#51 Edited by Zekhariah (694 posts) -

@wjb: The more legitimate tech sites tend to go with recommended, and toss in a modifier depending on how many caveats exist. Anandtech is probably the best example of how to do a hardware review.

With PC hardware, you are rating an item for how well it performs a pre-defined job. For a launch console that is a silly question, but scoring it is even more meaningless (that would be like reviewing videocards on a 1-10 scale). You can note if it has merit, but there is not enough comparative basis to make that kind of scoring system work.

#52 Edited by TruthTellah (7641 posts) -

@jay_ray said:

It's click bait, plain and simple.

I'd say so.

Wait, how is a 7.5 click bait? That's like saying a 4 out of 5 to a game is clickbait just because it isn't a 5 out of 5.

Man, if Jeff gives the PS4 a 3 out of 5 because it's "aight I guess", I imagine some people on the forums will just go feral.

#53 Edited by slyspider (1033 posts) -

I give pc's a 2/63 and xbox 360s a 16/1923. Oh I thought we were randomly assigning numbers to things. This holds about as much weight to me as anything polygon does.

#54 Posted by chrissedoff (2041 posts) -

All consumer electronics get reviewed. There's nothing messed-up about Polygon reviewing the Playstation 4. In fact, it's awesome because that is some useful information to have for people who don't have unlimited money to spend. Did you guys seriously watch the Friday live steam and come away thinking the Playstation 4 was this totally baller, invincible video-game-playing dynamo? Polygon gave the damn thing a positive review with a few significant reservations. That assessment should be universal. There's no conspiracy to sniff out and there's no excuse here to rant about how much you hate Polygon without looking like a grumpy little ninny.

#55 Posted by Nhoj_Sllew (158 posts) -

I started watching this Microsoft funded doc and the first ad is playstation.......

#56 Edited by ILikePopCans (711 posts) -

@ferros said:

I can't find the Gaf thread where I read it but there's a Forbes or Business Insider article that lists all the companies who contributed to the Polygon documentary, it wasn't just Microsoft's $750,000. The problem is that it creates the appearance of impropriety which taints it as a venue for real opinions to be shared. I recognise every site gets swag and games from publishers, it's how you surface that information that makes you trustworthy or not.

Giant Bomb has in the past shown disinterest to outright disdain for a lot of that stuff (I can't count the number of times Jeff has said something like "fuck this dumb event, just give me the game so I can review it") which makes me trust their opinions on stuff. Polygon took a whole bunch of money from various sources to make a documentary about changing the face of games journalism, a bunch of grandstanding wankery in my opinion. So therefore everything they do is in question, including console review scores.

Polygon is not a bad thing. They may be too showy for me and use crappy tactics like make an article for every little piece of news out of a press conference, and I definitely like Giant Bombs small community feel with unrefined, honest as fuck staff much more, but Polygon has some good experience guys over there and when they do opinionated things then I know they are not bias on things more then the guys at Giant Bomb are. And I bet people at Polygon did not do any of the dealing with how they got the money for their documentary, they probably told the head people at Verge how much they needed for their documentary and they made deals with companies to get that money. It just so happen that Microsoft threw in a fuck ton of money, so I don't know why people think that makes them xbox lovers.

#57 Posted by danm_999 (69 posts) -

I guess the reason I'm not totally sold on this practice because I'm not 100% on who this review is for.

Seems utterly pointless to me to review what in reality is not actually a console, but a launch experience with that console. Obviously new features, new SKUs, new games are going to make any day one appraisal of any of the next gen systems woefully obsolete in the next few weeks and months. I guess Polygon will change the score up or down to reflect those changes, like they do with games (so to their credit, that move would be consistent), but then, we expect our consoles to last a lot longer, and change a lot more than we do our games. How is this going to work, precisely? Is a good firmwear update going to bump the grade 0.5?

Then again, I'm in the camp that's waiting before jumping into this next generation before some clear trends emerge, so this review is already pretty useless to me anyway. I suppose if you're a person on the fence about getting at the launch window (and if you manage to somehow find one launch despite your previous fence sitting), this review might have worth to you, so perhaps I'm letting my reluctance to jump into the next generation cloud my judgement.

