So happens when a games reviewer gets stuck?

metal_mills

Follow

3604

Forum Posts

4049

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 10

User Lists: 3

#1 Edited By metal_mills

I always wondered this. What if for example Jeff is reviewing Red Faction and gets stuck on a mission and he tries and tries but just can't beat it? Red Faction might not be the best example but games like RPG's, strategy, ore puzzle ones especially. How can they review it if they can't finish it?

Edit: Typo in the title. -_-

14 years ago

The_A_Drain

Follow

4073

Forum Posts

577

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#2 Edited By The_A_Drain

I'd imagine they get sent a copy of the official guidebook (if there is one) and that a lot of reviewers probably have other reviewers on MSN/etc and can help each other out if they get stuck.

Besides, you don't always need to finish a game to review it, puzzle games for example like Puzzle Quest, you know the core gameplay within the first couple hours and can explore for ages, you don't need to spoil the ending to give an opinion on the general gameplay. Other games you do need to have knowledge of the plot because they are more important.

If a reviewer doesn't finish a game, it's probably because it doesnt have a finish, or the core gameplay doesnt require him to finish to be able to comment on, or the game is so terrible it doesnt need to be finished (Bomberman Act Zero for example, of Big Rigs, you only need a couple hours with them to know how awful and unplayable they are)

14 years ago

Alex_V

Follow

651

Forum Posts

832

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 5

#4 Edited By Alex_V

Surely the review would simply reflect this fact. It would be dishonest to do anything else.

I'm not a big fan of the idea that reviewers have to finish a game. If the reviewer gets fed up enough to stop, they should simply write that and criticise the game on that basis. One of the problems with reviews (I think) is that they review finishing a game rather than playing the game as a consumer. I don't care how great the last half hour or a game is if the rest is unplayable junk.

14 years ago

deactivated-62acf8675bf9a

Follow

192

Forum Posts

4

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 1

#5 Edited By deactivated-62acf8675bf9a

play on easy.
write in the review it was hard.
like devil may cry

14 years ago

kitsune_conundrum

Follow

1240

Forum Posts

1608

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 1

#6 Edited By kitsune_conundrum

I remember them saying that they tend to review games at normal in which the majority of players/buyers are probably going to start with. If its just that difficult on just normal, they'll mentioned it. They have I believe at various times.

14 years ago

LordAndrew

Follow

14609

Forum Posts

98305

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 36

#7 Edited By LordAndrew

From what I've heard, sometimes the publisher provides various extra materials to help if a review gets stuck.

14 years ago

ElectricBoogaloo

Follow

488

Forum Posts

243

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 115

User Lists: 6

#8 Edited By ElectricBoogaloo

I'm sure other editors will also chime in if they get really stuck.

It is annoying, though. I need to write a Ghostbusters review but this one section on the last level is giving me a load of trouble. Crazy difficulty spike.

14 years ago

EpicSteve

Follow

6908

Forum Posts

13016

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 89

User Lists: 11

#9 Edited By EpicSteve

From what I've learned over the years of listening to podcasts, journalists always play games on Normal. How else would they know if the difficulty is to easy, hard, or unbalanced? Also, I believe they would have a contact within the company they can call. For me at least, if I get stuck its typically me in a room for 15-25 minutes because the game didn't make it obvious on how to progress. Once in a great while (typically in holiday season) you'll see disclaimers on reviews saying the writer couldn't truck through the entire game.

14 years ago

deactivated-62acf8675bf9a

Follow

192

Forum Posts

4

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 1

#10 Edited By deactivated-62acf8675bf9a

its really interesting i think
like play cod games on normal its a straight shoot em up
put it on veteran its a whole new game

14 years ago

zombie2011

Follow

5628

Forum Posts

8742

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

#11 Edited By zombie2011

Game thinks its better than me. 1/10

that would be my entire review.

14 years ago

Out_On_Bail

Follow

1580

Forum Posts

3297

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 4

User Lists: 8

#12 Edited By Out_On_Bail

Um, nobody at GB ever gets stuck, only frustrated enough to maybe toss a controller. Jeff, Ryan, Brad, and Vinny are gaming guru's and "stuck" is not part of their vocabulary.

--in reality I would think they could call one of their many contacts in the industry to maybe get some assistance. I would hope it's also reflected in their review of how complicated it may of been.

14 years ago

Pibo47

Follow

3238

Forum Posts

8

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 3

#13 Edited By Pibo47

@zombie2011 said:

" Game thinks its better than me. 1/10

that would be my entire review.
"

lol nice.

