Read the following guidelines to ensure that you are posting in the correct forum:
ENHANCEMENT: An improvement of an existing GameSpot component or feature. FEEDBACK: Anything in relation to the site just as long as it is not a bug or glitch report.
BUG/GLITCH: A bug is an error, flaw, mistake, failure, or fault found on GameSpot that prevents it from working correctly or produces an incorrect result. If this is your problem then visit the Technical Support forum.
HOW-TO: If you have a question on how to use the site, please visit the How To GameSpot board.
Broken Link Reports: Create a new thread about any broken links. If your issue is not resolved within 24 hours, contact support and provide your thread from this board.
Reviews updates
- Dec 23, 2012 3:34 pm GMT
I know the policy is that all reviews are based on the day the game hits the shelves and not after game updates to the games are done. I never really cared about this rule until it effected me. I was looking at getting Sonic Racing for the Wii-U, then I saw the game scored a 6.0. So this had bummed me out until I found out from someone else that the game had an update that fixed the issues that was expected in your review of the game. I understand you may not change your review scores or notes. This would take alot of time, don't forget many people base what games they are going to buy on reviews. It would be nice if it was noted somewhere when looking up a review that there been an update to the game.
I also wonder if this practice is now becomes dated. Many games such as NSMB Wii U and MGS4 require an update before you start playing them. If these games reviews are being based after an update should it be noted that an update was done to a game.
Thank You
- Please wait. Quick reply will be available shortly.
- Dec 23, 2012 6:18 pm GMT
"Let's not stand on ceremony here. Mr. Wayne." -Bane
i have to agree, at least change the score if there is an update- Please wait. Quick reply will be available shortly.
- Dec 24, 2012 3:26 pm GMT
Nintendo + Sony
PSN & NN ID: Briguyb13 | 3DS FC: 1418-7019-4685
I agree, they need to be adjusted after updates. It kind of defeats the whole purpose of reviews when they end up inaccurate and misleading to the public, like the Sonic Racing review does.
- Please wait. Quick reply will be available shortly.
- Dec 25, 2012 9:14 am GMT
[QUOTE="HarlockJC"]
It would be nice if it was noted somewhere when looking up a review that there been an update to the game.
[/QUOTE]That's exactly what the '[url=http://www.gamespot.com/news/introducing-after-the-fact-6234261]After the Fact[/url]' entries are for. Review scores have historically never been adjusted though.
- Please wait. Quick reply will be available shortly.
- Dec 25, 2012 3:48 pm GMT
[QUOTE="dab198"]
[QUOTE="HarlockJC"]
It would be nice if it was noted somewhere when looking up a review that there been an update to the game.
[/QUOTE]That's exactly what the '[url=http://www.gamespot.com/news/introducing-after-the-fact-6234261]After the Fact[/url]' entries are for. Review scores have historically never been adjusted though.
[/QUOTE]New gerenation, new ways of thinking to keep up with the times is called for.
- Please wait. Quick reply will be available shortly.
- Dec 26, 2012 2:17 pm GMTWhile it sounds like a good idea at first glance, and I would actually be in support of perhaps even a note or a Score Before and Score After system if it can be done for certain games, wouldn't this defeat the purpose of developers getting it right the first time - which is what should be the case? If a game is glitchy, then it deserves a lower score than what it would have got if it wasn't glitchy. It sends out the message to make sure your games work before they're put out on the market. Plus as you said, this is probably quite unlikely to happen as the administration of it would be hard to justify.
- Please wait. Quick reply will be available shortly.
- Dec 26, 2012 9:00 pm GMT
Nintendo + Sony
PSN & NN ID: Briguyb13 | 3DS FC: 1418-7019-4685
[QUOTE="michaelP4"]While it sounds like a good idea at first glance, and I would actually be in support of perhaps even a note or a Score Before and Score After system if it can be done for certain games, wouldn't this defeat the purpose of developers getting it right the first time - which is what should be the case? If a game is glitchy, then it deserves a lower score than what it would have got if it wasn't glitchy. It sends out the message to make sure your games work before they're put out on the market. Plus as you said, this is probably quite unlikely to happen as the administration of it would be hard to justify.[/QUOTE]In this day of game development it's getting harder and harder for games to be perfect from the start with the size of games now and so much pressure to meet deadlines. I agree with the other poster who said a new generation deserves higher standards for reviews.
If the goal and main purpose of reviews is to best inform the consumer and be accurate enough to do so, they should either wait a month or so before reviewing the game, or revise reviews for accuracy down the road.
- Please wait. Quick reply will be available shortly.
- Dec 27, 2012 5:25 pm GMT
[QUOTE="dab198"]
[QUOTE="HarlockJC"]
It would be nice if it was noted somewhere when looking up a review that there been an update to the game.
[/QUOTE]That's exactly what the '[url=http://www.gamespot.com/news/introducing-after-the-fact-6234261]After the Fact[/url]' entries are for. Review scores have historically never been adjusted though.
[/QUOTE] I know of the after the fact, it had never bothered me in the past and it's something you don't think about until it effects you. I have bought games based on the reviews listed on Gamespot. I am not asking for them to change the score. But someway there should be an easy was to let users know there been an update to the game. I am sure many of these companies would be more than happy to let Gamespot know there has been a change in the game or an issue fixed. Allowing people to go based on incorrect information is not a very good idea for the site in my opinion.
- Please wait. Quick reply will be available shortly.
- Dec 28, 2012 9:43 am GMT[QUOTE="Bigboi500"]If the goal and main purpose of reviews is to best inform the consumer and be accurate enough to do so, they should either wait a month or so before reviewing the game, or revise reviews for accuracy down the road.[/QUOTE] Definitely not feasible to wait a month for a review for a game - GS would be out of business if it did that and the other option again would be very hard to administer. It all comes down to money at the end of the day - if gamers want something like this to be done, which it'd be nice to see as I agree with it in principle, you'd need to somehow find a cheap and easy way of doing it, while also maintaining the meticulous quality that GS invests in their reviews. It's quite hard to put that into practice. All I could think of is that users themselves do it through their own reviews or voluntarily help out GS in doing it, which you'd need to make sure the right people are doing it for the latter.
- Please wait. Quick reply will be available shortly.
