Is Dead Rising 3 flop on PC (3.0 on GS)?

Seems Dead Rising 3 is crashing for many users on steam, and now GS reviews PC version 3.0 compared to Xbox One's 7.0.

Should we stay away from PC version of Dead rising 3?

3.0? 0_o lolz

Found it.

For a 3/10 I was expecting the review to go over the performance of the game, but it just seems like the reviewer disliked the game greatly.

It's because that reviewer has no clue what Dead Rising is going for. It's not because the version's worse.

That review was awful. *edit*: Not fair to call it awful. I just felt it was more of a second take, rather than a review that told what this version's about.

This. He did talk about the port but gave a very little info on it. This reviewer is worse than tom and caro.

Looking at TotalBiscuit's video, I'd say 3 is probably way too harsh, even if it's I game I personally see little appeal in.

I don't understand , DR 3 on PC is the version with all the DLC's. Why it should get lower score than original vanilla version? I guess'd be its unomptimsed port, many having problems if you check steam boards.

Not the same reviewer. His view of DR3 was completely different. So either they update the main review to a 3 or they get the original guy to review it.

Yeah, I've heard there are problems, but that's not what the review is about.

He just talks about the fact that Dead Rising is silly, stereotypical and all that. And he's not a fan of it. Hence why it got a 3.

Wow, that is quite the review disparity. And looking at the Good/Bad score summary it's not because of the port job, but actually the game itself

Ahhh!

I hope Capcom patches Dead Rising 3, Dead Rising 2 and OTR PC versions were best (minus GFWL) :)

Lol really? It was because he found the game to be shit? In that case, I think some reviewscore parity would be warranted; or possibly a second opinion note or something, like they used to do in magazines.

That, or the community will :p

Just the tone of the game. Seems where most of his complaints come from. Would've been better if he talked more about what makes the PC version better or worse.

This would've served better as a "2nd take", like you said. GS has done this before. Get a person that doesn't really play these kind of games, and let them give their thoughts about it. The Dark Souls 2 one received a lot of attention, because the dude wasn't into it.

It's also a shame that they attach a score to these "2nd take" reviews. Doesn't need it.

This is the caption on one of the photos: "The game is saddled with deeply sexist and mean-spirited overtones."

And it's a different reviewer from the X1 version

*Deleted because doubleposting etc*

It seems the issue he has is with the game itself,not the port wich is basically the exact same game with all the extra content,it just makes it weird because someone else reviewed the xbone version and gave it a 7,this guy would´ve given a 3 to the xbone version as well.

Here's the authors response in the comments

So! I wanted to tuck a comment in here--to address some of the complaints and confusion, and maybe explain a bit about my stance on reviews in general. Feel free to take it or leave it, or ask me a follow-up question and I'll try to answer it to the best of my ability. I love talking about reviews (it's all I ever seem to talk about), and I'm happy to do so with y'all as long as it's vaguely civil.

Let me first say that I definitely sympathize with some of the confusion about Dead Rising 3 getting a 7 on one version (from a different reviewer at a different time), and a 3 on what's ostensibly a new and improved re-release. That can seem weird and counter-intuitive, I'm sure.

Obviously, I'm a different guy, with a different take on the base game, as some people here have already noted. I can't speak for why GS didn't get Gaston to do the review for this version as well (there are myriad possible reasons, and I haven't checked)--but it was assigned to me, and as a freelance writer let me tell you: you try not to say "No" to offers.

So anyway, what I want readers to be able to believe, first and foremost, is that I've given my honest opinion about a game. You could see, maybe, that if I adopt the previous review's take as my own, sight-unseen, that I wouldn't be doing that. If I think to myself "Well, it was previously given a 7. So even though I do not much like this game, I should start at the assumption that this game is a 7, and make minuscule adjustments to that based on how it fares as a port," you could see that I'd have just gone and been completely dishonest about my take on the game. I wouldn't do that to y'all; you deserve better.

On being "pretentious": Sorry if you don't like my style! It's not for everyone, I know. But I write generally believing that my audience is a smart bunch, and I want to give 'em content that'll be thought-provoking and interesting to read. Most people seem to enjoy it (at least, up until I give a game that they like a low score). I loathe reviews that read like bullet-point lists of features--they don't tell you anything you can't read on the game's wikipedia page, or the back of its box. I'm not here to do that.

On accusations that I've written this as "clickbait": I'm freelance, so I don't get paid any more or any less based on how many clicks the review gets. No clickbaiting here. If anything, I was a bit worried about the publication of this review (peruse the comments and maybe you can appreciate why). I hope you can appreciate that I believe so much in the importance of honesty in a review that I'd submit it thusly and brave the flak I knew was coming. Ditto for GS, in all likelihood, but they did not ask me to change my opinion. Please take this as a sign that the review is presented as unadulterated as possible, and not the other way around.

On "objectivity": I talk a lot about this one on twitter. I think it's fallacious to strive for objectivity in criticism. It's impossible to just mentally tell yourself to disregard the totality of your experiences, ideas, and opinions when analyzing a thing. They'll always be there. Even if I couched my review in the most dry, fact-oriented writing I could manage, I'd still be making subjective decisions about what to talk about and when, and I'd certainly still be making subjective claims about whether those things are good or bad. Better, I think, and more important, to try to be *logical* in one's arguments (and I hope I've done that here). A review is just one person's opinion, with all the inherent subjectivity that comes with; please don't take it as a judgement from on high about the value of a game. If you enjoy Dead Rising 3, that's great! I'm happy for you.

Hope that helps to clarify things a little bit. If there's something else you're wondering about, hit me up on here (or twitter if you'd like--I'm easy enough to find there). Please be civil-ish: I'd love to be able to answer you and that's the surest way for that to happen.