#58 Posted by l4wd0g (1815 posts) -

I really like the written review. I think giving it a score was dumb. They say they'll adjust it when there are more games... But wouldn't that mean by the end of every systems life a console would be a 10?

#59 Posted by Subjugation (4693 posts) -

A written review is ok I guess, but putting an actual score to hardware seems real dumb.

#60 Edited by BlatantNinja23 (930 posts) -

I don't really have an issue with giving a score to a console in it's current position. I'm more surprised by the amount of hate people have towards polygon.

#61 Edited by Jimbo (9709 posts) -

Polygon isn't even close to a 7.5 yet. Massively underperforming given how hyped up those guys (I'd never heard of) were. If they're all so talented, why does Polygon rely so heavily on cheap gimmicks like this for attention, rather than quality of content?

There have been game sites in the past which have drawn attention by offering a much higher quality of content than the regular dross -Rock, Paper, Shotgun and Giant Bomb back in their prime, Old Man Murray etc- but Polygon isn't even close to hitting that kind of level yet. It's very much just another game site.

#62 Posted by Thedrbrian (54 posts) -

@bisonhero: So responsive.

The layout is awful and like all the other websites I only visit once only shows 5 words per line on an iPhone.

#63 Posted by RazielCuts (2711 posts) -

With the 5/10 for Killzone and the 7.5/10 for the console itself it turns out Polygon are the most talked about thing surrounding the PS4, I'm sure in their bosses eyes thats considered doing something 'right'.

#64 Posted by Nictel (2312 posts) -

I give the Polygon review 1 million sold consoles on day 1.

#65 Posted by Jinstarwing (45 posts) -

@truthtellah: I really doubt that GB guys are going to give a score to the ps4. I am pretty certain they are just going to say exactly how they feel about the console at the given time.

#66 Posted by preaser (35 posts) -

I find both The Verge and Polygon pretty dumb for many of the reasons already stated in this thread. Don't really care all that much but I just find it kind if silly.

#67 Edited by Excast (689 posts) -

Polygon is weird because while I find myself liking some of the people involved like the McElroy clan and Chris Plante, there is this overall ickiness to the nature of the content and community that I can't get past. Perhaps it is the leadership of Arthur Gies. I dunno, but the guy always comes off extremely poorly whenever I hear from him.

At the end of the day they are free to produce the content they believe people want to see. The reason I love Giantbomb is that they have earned my trust and they don't go out of their way to be dramatic. They didn't need to review every launch game in a day. They don't need to give every game a score. I am guessing it is why the community has embraced them to such an extent and why a place like Polygon feels like a hollow shell.

#68 Posted by tourgen (4229 posts) -

I imagine it's so they can give the Xbone 9/10 next Friday and get paid for a job well done.

#69 Posted by Blu3V3nom07 (4027 posts) -

@sooty said:

@blu3v3nom07 said:

@sooty said:

@blu3v3nom07 said:

Well, The Verge gave PS4 a 7.7. They're sister websites. Get Hype!

It just amazes me they list "Not enough great games yet" as a con, they even put YET at the end of it, so what's the point in saying it's a con when you acknowledge it will get better? Like any console line-up.

Let's blame Josh. Nobody likes Josh. I don't like Josh. Do you like Josh? I'm sure we can hug it out and not like Josh together, I think.

Paul.

Let's blame Patrick instead. And Kessler.

Sure.

Sure.

#70 Posted by Brodehouse (9370 posts) -

Polygon is a dumb place for smart people.

#72 Posted by Blu3V3nom07 (4027 posts) -

@blu3v3nom07 eh ps4 is alright. I don't blame em for rating it a 7.7

Don't you believe the faith?! E3 HYPE TRAIN!!!!!!!

#73 Posted by alwaysbebombing (1279 posts) -
#74 Posted by TheHumanDove (2396 posts) -

The trick is in knowing that Polygon is bad

#75 Posted by Jay_Ray (1006 posts) -

@bawlzinmotion said:

@jay_ray said:

It's click bait, plain and simple.

I'd say so.

Wait, how is a 7.5 click bait? That's like saying a 4 out of 5 to a game is clickbait just because it isn't a 5 out of 5.

Man, if Jeff gives the PS4 a 3 out of 5 because it's "aight I guess", I imagine some people on the forums will just go feral.

