PC Format UK reviews incomplete preview build of The Witcher 2.

  • 86 results
  • 1
  • 2
#1 Edited by Metal_Mills (2980 posts) -

Edit:
 
PC format UK and the writer who wrote the witcher 2 "review" wants to sue me if I don't delete this thread. To the publisher, fuck you. To the writer, fuck you too. Apparently, Phil Iwaniuk believes that the UK doesn't exist on Earth anymore because a UK exclusive beats a world exclusive by another magazine. Hmm, funny that. Also, funny how the review reads more like a preview and doesn't ever point out any actual events in the game. I wonder why that is? Could it be because the version flying around then was 1/3 of the game? No, surely not. It's also written from the same person who said Dragon Age 2 looked gorgeous, had the best RPG combat ever and had the best choices in a game(if he actually paid any attention he'd have seen that NO choice made any difference) and never said a bad word against it. Interesting, especially after all the rumours of EA paying off reviews and faking them on metacritic. But I'm sure it's just a big misunderstanding. A video game magazine would NEVER do anything unethical, right? You can't sue a person over relaying news, Phil, or speculating on a subject.
 

#2 Posted by Tru3_Blu3 (3184 posts) -

Wow. That's pretty fucking stupid of them.

#3 Posted by EuanDewar (4757 posts) -

I had no idea this magazine existed.

#4 Posted by RIDEBIRD (1230 posts) -

Oh how the mighty have fallen.. PC Format is old as shit, and used to be a serious competitor to PC Gamer. Perhaps still are? I don't know. Very weird that they would make such a mistake.

#5 Posted by Yanngc33 (4496 posts) -

European game journalism strikes again

#6 Posted by Soap (3564 posts) -

That is some dumb shit right there.

#7 Posted by phrosnite (3518 posts) -

Do you really care for magazine reviews? Also... what score did they give it?

#8 Posted by Karkarov (2982 posts) -

Every time I hear about a european game review magazine it is basically the same thing.  That thing is sloppy reviewing, biased views, and all around low quality product.

#9 Posted by phrosnite (3518 posts) -
@Marz said:
" they gave it a 92,  guess that bodes well for an incomplete version of the game o.O "
Early reviews are always above 90 so...
#10 Posted by Fluxxed (81 posts) -

This topic will go well.

#11 Edited by Adamsons (877 posts) -
@Marz said:

" they gave it a 92,  guess that bodes well for an incomplete version of the game o.O "

This is true, though from what Ive gathered about PC Format is that they gave Dragon Age 2 95, which pretty much nullifies any credibility.

Edit -

A little off topic, but did anyone watch that video of the Geralt/Triss photoshoot on youtube..?

The fuck did i just watch..
#12 Posted by phrosnite (3518 posts) -

Keep in mind that the first witcher was broken as hell so I won't  be suprised if the sequel has tons of bugs and whatnot.

#13 Edited by Jimbo (9772 posts) -
@Metal_Mills: I've seen plenty of places doing write-ups about that preview build.  Are PC Format claiming that theirs is a full review of the full game?

edit: Huh, very weird if they're giving a score based on just the first act of the game.
#14 Posted by Thule (692 posts) -

I don't really see what's wrong with this, unless they claimed they're reviewing the full game somehow. There's many places already posting previews and impressions of the preview build given out to the press.

#15 Posted by Heltom92 (704 posts) -
@Yanngc33 said:
" European game journalism strikes again "
Yep that's right it's a European thing...
#16 Posted by Metal_Mills (2980 posts) -
@Karkarov said:
" Every time I hear about a european game review magazine it is basically the same thing.  That thing is sloppy reviewing, biased views, and all around low quality product. "
Some of the European reviews of DA2 were much more honest and critical than most American reviews. All places can have poor writing or biased reviews. Look at IGN or 1up or Kotaku. Some of the stuff written there is atrocious. @Jimbo said:
" @Metal_Mills: Are PC Format claiming that theirs is a full review of the full game?
They wrote it has a full review. While I haven't read it, I believe they said nothing about it being a preview build.
#17 Posted by valrog (3671 posts) -
@Karkarov said:
" Every time I hear about a european game review magazine it is basically the same thing.  That thing is sloppy reviewing, biased views, and all around low quality product. "
Yes, that is exclusive to European reviewers. Please.
#18 Posted by blueduck (964 posts) -
@Metal_Mills said:
 While I haven't read it
Oh.
#19 Posted by MikkaQ (10268 posts) -

This is pretty much in line with my previous experiences with European game press. 


