IGN's RDO Review (8.5/10) & Reviewing Games as a Service

[Rokushakubo]

So the other day I saw IGN gave RDO a review now that it's out of beta and it got an 8.5/10. I agreed with a lot of the comments he made about the general nature of the game. However, come summer there will be a huge new element added via the 3 roles and who knows what else. In a year or two the game will be a lot more than it is now. 

 

Generally game outlets don't give annual scores but it seems inaccurate to fix a review and score to a game that's growing and expanding all the time. If R* can smash their vision laid out in the gameinformer interview then I think the game would be more than an 8.5. 

 

ANyway, just thought y'all might be interested to see how the game was rated. Haven't seen any other reviews from the usual sources yet.  

 

 

[Fozzie]

I wonder how much he got from R* for an 8.5?

As is 7 at best, in Beta it was a 3.5-4

[CMCSAVAGE]

The only review/rating I go by is my own. 8.5 pfffftttt. I have no interest in reading it, but it was probably written by someone that enjoys the sh*tty PvP modes.

 

I'll give it a 6.5 in it's current state. The only thing keeping me logging on everyday is the daily challenges.

[Rokushakubo]

8 minutes ago, CMCSAVAGE said:

The only review/rating I go by is my own. 8.5 pfffftttt. I have no interest in reading it, but it was probably written by someone that enjoys the sh*tty PvP modes.

 

I'll give it a 6.5 in it's current state. The only thing keeping me logging on everyday is the daily challenges.

It's a video review. The guy says that he has no interest in PvP but that there was still a swathe of things to do aside from that. 

 

I don't really have an opinion on the number given as it's totally subjective. More so the content of the review.  

[Lonely-Martin]

32 minutes ago, CMCSAVAGE said:

The only review/rating I go by is my own. 8.5 pfffftttt. I have no interest in reading it, but it was probably written by someone that enjoys the sh*tty PvP modes.

 

I'll give it a 6.5 in it's current state. The only thing keeping me logging on everyday is the daily challenges.

Same, same score too really. Just isn't there yet for me. Not to say it won't or doesn't have aspects I enjoy.

 

I never believe any of it really, it's all just a circle jerk. Same with the Oscars or anything like that. I don't care. Its all personal opinion and many are probably swayed by a payout or some sort of benefits, lol.

 

Many 'critically acclaimed' things I've played/watched are sh*t or just not my kind of entertainment, many 'critically panned' things are on my top 10 lists, lol. I respect COD, Battlefied, God of War and Spiderman (games my mates like often), but don't like that kind of game so to me, they all get written off as crap. Course they aren't, but they are to me, lol.

 

Not to say RDR II/O is sh*t. I love the franchise as much as GTA I'd say.

22 minutes ago, Rokushakubo said:

It's a video review. The guy says that he has no interest in PvP but that there was still a swathe of things to do aside from that. 

 

I don't really have an opinion on the number given as it's totally subjective. More so the content of the review.  

Fish, hunt, 13 missions. And fishing/hunting can quickly become PvP.

 

I smell a pay off, lol. That's a blatant lie. Is 13 a swathe of content to others?

 

Surely not.

Edited June 11, 2019 by Lonely-Martin

[CMCSAVAGE]

9 minutes ago, Rokushakubo said:

It's a video review. The guy says that he has no interest in PvP but that there was still a swathe of things to do aside from that. 

Ok, I just watched it. Other than giving it a score, it really wasn't much of a review, it was more of a recap of content than anything else. What I find strange, he said he's been playing for 6 months but he's not even at rank 40 lol.

[Van_Hellsing]

I stopped reading game reviews. There's a big difference between professional game reviewers and user reviews. You can see the differences between players and journalists on rottentomatoes or metacritic. 

 

"Influencers" are coersed with exclusive access and flown to lush resorts. They know damn well that the special treatment will stop if they write a less favorable review. 

 

No man's sky was hyped up on reddit with dummy accounts. Sonny's efforts to censor all uncontrolled reviews before the release, was a red flag. Sony did not want the truth to come out that NMS sucked donkey b*lls. 

 

I don't preorder and have a wait and see stance on games. 

Edited June 11, 2019 by Van_Hellsing

[Rokushakubo]

1 hour ago, Lonely-Martin said:

 

Fish, hunt, 13 missions. And fishing/hunting can quickly become PvP.

 

I smell a pay off, lol. That's a blatant lie. Is 13 a swathe of content to others?

 

Surely not.

Not really but I think it's how you choose to play the game that dictates that.