It's click bait because there is a number, if they want to write an article stating their opinion about the hardware and current software that's fine and dandy. But putting a number on it is just ridiculous and only drives stupid system war bullshit which baits more people to click the link to the article.

#76 Edited by TruthTellah (7641 posts) -

@jay_ray said:

@truthtellah said:
@bawlzinmotion said:

@jay_ray said:

It's click bait, plain and simple.

I'd say so.

Wait, how is a 7.5 click bait? That's like saying a 4 out of 5 to a game is clickbait just because it isn't a 5 out of 5.

Man, if Jeff gives the PS4 a 3 out of 5 because it's "aight I guess", I imagine some people on the forums will just go feral.

It's click bait because there is a number, if they want to write an article stating their opinion about the hardware and current software that's fine and dandy. But putting a number on it is just ridiculous and only drives stupid system war bullshit which baits more people to click the link to the article.

The Verge and Polygon websites do scored reviews of tech all the time. We may think scores are pretty useless for a launching game system, but to call it "clickbait" is to suggest that they also think it's useless and are only doing it for clicks. They're doing it because they think scores can be given to stuff like this. I'd argue that by this same logic, games shouldn't get scores, because scores are just "clickbait".

Games are relatively subjective, and a score can be very divisive. So maybe Giant Bomb and every other site that gives games scores, especially at launch before all of the numerous patches and such that happen over time, are just crooked clickbaiters. I don't believe that, but as far as calling things clickbait go, I think it's wrong to suggest that even the basic idea of using a score for a console is inherently "clickbait". It may be misguided or not very useful, but calling it clickbait isn't right.

#77 Posted by Veektarius (4141 posts) -

I agree that it is pointless and meaningless but also do not care.

#78 Posted by Jay_Ray (1006 posts) -

@truthtellah: I do think Polygon give hardware review numbers to drive clicks and bait system war "discussions". The Verge is different since they are a hardware site. My main problem is that hardware reviews (in my opinion) need a large variety of similar products. An iPhone review is only useful when comparing it to the previous years iPhone, Androids, and the various other smartphones. Video games consoles don't have enough comparables to be worthwhile. If they want to grade the launch that would be fine but grading the hardware is stupid.

#79 Posted by PandaBear (1264 posts) -

Why the fuck has the Giant Bomb forums become a Polygon link dumping ground? So sick of these borderline spam posts.

#80 Posted by TruthTellah (7641 posts) -

@jay_ray said:

@truthtellah: I do think Polygon give hardware review numbers to drive clicks and bait system war "discussions". The Verge is different since they are a hardware site. My main problem is that hardware reviews (in my opinion) need a large variety of similar products. An iPhone review is only useful when comparing it to the previous years iPhone, Androids, and the various other smartphones. Video games consoles don't have enough comparables to be worthwhile. If they want to grade the launch that would be fine but grading the hardware is stupid.

I agree that scores aren't very useful when considering the small selection, and it's rather stupid. But once again, I have to reject the idea that it's purposefuly "clickbait" or intended to bait system wars discussion(which they're pretty strict on in comments at Polygon). I think they're making a simple mistake, not purposefully doing something evil or manipulative.

#81 Edited by wjb (1551 posts) -

@truthtellah said:

Wait, how is a 7.5 click bait? That's like saying a 4 out of 5 to a game is clickbait just because it isn't a 5 out of 5.

Man, if Jeff gives the PS4 a 3 out of 5 because it's "aight I guess", I imagine some people on the forums will just go feral.

Is it click-bait because they don't like the site where it's coming from? I don't get it, either.

So...do I just don't know what click-baiting is, or what? It's not like Polygon has the title "We Gave the PS4 a 7.5! Find Out Why Inside!" It's just a simple "PS4: read the review" on the main page. Theoretically, we don't know it's a 7.5 until the very, very end.

Everyone knows it's a 7.5 now because of threads like this, which is something Polygon cannot directly control. It's not the site's fault for everyone discussing how ludicrous a score is. As I've said before, it's not that weird to do. I mean, we can sit here and say "they did it on purpose to trick us into reading the review," but we don't have to. It can be argued that everything on the Internet is click-bait because I'm fairly certain that every site wants everyone to read everything they write. "It's cool if you don't read this; it's just my job and I gotta kill time." The majority of the news stories and articles here are kind of "click-baitey" with the snarky headlines.