Man I remember around the N64 days, the UK Nintendo Official Magazine was kinda awesome. I'd get that instead of Nintendo Power. 
#20 Edited by Metal_Mills (2980 posts) -
@blueduck said:

" @Metal_Mills said:

 While I haven't read it
Oh. "
Atually, I have now thanks to Marz. Once, right at the end it points out they played a non-final version. Even saying that the fact they reviewed and scored a game based on an unfinished code of half the game is a joke. It's like watching a movie that hasn't reached final edit, watching an hour of  it and giving it 4 stars.
#21 Posted by jorbear (2517 posts) -

A 92 and it isn't a complete build. I hope it is higher when it is finished. 

:D
#22 Posted by benjaebe (2783 posts) -

Poor form on their part.

#23 Posted by geirr (2476 posts) -
I'm guessing PC Format (which I remember from 20+ years ago) had a deal with the game developer?
#24 Posted by blueduck (964 posts) -
@Metal_Mills said:
" @blueduck said:

" @Metal_Mills said:

 While I haven't read it
Oh. "
Atually, I have now thanks to Marz. Once, right at the end it points out they played a non-final version. Even saying that the fact they reviewed and scored a game based on an unfinished code of half the game is a joke. It's like watching a movie that hasn't reached final edit, watching an hour of  it and giving it 4 stars. "
I'm not trying to be a super defender of this magazine, I've never read it, but they did tell you. The only people who would not be aware of of this fact are the people who didn't read it and why would they have opinion on it anyway. They're also going to review the game in full when it comes out so really I don't see the problem.
#25 Posted by Metal_Mills (2980 posts) -
@blueduck said:
" @Metal_Mills said:
" @blueduck said:

" @Metal_Mills said:

 While I haven't read it
Oh. "
Atually, I have now thanks to Marz. Once, right at the end it points out they played a non-final version. Even saying that the fact they reviewed and scored a game based on an unfinished code of half the game is a joke. It's like watching a movie that hasn't reached final edit, watching an hour of  it and giving it 4 stars. "
I'm not trying to be a super defender of this magazine, I've never read it, but they did tell you. The only people who would not be aware of of this fact are the people who didn't read it and why would they have opinion on it anyway. They're also going to review the game in full when it comes out so really I don't see the problem. "
Reviewing anything that is unfinished is highly unprofessional. Call it a preview, hell, even give the preview of what you saw a score but to call it a review and use unfinished code is dodgy.
#26 Posted by Animasta (14648 posts) -
@phrosnite said:
" Keep in mind that the first witcher was broken as hell so I won't  be suprised if the sequel has tons of bugs and whatnot. "
They coded their own engine this time so it will, most likely, be less buggy.
#27 Posted by phrosnite (3518 posts) -
@Laketown said:
" @phrosnite said:
" Keep in mind that the first witcher was broken as hell so I won't  be suprised if the sequel has tons of bugs and whatnot. "
They coded their own engine this time so it will, most likely, be a lot more buggy. "
Fixed.
#28 Posted by Karkarov (2982 posts) -
@Metal_Mills said:
" @Karkarov said:
" Every time I hear about a european game review magazine it is basically the same thing.  That thing is sloppy reviewing, biased views, and all around low quality product. "
Some of the European reviews of DA2 were much more honest and critical than most American reviews. All places can have poor writing or biased reviews. Look at IGN or 1up or Kotaku. Some of the stuff written there is atrocious. @Jimbo said:
" @Metal_Mills: Are PC Format claiming that theirs is a full review of the full game?
They wrote it has a full review. While I haven't read it, I believe they said nothing about it being a preview build. "
Anyone who considers Kotaku a reviews site already has issues, it is a Japanese Fanboi Blog site nothing more.  I am also aware everyone on Giant Bomb hates IGN and 1up.  That said I haven't seen either of them ever review a build copy of a game then claim it was a full review, or heard of them claim world exclusives they didn't actually have.  Two things I have seen multiple European review sites and mags do.  As for their review quality?  At least they are consistent and know how to fake it well when they do give a biased review.  As for DA2, you do know lots of people actually did like the game?  I would have given a positive review if I had written one.  Like 4/5 or 80/100. 

