, the last EA game I bought was Mass Effect 3 and it's going to be the last for a long time.
That said, the last EA game I bought was Mass Effect 3 and it's going to be the last for a long time.
I agree with you, my only point is to know what is happening exactly. Why this footage of a different price exists, before sending EA to hell, etc.
As usual, vote with your wallet. Thankfully they make boycotting them pretty easy with all the average games they release nowadays. So all things considered EA is nice: they make scummy stuff like this but they also make pretty shitty games so you won't feel bad not buying them.
Totally. When this game comes to Origin Access I'll get that for a month and play through the single player and be done with it.
Me too - I thought Forza 7 adding the ability to use real currency post release rather than at launch interesting...
ps3ud0 8)
Like others said all we can do is vote with our wallets.
This seems scummy as hell but is it actually common? If so I didn't know that...reviewers should make that clear. I knew it was common for demos and press events. That's fine. It's not ok for review copies though imo.
This seems scummy as hell but is it actually common? If so I didn't know that...reviewers should make that clear. I knew it was common for demos and press events. That's fine. It's not ok for review copies though imo.
I think this is totally unacceptable, but this is far from the first time I've heard of it happening. Isn't it fairly common for reviewers to get builds of a game where the microtransaction economy hasn't yet gone live, so publishers can get their high Metacritic scores and then patch in whatever monetisation scheme they care to a week or two down the line?
Any respectable redaction won't post review scores on launch day for a game like this. Have a decency, post "first impressions", " review in the making article" on launch day, then post review with score after the weekend. You will even get more views this way, so it's win-win.
They just can't help themselves, can they. I pray for the day that EA loses the rights to Star Wars and maybe Disney/Lucasfilm makes a gaming division that shops ideas around to different studios and publishers, similar to Marvel Games.
I'd rather go play the Star Wars slots in my hometown casino.
They're cool. They light up and have movie sounds and Luke Skywalker says "I have a bad feeling about this" every time you give them your money like a stupid asshole.
They're cool. They light up and have movie sounds and Luke Skywalker says "I have a bad feeling about this" every time you give them your money like a stupid asshole.
You can play all of the heroes in arcade mode. I know it's not the same as MP but you get a pretty good feel for them.
Just fuck EA... Also, our review "industry" (lol) needs better metrics by which they score games. I don't like how much it's based on a reviewer's subjective experience and they base their score on "how much they liked reviewing it". it's hardly representative of the experience of the consumer who has to measure the content vs the price, microtransactions and other hellish stuff.
Maybe being a bit dramatic, but hopefully you get my point. I dislike how exploitative reviews have become to publishers.
Maybe being a bit dramatic, but hopefully you get my point. I dislike how exploitative reviews have become to publishers.
I wish we are not the minority because obviously gamers seem to be voting with their wallets for this stuff. I'm sure this game will do fine and then the next one will have even more dodgy stuff in it.
Reviewers should review both the review copy and the retail version, while making the differences known.
Not that any of this matters really. Consumers are going to lap it up regardless.
Not that any of this matters really. Consumers are going to lap it up regardless.
Nah I don't believe the intention is to deceive reviewers. it's 2017 they know how news spread and websites can change the score. Also they have microtransactions they want to sell with games as a service so it's not the old Kojima MGS2 days.
Not defending EA here but c'mon you don't expect this to go unnoticed and expect reviewers to fell for it. EA knows that reviewers read Reddit and other places.
Not defending EA here but c'mon you don't expect this to go unnoticed and expect reviewers to fell for it. EA knows that reviewers read Reddit and other places.
- Status