Reviewing Games That Aren't Done

[Zondaro]

So, I'm at work this afternoon just browsing the internet during what is without a doubt the slowest damn day of the year for us... and what do I see? A forum post over at TeamXbox.com about the new scores for GMR magazine... and what's the big thing? Ninja Gaiden... wait... how could a game that few have played, yet alone seen running in real time already have a score?

The practice of reviewing games that are not only unfinished, but haven't even been made available for playing has always annoyed me.. but now... my rage has hit an all time f*ing high. This crap has to end. My blinding anger prevents me from writing more at this junction, but I've copied/pasted some old thoughts from an article I wrote on game reviews this summer: http://zondaro.net/projects/writings...e_icritic.html

More horrifying to me than not playing a game all the way through for a review, is the practice of reviewing games that are not done. Something that pretty much all of the major game magazines do from time to time. Reviewing a copy that you are told is "pretty much gold" is not the same thing. When the PR rep tells you the framerate issues will be fixed for the final version, that's nice but how many times have we read a preview that promises framerate fixes?

I'm always surprised that the not finishing a game issue is more important to gamers than playing an unfinished copy. I'm not crazy here; they do review games that aren't finished. Official Xbox Magazine got caught with their collective pants down when they reviewed Panzer Dragoon Orta only to have Sega bump the release date back a few months. If you're not holding a gold copy of the game you're not reviewing what your readers will be playing.

Imagine if Ebert started reviewing movies that were missing special effects, or weren't done being edited for length. Could you trust the fat man that scene where the main characters flew over a river was breath taking? Imagine if Cnet.com reviewed the newest Dell handheld that wasn't quite done with beta testing… would you feel comfortable buying it on the assurances of the reviewer that the bugs would be squashed before the release?

How is this industry ever going to be taken seriously as long as magazines like GMR review games that are unfinished... heck, what about all the so called "mens magazines" like STUFF and MAXIM that review games like Half-Life2 way before release? If they tried to do that with a movie, the studio would be all over them... game publishers need to stop sucking up for free publicity and start enforcing some damn standards...

[Jeremy]

Well, I found myself in this position recently with Disgaea, as I had to review a copy of it that was 95% done, with the note that this version of the game was identical to the final copy, only with text errors that would be remedied. I was staunchly against reviewing it like this, with my key arguement being that I want to play the exact same copy of the game that the person reading the review will be able to play. In the end though, I reviewed the game, as the site's reputation could have been greatly damaged if I didn't.

[Green]

Does anyone take GMR seriously? I know that's not your point, it's all mags in general, but I could care less about what GMR or Maxim (for crying out loud) have to say about a game.

[Xero_Kaiser]

Ninja gaiden is due out in early december isn't it? they've gotta be done with it by now

[Zondaro]

My point is that Maxim doesn't review movies that aren't out yet. They just list upcoming films... Videogames are not getting the same treatment is my issue. Reviews of games that are not finished only hurts the industry. People buying a game that sucks because a review based on an unfinished copy said it was good? That's one person who's less likely to trust another review or risk plopping $50 bucks down to try another videogame.

[Grave]

Considering developers like to rush games out the door before they're done, especially in the cases of PC games (release now, patch later), I doubt this bullshit's going to end for quite a while. If unfinished products can ship, how little are the reviewers getting?

And I'm not talking about a few bugs or some shit like that. I'm talking about multiplayer mode not being implemented, or features promised that are totally missing from the product. PC software companies get away with it, and with stuff like Xbox Live, I'm fearing it'll reach consoles, too. No, I'm not accusing anyone of it yet, and I love the content uses of Live. And no, I don't feel bad about paying $5 for more content. But I do fear that it'll soon be used to patch games that shouldn't have even been released.

I don't know. I'm rambling.

[Zondaro]

Ninja gaiden is due out in early december isn't it? they've gotta be done with it by now

As it stands now the game is looking to be delayed till Februrary. But that aside, I chose Ninja Gaiden to pick on because so little of the game has been shown... and so few editors have even gotten the chance to PLAY the game much less see it running in real time.

Reviewing a game you've only seen some of, or played for thirty minuets at E3 is a pretty lousy idea in my opinion. Yet there seem to be magazines choosing do just that. I wonder if this is why Mario Kart recived such high scores from print magazines (with a lead time so long that they weren't privy to a review copy from good old Nintendo) compared to the online sites such as IGN and GAMESPOT?

[Diff-chan]

to the best of my knowledge, a lot of times the publishers give them the thumbs-up to be reviewed. Ultimately it would be up to the magazines to take a stand here, but really credibility is a non-issue with them so things aren't gonna change.

[Jeremy]

Well, Zondaro, Maxim likely doesn't give a shit about the gaming industry, they just want to have reviews in it to appeal to a bigger audience for their mag, and publishers love them since that mag reaches the ever-so-Godlike 18-35 demographic. I agree that reviewing unfinished games does nothing but harm, both in the short term, and the long term.

[Zondaro]

to the best of my knowledge, a lot of times the publishers give them the thumbs-up to be reviewed. Ultimately it would be up to the magazines to take a stand here, but really credibility is a non-issue with them so things aren't gonna change.

Did Valve really give a thumbs up for STUFF to review Half-Life2 already? I'm sorry... did I miss the copy of HL2 marked "reviewable" on my desk somewhere?

I don't think this is up to the magazines. They have enough problems. I think this is up to the consumers.