@Valrog
Sorry I didn't realize I said "American Reviewers are all perfect and make no mistakes" in my post.  For the record, no they aren't, in fact I have very little respect for most "game journalists" and or "reviewers".
#29 Posted by Metal_Mills (2980 posts) -
@Karkarov said:
" @Metal_Mills said:
" @Karkarov said:
" Every time I hear about a european game review magazine it is basically the same thing.  That thing is sloppy reviewing, biased views, and all around low quality product. "
Some of the European reviews of DA2 were much more honest and critical than most American reviews. All places can have poor writing or biased reviews. Look at IGN or 1up or Kotaku. Some of the stuff written there is atrocious. @Jimbo said:
" @Metal_Mills: Are PC Format claiming that theirs is a full review of the full game?
They wrote it has a full review. While I haven't read it, I believe they said nothing about it being a preview build. "
That said I haven't seen either of them ever review a build copy of a game then claim it was a full review, or heard of them claim world exclusives they didn't actually have.
They've done things just as bad.
#30 Edited by Sooty (8082 posts) -

What does it have to do with Europe, have you people forgotten about the American IGN reviews?

The US IGN reviews (well, pretty much all IGN reviews) come up with fucking stupid negatives for games. Being too difficult is always one of them, learn to play, reviewers.

#31 Posted by CL60 (16906 posts) -
@Adamsons said:
" @Marz said:

" they gave it a 92,  guess that bodes well for an incomplete version of the game o.O "

 though from what Ive gathered about PC Format is that they gave Dragon Age 2 95, which pretty much nullifies any credibility
Opinions, people have them.
#32 Posted by Andorski (5190 posts) -

Shit quality from the European gaming press isn't an exclusive trait, but it's definitely a commonality compared to their American counterparts.  Or do we need to ask how many players will be in ze multiplayer?

#33 Posted by GS_Dan (1402 posts) -
@Karkarov said:
" Every time I hear about a european game review magazine it is basically the same thing.  That thing is sloppy reviewing, biased views, and all around low quality product. "
My copy of Edge just slashed its wrists :(
#34 Edited by philiwaniuk (3 posts) -

Hi Everyone,

I'm the writer who reviewed The Witcher 2 for PC Format.

Let me clear up some confusion here. I didn't review 'half the game' or 'preview code'. I flew out to Warsaw, Poland, to CD Projekt Red's HQ and played the *REVIEW CODE* from start to finish. I also spoke to a number of developers about issues I had with the game, and at this point they informed me that they intended to iron out these issues before the game hit the shelves -a day one patch, essentially.

That's what i meant when i mentioned 'pre-final code' in the review. I felt I had a duty to mention these issues in my review in case they weren't fully resolved by the time it shipped to stores, but it was also only fair to mention that the developers were working on it.

This is how games journalism works - especially exclusives. We don't go and buy a boxed copy from a store and review that. Publishers provide us with review code, and it's their responsibility to make sure this version is as close to the retail copy as possible. If you take issue with the PC Format review of the Witcher 2, you can also discount every other review you've read in every other publication too.

Your assumptions based around this statement are uninformed and categorically incorrect. As they're also damaging to the magazine's credibility (and wrongly so) I ask that you either take this post down or edit it so that the facts are presented correctly.

If you'd like to discuss it further with me, feel free.

Thanks,

Phil

P.S. I've just noticed the original poster didn't even read the review before starting this topic. Nice work.

Just to hammer the point home once more, the version I played was the complete game, from prologue to ending. It was a genuine exclusive, which is why CDP Red flew me to Poland to play it.