 

I started from most western part of New Austin and traveled to Valentine, going from stranger to stranger mission along the way. On the way I hunted, if I saw a gang hideout I took it, helped those in need, fended off ambushes etc. I don't usually play like that, I've just been hunting a set area for the most part but when I did that I thought it was a really great experience and the world felt really fleshed out with lots to do. 

 

I think usually people want the dopamine though so they tend to focus on something that's going to give them measurable progress and in general want to do it in a time efficient manner. When you dissect the current experience into its separate components with the mentality that I'm doing 'this OR that' as opposed to 'this AND that' then it is more bare bones. 

 

I would say fish, hunt, explore, stranger missions, story missions, race, poker, PvP isn't bad for 7 months or so. Not sure it's 8.5 but reviews scores aren't supposed to be taken in isolation but rather as part of an aggregated number to judge general consensus. I think I would be more likely to near that number once the upcoming roles are introduced. They sound time intensive and offer progression and will round the game off pretty nicely for the first year. 

Edited June 11, 2019 by Rokushakubo

[CMCSAVAGE]

49 minutes ago, Van_Hellsing said:

No man's sky was hyped up on reddit with dummy accounts. Sonny's efforts to censor all uncontrolled reviews before the release, was a red flag. Sony did not want the truth to come out that NMS sucked donkey b*lls. 

Spoiler

 

[IamCourtney]

I give RDO a solid Mucho Potential out of Updates ASAP Please

[Lonely-Martin]

1 hour ago, Rokushakubo said:

Not really but I think it's how you choose to play the game that dictates that.

It can do for sure. But in a freemode where all playstyles are varied, it's more how others play around us that dictates the game we experience too.

 

I can choose not to fight of course, but if the other wants to, I'm still getting shot either way, lol. I opt out, the other forces my will to either fight or waste time switching lobbies. Neither are why I log in.

[Leftover Pizza]

IGN used to be good, about 20 years ago. Now they are kind of trash. 

[Jason]

Before I clicked on this thread I knew I'd see comments claiming reviewers get bribed lol.

 

That sort of thing is incredibly rare, if not completely non-existent for professional game critics these days. The ones you don't want to believe are the "influencers" aka the streamers and YouTubers cause most of them won't say a damn thing bad about games out of the fear that they're gonna get blacklisted and thus no longer get all expenses paid invites to events.

 

Anyway yea it's more like a 7/10 cause no content, reviewer just be bad.

[AmyStone]

10 hours ago, Fozzie said:

I wonder how much he got from R* for an 8.5?

As is 7 at best, in Beta it was a 3.5-4

Their opinion and your opinion. It's just opinions.

[Ghoffman9]

While the latest patch did fix a lot of things, there is still much to be done. What we got now is what we should have gotten on launch day. The next big patch with the different roles you can undertake, I wager that will take another six months before we see that. Around RDR2's 1st anniversary. Course we have no idea what it entails besides a simple description.

Edited June 11, 2019 by Ghoffman9

[IamCourtney]

2 minutes ago, Ghoffman9 said:

While the latest patch did fix a lot of things, there is still much to be done. What we got now is what we should have gotten on launch day. The next big patch with the different roles you can undertake, I wager that will take another six months before we see that. Around RDR2's 1st anniversary. Course we have no idea what it entails besides a simple description.

They've said the next update will be coming in the summer, early summer if they're smart. They'd have to be insane to wait 6 months. But you never know...

[Commander S]

The more I think about it, the more I reckon ongoing/'live service' games could do with 'year in review' coverage - i.e., periodically review the new stuff, and the current state of the game.

 

That way, you can review the launch state for what it is, then post an updated take however long down the line (and again, as often as necessary) - and not just 'amend the original score depending on how updates affect the overall game', because that's trying to split the difference between the now-current version and the original.

 

In other words, for any constantly-evolving game, reviews are less 'the final word', and more a snapshot of a moment in time - not "is this game worth playing?", or "will this be worth playing eventually?", but "what's the current version like to play?". Maybe even periodically go back and do a broader retrospective of all the cumulative changes, so that in addition to all the 'timestamp' reviews, there's an overview that talks about how the game has evolved.

 

Kotaku is pretty good at already doing that kind of thing - IIRC, they made a conscious shift to doing more post-launch coverage of games, including later DLC, emergent community-driven things in MMOs and the like, and not just reviewing games at launch and moving on. They even assign specific writers to cover specific games - for example, most of the GTAO and RDO coverage is handled by Zack Zwiezen, who's been their regular 'R* online stuff' guy for a good few years, now.