14 years ago

jeff

Follow

6357

Forum Posts

107208

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 20

#14 Edited By jeff

@LordAndrew said:

" From what I've heard, sometimes the publisher provides various extra materials to help if a review gets stuck. "

Actually, we usually don't get the manual, let alone "extra materials." But that's easily corrected, as a PDF of the manual is usually an e-mail away.

In a few cases, I've contacted a publisher on a reviewer's behalf to ask for specific help about a portion of a game. But the way most games are designed these days, it's pretty rare to get completely stuck with no hope of forward movement. So if that means banging your head against a boss fight all night until you make it through, so be it.

14 years ago

rateoforange

Follow

408

Forum Posts

245

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 5

#15 Edited By rateoforange

Some games don't have endings, and some are intentionally amazingly hard, and others are such total crap as to be impossible to finish. I don't think finishing a game is necessary to review it, just playing it for a long enough period of time to get a definite impression of the content.

14 years ago

DavidSnakes

Follow

699

Forum Posts

11

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 0

#16 Edited By DavidSnakes

^Greg Kasavin and DMC3

14 years ago

The_A_Drain

Follow

4073

Forum Posts

577

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#17 Edited By The_A_Drain

@Jeff said:

"
@LordAndrew said:
" From what I've heard, sometimes the publisher provides various extra materials to help if a review gets stuck. "
Actually, we usually don't get the manual, let alone "extra materials." But that's easily corrected, as a PDF of the manual is usually an e-mail away.

In a few cases, I've contacted a publisher on a reviewer's behalf to ask for specific help about a portion of a game. But the way most games are designed these days, it's pretty rare to get completely stuck with no hope of forward movement. So if that means banging your head against a boss fight all night until you make it through, so be it.
"

That's some epic dedication right there.

At least with the rest of us general consumers we can leave it for the night and come back another day, you guys have to slog through until the job is done, my heart goes out to you, specially with games like Vampire Rain, that must have made a couple reviewers lose their minds.

14 years ago

metal_mills

Follow

3604

Forum Posts

4049

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 10

User Lists: 3

#18 Edited By metal_mills

@Jeff said:

"
@LordAndrew said:
" From what I've heard, sometimes the publisher provides various extra materials to help if a review gets stuck. "
Actually, we usually don't get the manual, let alone "extra materials." But that's easily corrected, as a PDF of the manual is usually an e-mail away.

In a few cases, I've contacted a publisher on a reviewer's behalf to ask for specific help about a portion of a game. But the way most games are designed these days, it's pretty rare to get completely stuck with no hope of forward movement. So if that means banging your head against a boss fight all night until you make it through, so be it.
"

Thanks for the reply. I was looking into being a games journalist(like a million others on this site I bet) and it was something I had always wondered.

14 years ago

JoelTGM

Follow

5784

Forum Posts

1760

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 1

#19 Edited By JoelTGM

@Alex_V said:

" Surely the review would simply reflect this fact. It would be dishonest to do anything else.I'm not a big fan of the idea that reviewers have to finish a game. If the reviewer gets fed up enough to stop, they should simply write that and criticise the game on that basis. One of the problems with reviews (I think) is that they review finishing a game rather than playing the game as a consumer. I don't care how great the last half hour or a game is if the rest is unplayable junk. "

You kind of have to finish the game to say whether it was overall a good experience or not.

14 years ago

Diamond

Follow

8678

Forum Posts

533

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 4

#20 Edited By Diamond

Off to the glue factory

14 years ago

Video_Game_King

Follow

36563

Forum Posts

59080

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 54

User Lists: 14

#21 Edited By Video_Game_King

@ROBdaMOB said:

" play on easy.write in the review it was hard.like devil may cry "

I guess you mean Devil May Cry 3, since that was pretty much the case.

14 years ago

kuwabaratheman

Follow

169

Forum Posts

1487

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 8

#22 Edited By kuwabaratheman

@DOUBLESHOCK said:

"
@Alex_V said:
" Surely the review would simply reflect this fact. It would be dishonest to do anything else.I'm not a big fan of the idea that reviewers have to finish a game. If the reviewer gets fed up enough to stop, they should simply write that and criticise the game on that basis. One of the problems with reviews (I think) is that they review finishing a game rather than playing the game as a consumer. I don't care how great the last half hour or a game is if the rest is unplayable junk. "
You kind of have to finish the game to say whether it was overall a good experience or not. "

I disagree. I think it depends on the length of the game. An action game that can be beaten in a short amount of time, sure. But if we're talking about a 60 hour+ RPG, then I think playing the game for 30-40 hours should give you a pretty good indication of the game. Beating the game certainly helps, but I think it's just important to play a sizable amount of time.

