Why do people rate games before they even Complete them? Fair???

This topic is locked from further discussion.

Avatar image for uso_outkast
uso_outkast

114

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 12

User Lists: 0

#1 uso_outkast
Member since 2006 • 114 Posts

Is it right for people to say a game sucks and shouldn't be bought if they open up there review with "I've only played this game for 4 hours but...."?

Some games have slow starts...and epic build ups...

Is Final Fantasy 13 getting a fair treatment?

A lot of sites graded it low well before the ENGLISH version even came out?

Avatar image for funsohng
funsohng

29976

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#2 funsohng
Member since 2005 • 29976 Posts
they get review copies.... and if youa re talking about the reader reviews, that's just the way things are.
Avatar image for -Hoax-
-Hoax-

5331

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#3 -Hoax-
Member since 2008 • 5331 Posts
Game Reviwers from GameSpot, IGN etc etc get there games alot earlier then release dates for reviewing purposes.
Avatar image for wizdom
wizdom

10111

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 13

User Lists: 0

#4 wizdom
Member since 2003 • 10111 Posts
[QUOTE="uso_outkast"]

Is it right for people to say a game sucks and shouldn't be bought if they open up there review with "I've only played this game for 4 hours but...."?

Some games have slow starts...and epic build ups...

Is Final Fantasy 13 getting a fair treatment?

A lot of sites graded it low well before the ENGLISH version even came out?

Most sites had the English version of FFXIII weeks before it camed out hence the reason why it got reviewed before it came out, I do find it annoying that gamers review a 60hr game 4hrs in, I do agree that rpg's sometimes take awhile to get into to, personally I'm not liking the game that much 3hrs in, but I'm in it for the long run, I wish GS would make people wait a week a least before they review a game, how can you review a 60hr game the day it comes out?
Avatar image for groundgamer
groundgamer

2122

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 118

User Lists: 0

#5 groundgamer
Member since 2009 • 2122 Posts
Yes, I think it is fair, because some people can judge a game half way through, like me.
Avatar image for ks1990steelman
ks1990steelman

1418

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#6 ks1990steelman
Member since 2009 • 1418 Posts
Sometimes it's not necessary to complete a game to see if it's good or bad. For example, we can rate MGS4 as a masterpiece from the first 10 minutes only. Anyway, I agree that for official reviews they have to complete and, in many cases, to play again the game.
Avatar image for evilmaster2424
evilmaster2424

2060

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 5

User Lists: 0

#7 evilmaster2424
Member since 2009 • 2060 Posts

well there are sum games thtat just arent worth geting through becsue there just that terrible. but ppl that do reveiw a game before they beat it they should atleast go back to there reveiw and and update it with there final opinion of the game after completion

Avatar image for MURDA_B
MURDA_B

2879

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#8 MURDA_B
Member since 2008 • 2879 Posts

i dont even know....but to me you can tell if a game is boring or not in like maybe 2 or 3 hours but for some its different

Avatar image for kfjl
kfjl

2469

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 10

User Lists: 0

#9 kfjl
Member since 2004 • 2469 Posts
I don't feel it's fair because it's not uncommon for games to either go down the crapper towards the end or become better towards the end than the rest of the game, so you can't truly evaluate the game unless you've seen everything it has to offer (or not offer).
Avatar image for SadPSPAddict
SadPSPAddict

5462

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 46

User Lists: 0

#10 SadPSPAddict
Member since 2006 • 5462 Posts
The vast majority of gamers do NOT complete EVERY game they ever play - so if reviews were only "allowed" by people completing them there would be significantly fewer reviews out there. I certainly agree 10mins is not enough to judge a game but also think that if someone has put several hours into playing it then their opinion is as valid as anyone else's. I post reviews on this site, I have completed some games I play but there are plenty I haven't and won't ( I'm 37 years old with a full time job, a wife and 4 children so only have a limited amount of time to game ) - but does that make my opinion less valid? I don't think so and I for one give other "player" reviews more attention than the official reviews by the "professionals" as they tend to do a better job, especially for the "less main-stream" games. I like racing and puzzle games and I'd rather read the review of a fellow puzzle addict than a "modern warfare" addict who has to review the puzzle game because his/her boss told him/her to! I dare say some genres demand a reviewer to have have played a higher percentage of the game compared to others - a game like Picross on the DS for example doesn't need many hours of gameplay to know that the mechanics are sound and the concept is good. On the other hand I played NFS Shift on PS3 for several hours before I felt able to pass judgement.
Browse Boards
Jump to Top

×

Move topic to another board

Pick a board and hit submit

  • (Or search for a more specific forum)
    • Close