WHAT DO WORDS MEAN?

#82 Posted by TruthTellah (7641 posts) -

@wjb said:

@truthtellah said:

Wait, how is a 7.5 click bait? That's like saying a 4 out of 5 to a game is clickbait just because it isn't a 5 out of 5.

Man, if Jeff gives the PS4 a 3 out of 5 because it's "aight I guess", I imagine some people on the forums will just go feral.

Is it click-bait because they don't like the site where it's coming from? I don't get it, either.

So...do I just don't know what click-baiting is, or what? It's not like Polygon has the title "We Gave the PS4 a 7.5! Find Out Why Inside!" It's just a simple "PS4: read the review" on the main page. Theoretically, we don't know it's a 7.5 until the very, very end.

Everyone knows it's a 7.5 now because of threads like this, which is something Polygon cannot directly control. It's not the site's fault for everyone discussing how ludicrous a score is. As I've said before, it's not that weird to do. I mean, we can sit here in say "they did it on purpose to trick us into reading the review," but we don't have to. It can be argued that everything on the Internet is click-bait because I'm fairly certain that every site wants everyone to read everything they write. "It's cool if you don't read this; it's just my job and I gotta kill time." The majority of the news stories and articles here are kind of "click-baitey" with the snarky headlines.

WHAT DO WORDS MEAN?

Pshh.. This comment is so click-baity.

#83 Posted by wjb (1551 posts) -

@truthtellah: You caught me. Now my career is ruined and the only place for me is Polygon where I can grow patchy beards and casually talk about video game reviews while getting a tattoo on-camera.

#84 Posted by TruthTellah (7641 posts) -

@wjb said:

@truthtellah: You caught me. Now my career is ruined and the only place for me is Polygon where I can grow patchy beards and casually talk about video game reviews while getting a tattoo on-camera.

Woah, I'd watch that. Honest Polygon Corner.

#85 Edited by GooieGreen (452 posts) -

Follow the money, guys... then take it and destroy it for YouTube hits.

#86 Posted by SunBroZak (838 posts) -

Honest question: can you guys take Polygon's website seriously? (nothing about the writing, I just mean the structure, layout, design of the website)

I still can't. It's so silly.

From the Giant Bomb stuff he's been in, I really like Justin McElroy. But I don't really follow any gaming news sites other than Giant Bomb, so unfortunately I don't get to see him very often.

#87 Edited by horseman6 (313 posts) -

@truthtellah: Giving any console a score, especially this early is beyond stupid. There's no real point of comparison for the console yet either so yes, this is complete click bait. That's why I don't go to The Verge or to Polygon. I don't trust their reviewers, their websites are annoying to visit, and the run on complete click bait. Kotaku and Gizmodo aren't any better though.

#88 Edited by horseman6 (313 posts) -

@sunbrozak: McElroy has zero integrity. He reviewed a game, The Gunstringer, and gave it a 5/5 even though he had a direct conflict of interest and then went on to berate people who pointed out the conflict of interest on the Joystiq forums. He's no better than Arthur Gies.

#89 Edited by chrissedoff (2041 posts) -

@horseman6 said:

@truthtellah: Giving any console a score, especially this early is beyond stupid. There's no real point of comparison for the console yet either so yes, this is complete click bait. That's why I don't go to The Verge or to Polygon. I don't trust their reviewers, their websites are annoying to visit, and the run on complete click bait. Kotaku and Gizmodo aren't any better though.

@jay_ray said:

@truthtellah: I do think Polygon give hardware review numbers to drive clicks and bait system war "discussions". The Verge is different since they are a hardware site. My main problem is that hardware reviews (in my opinion) need a large variety of similar products. An iPhone review is only useful when comparing it to the previous years iPhone, Androids, and the various other smartphones. Video games consoles don't have enough comparables to be worthwhile. If they want to grade the launch that would be fine but grading the hardware is stupid.

Giving a score is useful in that it sums up their impressions in an easy-to-digest format that communicates how much they liked it. There are many similar products for which it is suitable for comparison, though I reject your assertion that this is necessary. Like all products reviews, you should be using the review to not only judge between products that fit a particular niche, but all products and services that you could alternatively spend money (or time) on. In that context, a review and a score are useful, regardless of how many very similar products are out there.

