You know, it's interesting. I talked with Arthur Gies (Reviews editor) for a bit about it on twitter. I like Arthur a lot and I think he does a really good job in his reviews. However, in this case, I asked him if he felt that Polygon would have been better served to have started with a lower review score and ended with a higher one. Suffice to say, he didn't feel it was necessary and that Polygon had stated their review process thoroughly in their cubric. I didn't really agree with that since I felt that Polygon had accidentally left out important information (the server state and how that affects the game) by publishing a review so early.
I don't mind that Polygon is approaching reviews differently. Really, that's just Polygon's style and I think it can give people something different, which I applaud. What I think though, is that since Polygon does have the ability to change a score, they should really be accounting for launch issues, since scores can be revised later. Russ Pitt's initial review is almost a preview to me since he basically talks about what ideally Sim City could be, if it works properly.
Suffice to say, Arthur and I disagreed, but I think in this case, and in the future, Polygon is courting a lot of controversy if they continue to go down this review path. It's not like there are going to be fewer games that are "always online", and I doubt this is the last time we'll see a game with server issues.
Log in to comment