14 years ago

metal_mills

Follow

3604

Forum Posts

4049

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 10

User Lists: 3

#23 Edited By metal_mills

@KuwabaraTheMan said:

"
@DOUBLESHOCK said:
"
@Alex_V said:
" Surely the review would simply reflect this fact. It would be dishonest to do anything else.I'm not a big fan of the idea that reviewers have to finish a game. If the reviewer gets fed up enough to stop, they should simply write that and criticise the game on that basis. One of the problems with reviews (I think) is that they review finishing a game rather than playing the game as a consumer. I don't care how great the last half hour or a game is if the rest is unplayable junk. "
You kind of have to finish the game to say whether it was overall a good experience or not. "
I disagree. I think it depends on the length of the game. An action game that can be beaten in a short amount of time, sure. But if we're talking about a 60 hour+ RPG, then I think playing the game for 30-40 hours should give you a pretty good indication of the game. Beating the game certainly helps, but I think it's just important to play a sizable amount of time. "

And what if the last 1/4 of the game is terrible or the story gets way way better? You'd completely ignore that and give a seriously shitty review.

14 years ago

kuwabaratheman

Follow

169

Forum Posts

1487

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 8

#24 Edited By kuwabaratheman

@Metal_Mills said:

"
@KuwabaraTheMan said:
"
@DOUBLESHOCK said:
"
@Alex_V said:
" Surely the review would simply reflect this fact. It would be dishonest to do anything else.I'm not a big fan of the idea that reviewers have to finish a game. If the reviewer gets fed up enough to stop, they should simply write that and criticise the game on that basis. One of the problems with reviews (I think) is that they review finishing a game rather than playing the game as a consumer. I don't care how great the last half hour or a game is if the rest is unplayable junk. "
You kind of have to finish the game to say whether it was overall a good experience or not. "
I disagree. I think it depends on the length of the game. An action game that can be beaten in a short amount of time, sure. But if we're talking about a 60 hour+ RPG, then I think playing the game for 30-40 hours should give you a pretty good indication of the game. Beating the game certainly helps, but I think it's just important to play a sizable amount of time. "
And what if the last 1/4 of the game is terrible or the story gets way way better? You'd completely ignore that and give a seriously shitty review. "

Honestly, if a game is great for 40 hours and then starts sucking, I think it's still worth my money. I mean, that's still 40+ hours of solid enjoyment. And if the game sucks for 40 hours but suddenly gets great...well, I wouldn't consider a game that takes that long to get good worth my time.

I'm not saying that reviewers shouldn't aim to beat games before reviewing them, I'm simply saying that I don't think there's anything wrong with writing a review without beating the game, provided the reviewer has played a substantial portion of the game. That's the key. I'm talking about playing 30-40 hours or more of the game.

Also, I think a review on launch date where the reviewer has played a lot but hasn't beaten the game is more useful to most people than a review two weeks after launch where they've beaten the game. But that's just my opinion. Obviously the goal should be to beat every game before reviewing it. But where that's not possible, I don't see the harm in writing a review without having finished the game if they've played a lot of it.

14 years ago

Alex_V

Follow

651

Forum Posts

832

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 5

#25 Edited By Alex_V

@DOUBLESHOCK said:

"
@Alex_V said:
" Surely the review would simply reflect this fact. It would be dishonest to do anything else.I'm not a big fan of the idea that reviewers have to finish a game. If the reviewer gets fed up enough to stop, they should simply write that and criticise the game on that basis. One of the problems with reviews (I think) is that they review finishing a game rather than playing the game as a consumer. I don't care how great the last half hour or a game is if the rest is unplayable junk. "
You kind of have to finish the game to say whether it was overall a good experience or not. "

I agree, but the question is whether that is useful to a potential consumer or not. I would guess that most games are not completed by the majority of players. Worse than that, I don't think most players will carry on if the initial experience is frustrating.

I think the big problem is that if you spend enough time with a title your initial impressions get lost, but that's exactly the information I want when looking for consumer advice on a title. I want to know what the first 5 hours is like, not the last 45. I think I read too many reviews where the inference that I draw is "If you are paid to finish this game for review purposes, you will grow to love it". Or alternatively "If you are paid to finish this game for review purposes, the terrific first impression it makes will wear off".

14 years ago

Move topic to another board