Polygon is not responsible for "gaming community's" fanaticism, pettiness and inclination toward dreaming up idiotic conspiracy theories when their preconceived beliefs are challenged slightly. It is only click bait in the sense that every story in every publication on the Internet exists to attract readers and hold their interest.

Having said all that, they gave the fucking thing a good review. Every single person on the Internet who is upset by Polygon's review needs to grow the fuck up in ten different ways or forever be justifiably dismissed, ignored and marginalized.

#90 Posted by Sin4profit (2868 posts) -

I asked Justin McElroy over twitter if the score would change over time and he said it would. If that's true it's not unreasonable to have an annual re-review for console hardware.

Online
#91 Edited by horseman6 (313 posts) -

@chrissedoff said:

Giving a score is useful in that it sums up their impressions in an easy-to-digest format that communicates how much they liked it. There are many similar products for which it is suitable for comparison, though I reject your assertion that this is necessary. Like all products reviews, you should be using the review to not only judge between products that fit a particular niche, but all products and services that you could alternatively spend money (or time) on. In that context, a review and a score are useful, regardless of how many very similar products are out there.

Polygon is not responsible for "gaming community's" fanaticism, pettiness and inclination toward dreaming up idiotic conspiracy theories when their preconceived beliefs are challenged slightly. It is only click bait in the sense that every story in every publication on the Internet exists to attract readers and hold their interest.

Having said all that, they gave the fucking thing a good review. Every single person on the Internet who is upset by Polygon's review needs to grow the fuck up in ten different ways or forever be justifiably dismissed, ignored and marginalized.

It's way too early to review these consoles which is why I respect sites like Tested and Giantbomb. You don't need to get a review out the door ASAP to get those clicks. A review and score are useful, but not at the moment and while a 7.5 is not a bad score, they knew they would get a reaction out of it which is why it was posted so quickly. And no, we don't have a good point of comparison except against older consoles. What's the criteria for this generation? Are the lack of "Apps" a problem? Is it too slow? Is streaming not good enough? What do we need to look for in a console? Would an extremely powerful console with no apps or added benefits get a 0 even though that's not the point.

#92 Edited by TruthTellah (7641 posts) -

@horseman6 said:

@chrissedoff said:

Giving a score is useful in that it sums up their impressions in an easy-to-digest format that communicates how much they liked it. There are many similar products for which it is suitable for comparison, though I reject your assertion that this is necessary. Like all products reviews, you should be using the review to not only judge between products that fit a particular niche, but all products and services that you could alternatively spend money (or time) on. In that context, a review and a score are useful, regardless of how many very similar products are out there.

Polygon is not responsible for "gaming community's" fanaticism, pettiness and inclination toward dreaming up idiotic conspiracy theories when their preconceived beliefs are challenged slightly. It is only click bait in the sense that every story in every publication on the Internet exists to attract readers and hold their interest.

Having said all that, they gave the fucking thing a good review. Every single person on the Internet who is upset by Polygon's review needs to grow the fuck up in ten different ways or forever be justifiably dismissed, ignored and marginalized.

It's way too early to review these consoles which is why I respect sites like Tested and Giantbomb. You don't need to get a review out the door ASAP to get those clicks. A review and score are useful, but not at the moment and while a 7.5 is not a bad score, they knew they would get a reaction out of it which is why it was posted so quickly.

I'm pretty sure they posted the review because it's now available for purchase, and since they seem to believe that reviews are at least somewhat for assisting people in making purchasing decisions, they put out their impressions of the device before people put down their hard-earned money for it. Putting out their review after most people had already bought it would perhaps express their opinion on the product but not necessarily aid as many people in making a more informed purchasing decision.

#93 Posted by horseman6 (313 posts) -

@truthtellah said:

@horseman6 said:

@chrissedoff said:

Giving a score is useful in that it sums up their impressions in an easy-to-digest format that communicates how much they liked it. There are many similar products for which it is suitable for comparison, though I reject your assertion that this is necessary. Like all products reviews, you should be using the review to not only judge between products that fit a particular niche, but all products and services that you could alternatively spend money (or time) on. In that context, a review and a score are useful, regardless of how many very similar products are out there.