Cheers,

-Nick

Should you stay away from a Dead Rising game? well that all depends on whether you like the previous dead rising games or not, if you do then this is a giant step forward from 2 and more in tune with just how great the first one was.

And Gamespot again just want to be special and drive traffic.

@freedomfreak:

Yeah, We really just need the version differences, since we already have an old review for gameplay impressions. Second opinions are great too, but two entirely subjective reviews, with huge disparity in score is just.... Useless.

Ugh... that's a great way of making me not want to read the tripe... Not that I'm not already adblocking ofc...

Edit:

I do respect his response though, although I think he's too sensitive.

PC master race?

This just proves the definitive version is on the X1....and what a great game it was.

Look like PS4 is the only hope for dead rising 3 at this point.

Well it is a dead rising game, the reviewer did not like that kind of game I suppose. Guess he expected more from a game that clearly aimes for "dumb fun"

That said I have kept my game on the 30 fps Lock, no real reason to change it with the game having the most over the top help for precicion (as in you really need none at all).

is DR3 a good game? No and the prior were not good either, is it a fun game? heck yeah :P

Holy shit that is one of the worst reviews I've ever read. How the **** does GS sign off on this?

It only proves that PC games have a higher quality bar, as Mr. VanOrd has previously stated.

The game, is the exact same game than the Xbone. If you set it to run at Xbone settings, it'll run better on even low end PC hardware. The issue switht he port is that tryign to run the game like any other game shoudl run on PC (NOT 720p, NOT 30 FPS, NOT at medium settings) is currently a clusterfuck.

why is that?

Why is that? his issues seem to be with the actual content of the game

why can't you answer it?

Actually it proves nothing of the sort. Nick dislike the entire concept of Dead Rising that its not about the story or the run around you get to do, but the killing of zombies and going crazy with all the different types of weapons and for the more fashion minded person the different costumes

So you could have put any version on his table and it would end up with a low score. Not because its a bad game but because he simply dislikes that kind of game style.

7>3.....I see in this thread now though that it was a different reviewer that doesn't seem to have a sense of humor and took this game way to serious. I think this was a misstep on GS's part allowing this review on their website.

He deleted his second post. Heh.

I guess he couldn't answer it

3.0 sounds like a good score for dead rising, franchise is garbage and should die. it only got hyped because it was timed x1 exclusive

What?

Dead rising 1 wasn't on the playstation. Dead Rising 2 had multiple versions, of which was on the Playstation. Dead Rising 3 is all over the place at the moment, so going by the history of it, it better to just wait. But keep amusing yourself with B.S.

For all you know, DR package will be available on the PS5. Hears still hoping for someting better. Derp

I guess the reviewer wasn't given enough incentive to give the game a good score. Maybe Microsoft should have given him some Dorito's and Mountain Dew.

Personally I'll trust my mate who says he's having a blast with it.

IMHO, they really should've asked the person who reviewed the Xbox One version, as he's aleady given his opinion on the game, and the only thing that needs to be done is a compare and contrast between Xbox One and PC.

The OUTRAGE!! Someone had an opinion! :P

1. The port is awful. 2. Game is mediocre. = at least a 5.0 is we're going for predictable scores. The 3.0 is just because the reviewer evidently didn't enjoy the main concept at all (which I find hard to believe).

The port has all the DLC but cut a bunch of optional features in addition to the optimization issues. The game runs like ass on my GS70, and I noticed that the voice features with Kinect are gone (like yelling to attrach zombies) and SmartGlass has also been cut to my knowledge. These didn't really influence the review, but it's worth mentioning since the inclusion of the DLC with the PC version doesn't necessarily make this the definitive version.

-Byshop

They really want those hits.

Should of stayed an Xbox One exclusive. Microsoft is giving people less reasons to buy their consoles with timed exclusives.

Odd that one who dislikes the franchise and the mantra of the series is the one who would review it, a freelance no less. Some games just aren't for everyone.

Thats the score it should have had ever since the beginning. DR is a boring and repetitive shit series and it was only hyped because it was exclusive to the X1.

"The game is saddled with deeply sexist and mean-spirited overtones."

And here is one of the problems....

Actually, it was hyped because the series is loved by many.

To be fair the game really isn't that good in the first place, then add the crappy inconsistent performance to the mix and you have something not worth playing.

The game feels like a 360 game with more zombies sprinkled into the world, and the car physics and physics in general are horrendous.

Correct. I don't have an X1 and it's one of the few games I'm currently wishing I could buy.

Yeah I read that immediately and called bullshit. It's one thing to give game a 3 for performance issues- if they're bad enough that's more than understandable. But this guy said nothing about it, instead saying that he just didn't like anything about the game beyond the creative weapons. 3 seems far too harsh for the review he wrote.

This is judging it completely on what he wrote. If anything, it seemed more like a 6. When I was reading it I got the impression that he didn't love it but also didn't hate it. But that's wrong, I guess, because he gave it a 3.

I respect Gamespot more than other review sites (especially IGN aka typo central... I find at least one typo per review) but some of their recent reviews seem to be very at odds with each other. Like, the review will state one thing then the score will state another. It's bizarre and disappointing as someone who has been visiting this site for a half decade.

And this is more of a general thing that has nothing to do with the actual score of this particular game. I've just been noticing that the qualities of their reviews have been dropping quite a bit. The 3 wouldn't bother me if the reviewer had stated why he felt the game is a 3, but the way it was written doesn't seem to justify the score.

Nick is a freelance reviewer? then why does it say staff in his profile?

People should stop bitching about scores. It´s really tiring to hear at this point. PLAY WHAT YOU WANT.