#35 Posted by TwoLines (2788 posts) -

I really don't think anyone cares about this anymore, so this is kind of pointless. But, yeah, okay.

#36 Edited by Metal_Mills (2980 posts) -
@philiwaniuk said:

Hi Everyone,

I'm the writer who reviewed The Witcher 2 for PC Format.

Let me clear up some confusion here. I didn't review 'half the game' or 'preview code'. I flew out to Warsaw, Poland, to CD Projekt Red's HQ and played the *REVIEW CODE* from start to finish. I also spoke to a number of developers about issues I had with the game, and at this point they informed me that they intended to iron out these issues before the game hit the shelves -a day one patch, essentially.

That's what i meant when i mentioned 'pre-final code' in the review. I felt I had a duty to mention these issues in my review in case they weren't fully resolved by the time it shipped to stores, but it was also only fair to mention that the developers were working on it.

This is how games journalism works - especially exclusives. We don't go and buy a boxed copy from a store and review that. Publishers provide us with review code, and it's their responsibility to make sure this version is as close to the retail copy as possible. If you take issue with the PC Format review of the Witcher 2, you can also discount every other review you've read in every other publication too.

Your assumptions based around this statement are uninformed and categorically incorrect. As they're also damaging to the magazine's credibility (and wrongly so) I ask that you either take this post down or edit it so that the facts are presented correctly.

If you'd like to discuss it further with me, feel free.

Thanks,

Phil

P.S. I've just noticed the original poster didn't even read the review before starting this topic. Nice work.

Just to hammer the point home once more, the version I played was the complete game, from prologue to ending. It was a genuine exclusive, which is why CDP Red flew me to Poland to play it.

If it was exclusive why did CD-Action claim to have the first full review? Bit of a conflict there. I wasn't even the one to originally point it out, I'd head over to the official forums to chat with them about it. The whole review feels like a preview a part from one or two sentences. It feels like you're talking about the features of the game and nothing personally experienced.  Perhaps that's your writing style, I don't know, I'm not from the UK.
You're also the person who Dragon Age 2 a 95 saying it was the best of Bioware saying it was "graphically stunning" and had a "superlative narrative". You mean the game with 3 environments(which you happened to completely ignore in the review or in fact virtually any flaw except the very minor) that all looked incredibly bland was graphically stunning? Or the story which gives you no real choices and has a half-arsed bullshit ending is of the highest quality? As Jeff Gerstmann put it talking about reviews like that it comes off being "kinda gross".  That now that's way off-topic so I'll stop.
#37 Edited by CptBedlam (4449 posts) -

@philiwaniuk said:

If you take issue with the PC Format review of the Witcher 2, you can also discount every other review you've read in every other publication too.

No. Some publications decide not to "review" games at review events that take place outside of their offices and are supervised or also attended by the games' developers or PR people.

@philiwaniuk said:

This is how games journalism works - especially exclusives.

That's the shady kind of games journalism. And that's why I don't give a shit about exclusive reviews - no wait, actually I'm highly sceptical when I see the phrase "exlusive review".

#38 Edited by CptBedlam (4449 posts) -

double post, sorry

#39 Edited by Ghostiet (5224 posts) -

@philiwaniuk: I find it hard to believe they chose PC Format UK for the first exclusive review, since CD-Action claimed "first" on that one (and it would be corrected by CD Projekt if they were lying). And CD-Action is THE biggest video game magazine in Poland since around the year 2000, they pretty much completely obliterated any competition they had.

Online
#40 Posted by philiwaniuk (3 posts) -

PC Format had the UK exclusive. At no point in the review, or anywhere in the magazine do we suggest it's a world exclusive.

I fully understand the reservations people have vocalised about review events, and have no problem with anyone disagreeing with any opinions I've presented in reviews.

I do have a problem with people flagrantly misrepresenting facts and jumping to conclusions that are wildly inaccurate. I played all of Witcher 2's content (including different narrative paths), and mentioned the term 'pre final code' to alert gamers as to the game's potential problems and whether they were likely to be fixed. Without even reading the review, you started this thread which isn't even remotely true.