Polygon is not responsible for "gaming community's" fanaticism, pettiness and inclination toward dreaming up idiotic conspiracy theories when their preconceived beliefs are challenged slightly. It is only click bait in the sense that every story in every publication on the Internet exists to attract readers and hold their interest.

Having said all that, they gave the fucking thing a good review. Every single person on the Internet who is upset by Polygon's review needs to grow the fuck up in ten different ways or forever be justifiably dismissed, ignored and marginalized.

It's way too early to review these consoles which is why I respect sites like Tested and Giantbomb. You don't need to get a review out the door ASAP to get those clicks. A review and score are useful, but not at the moment and while a 7.5 is not a bad score, they knew they would get a reaction out of it which is why it was posted so quickly.

I'm pretty sure they posted the review because it's now available for purchase, and since they seem to believe that reviews are at least somewhat for assisting people in making purchasing decisions, they put out their impressions of the device before people put down their hard-earned money for it. Putting out their review after most people had already bought it would perhaps express their opinion on the product but not necessarily aid as many people in making a more informed purchasing decision.

This would be true if the people who are buying the consoles didn't already have them pre-ordered for months. Even if they gave the console a 2.0, it wouldn't make much of a difference. This is why, like I said, it's nothing but click bait.

#94 Posted by SharkEthic (945 posts) -

@horseman6 said:

@chrissedoff said:

Giving a score is useful in that it sums up their impressions in an easy-to-digest format that communicates how much they liked it. There are many similar products for which it is suitable for comparison, though I reject your assertion that this is necessary. Like all products reviews, you should be using the review to not only judge between products that fit a particular niche, but all products and services that you could alternatively spend money (or time) on. In that context, a review and a score are useful, regardless of how many very similar products are out there.

Polygon is not responsible for "gaming community's" fanaticism, pettiness and inclination toward dreaming up idiotic conspiracy theories when their preconceived beliefs are challenged slightly. It is only click bait in the sense that every story in every publication on the Internet exists to attract readers and hold their interest.

Having said all that, they gave the fucking thing a good review. Every single person on the Internet who is upset by Polygon's review needs to grow the fuck up in ten different ways or forever be justifiably dismissed, ignored and marginalized.

It's way too early to review these consoles which is why I respect sites like Tested and Giantbomb. You don't need to get a review out the door ASAP to get those clicks. A review and score are useful, but not at the moment and while a 7.5 is not a bad score, they knew they would get a reaction out of it which is why it was posted so quickly.

I'm pretty sure they posted the review because it's now available for purchase, and since they seem to believe that reviews are at least somewhat for assisting people in making purchasing decisions, they put out their impressions of the device before people put down their hard-earned money for it. Putting out their review after most people had already bought it would perhaps express their opinion on the product but not necessarily aid as many people in making a more informed purchasing decision.

Releasing a review after only a handful of days of hands-on-time, of a product with a potential lifespan of 8-10 years that, up until the day the review was released, wasn't fully functional due to the pending release of the 1.5 patch, is considered aiding people in making an informed purchasing decision? Sounds a lot more like a "early impressions" piece than a review, which makes the score all the more arbitrary. They should have at least gone the Conan O'Brien way of scoring a game, if they insist on calling this a review.

#95 Edited by Fattony12000 (6350 posts) -

JIM STERLING GREYLIST POLYGON MICROSOFT MONEY GIVE JUSTIN MCELROY MAXIMUM FUN GARME JURNAZILM MARCH ON BOSTON FOR APOLOGY FOR ALL THE BAD STUFF THEY DID 8.8 ZELDA WHAT GAMESPOT KANEANDLYNCHGATERESOLUTIONGATE GOOD MORNING DREAMCAST

TRUTH

PRIDE

This is living.

#COLLUSION

But also whatever. As with any and all reviews you are free to agree, disagree or ignore. Just believe in your heart and do what feels right.

#96 Edited by TruthTellah (7641 posts) -

@sharkethic:

@sharkethic said:
@truthtellah said:

@horseman6 said:

@chrissedoff said:

Giving a score is useful in that it sums up their impressions in an easy-to-digest format that communicates how much they liked it. There are many similar products for which it is suitable for comparison, though I reject your assertion that this is necessary. Like all products reviews, you should be using the review to not only judge between products that fit a particular niche, but all products and services that you could alternatively spend money (or time) on. In that context, a review and a score are useful, regardless of how many very similar products are out there.

Polygon is not responsible for "gaming community's" fanaticism, pettiness and inclination toward dreaming up idiotic conspiracy theories when their preconceived beliefs are challenged slightly. It is only click bait in the sense that every story in every publication on the Internet exists to attract readers and hold their interest.

Having said all that, they gave the fucking thing a good review. Every single person on the Internet who is upset by Polygon's review needs to grow the fuck up in ten different ways or forever be justifiably dismissed, ignored and marginalized.

It's way too early to review these consoles which is why I respect sites like Tested and Giantbomb. You don't need to get a review out the door ASAP to get those clicks. A review and score are useful, but not at the moment and while a 7.5 is not a bad score, they knew they would get a reaction out of it which is why it was posted so quickly.

I'm pretty sure they posted the review because it's now available for purchase, and since they seem to believe that reviews are at least somewhat for assisting people in making purchasing decisions, they put out their impressions of the device before people put down their hard-earned money for it. Putting out their review after most people had already bought it would perhaps express their opinion on the product but not necessarily aid as many people in making a more informed purchasing decision.

Releasing a review after only a handful of days of hands-on-time, of a product with a potential lifespan of 8-10 years that, up until the day the review was released, wasn't fully functional due to the pending release of the 1.5 patch, is considered aiding people in making an informed purchasing decision? Sounds a lot more like a "early impressions" piece than a review, which makes the score all the more arbitrary. They should have at least gone the Conan O'Brien way of scoring a game, if they insist on calling this a review.

Hey, I still agree that I think a review seems premature and somewhat unhelpful. All I'm suggesting is that it isn't necessarily clickbait. Them scheming to manipulate gamers into giving them views on a post they know serves no useful purpose is "clickbait". Them misguidedly thinking a review will do a lot of viewers any good isn't "clickbait". It's the difference between the conspiratorial clickbait accusation often thrown around by people online toward articles or reviews they don't like and a site doing something that is perhaps less useful than they think.

I don't think Polygon has some kind of malicious intent here; I don't think they're out to trick people with their review. From everything I've seen from them, they seem to think they're providing some kind of useful service. We may disagree on whether it is indeed useful, but accusing them of just posting the review as clickbait is not right. I have a feeling less people would be calling it clickbait if the score was higher, and efforts to dismiss or discredit them seem like a convenient way to deflect any level of criticism in the review. I'm cool with suggesting that there are problems with Polygon, as I've already shared some of my own complaints in this thread, but there's a big difference between simply criticizing them as mistaken and suggesting that they are plotting to trick people with "clickbait".

#97 Edited by SharkEthic (945 posts) -

@truthtellah: That's fine, I wasn't really commenting on the clickbait aspect, but I'll have a go at it:

It's clickbait:) Posting a review on launch day, for the sake of posting a review on launch day, is a way to stand out in a crowd of tech-reviewers, of which most wouldn't dream releasing a review of a not fully functional product. The missing 1.5 patch alone renders the review-format pointless, and judging from how the Polygon staff responds to the backlash on twitter, it sounds like, at least some of the staff, was well aware of this.

They could have saved themselves a lot of grief by calling this a hands-on impressions piece, but that doesn't generate the same amount of traffic as a review. The week leading up to the launch, "ps4 review" was really trending on google (it's the first suggestion when typing "ps4" today), and there were Polygon to grab a piece of that action.

That's just how I see it, though, I don't see it as a "fuck you forever, Polygon!" kinda thing - I'm sure they were trying to provide people with the most information they could, while still boosting their traffic.

#98 Edited by Missacre (566 posts) -

The rampant fanboyism we have here is great.

#99 Posted by SharkEthic (945 posts) -
@missacre said:

The rampant fanboyism we have here is great.

Wow, what a cool thing to say, dude! I don't really see any signs of "rampant fanboyism" in this thread, but still, VERY cool!

#100 Edited by Missacre (566 posts) -

@sharkethic said:
@missacre said:

The rampant fanboyism we have here is great.

Wow, what a cool thing to say, dude! I don't really see any signs of "rampant fanboyism" in this thread, but still, VERY cool!

If you say so. Also, I didn't mean specifically in this thread, but if that's what you think, more power to you.