Again, I think it's only fair that this thread's deleted or edited with the facts in order.

Thanks.

#41 Posted by RiotBananas (3600 posts) -

@philiwaniuk said:

PC Format had the UK exclusive. At no point in the review, or anywhere in the magazine do we suggest it's a world exclusive.

I fully understand the reservations people have vocalised about review events, and have no problem with anyone disagreeing with any opinions I've presented in reviews.

I do have a problem with people flagrantly misrepresenting facts and jumping to conclusions that are wildly inaccurate. I played all of Witcher 2's content (including different narrative paths), and mentioned the term 'pre final code' to alert gamers as to the game's potential problems and whether they were likely to be fixed. Without even reading the review, you started this thread which isn't even remotely true.

Again, I think it's only fair that this thread's deleted or edited with the facts in order.

Thanks.

This guy seems legit.

#42 Posted by valrog (3671 posts) -

I'm afraid you're 4 months too late. And if you didn't necro this thread, no one would see it anyway.

#43 Posted by Vinny_Says (5686 posts) -

gamebomb.ru reviewed Brink MONTHS before it came out

#44 Posted by Metal_Mills (2980 posts) -

Phil Iwaniuk and Future Publishing are threatening to sue me over this thread. Amazing. Even thought they don't know my name, who I am or even exist in the same continent as I do I better go into hiding! I'm thinking of changing my name to Ryan Caravella, move to Russia and join gamebomb. Start fresh, you know?

#45 Posted by AlexW00d (6182 posts) -

Ha.

#46 Posted by CornBREDX (4805 posts) -

Better watch what you say or a reviewer will find you 6 months later and threaten to sue.

haha oh man, there's no way this magazine is legit if this guy works for it. You can't litigate someone because they hate you, your work, or say it's terrible. Even if it was said on national news.

I continue to believe a lot of games journalism (not all, just a lot) over seas is shady.

#47 Posted by Fluxxed (81 posts) -
@CornBREDX said:

Better watch what you say or a reviewer will find you 6 months later and threaten to sue.

haha oh man, there's no way this magazine is legit if this guy works for it. You can't litigate someone because they hate you, your work, or say it's terrible. Even if it was said on national news.

I continue to believe a lot of games journalism (not all, just a lot) over seas is shady.

You know, I agree that this is stupid, but are you really going to complain about over seas games journalism being shady on GiantBomb of all sites?
#48 Posted by CornBREDX (4805 posts) -

@Fluxxed: Not complaining (although it is a shame for Europeans that want good, honest, reliable reviewers). Just making a comment on European press.

I don't really know what you mean by your sentence "but are you really going to complain about over seas games journalism being shady on GiantBomb of all sites?"

What's wrong with giantbomb? Or is there a wrong place to make comments about shady magazines? I do not think there is considering its on topic with the thread and more importantly the site (as it pertains to games journalism or whatever).

#49 Posted by Tennmuerti (8002 posts) -
@Metal_Mills said:
Phil Iwaniuk and Future Publishing are threatening to sue me over this thread. Amazing. Even thought they don't know my name, who I am or even exist in the same continent as I do I better go into hiding! I'm thinking of changing my name to Ryan Caravella, move to Russia and join gamebomb. Start fresh, you know?
Wait.
Fucking seriously? 
...
LMAO
#50 Posted by Metal_Mills (2980 posts) -
@CornBREDX said:

I continue to believe a lot of games journalism (not all, just a lot) over seas is shady.

Games journalism in general is shady. There was a thing exposed a while ago that any US gaming site that featured gillette shaving product ads on it could only accept that deal if they agreed to not post ANY negative news on the games gilette was in promotion with.

This edit will also create new pages on Giant Bomb for:

Beware, you are proposing to add brand new pages to the wiki along with your edits. Make sure this is what you intended. This will likely increase the time it takes for your changes to go live.

Comment and Save

Until you earn 1000 points all your submissions need to be vetted by other Giant Bomb users. This process takes no more than a few hours and we'll send you an email once approved.