• Sarmyth@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    72
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    8 months ago

    They got bait and switched is my understanding. The game they played included the content from the micro transactions without them being informed they weren’t part of the base game.

    • CleoTheWizard@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      27
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      8 months ago

      This kind of behavior should be enough for outlets to blacklist developers. But since they don’t/wont/can’t band together to do that, they have no say in how games are reviewed.

      Not mentioning micro transactions is equivalent to not mentioning the price. Why review a game if you don’t know if it will be $50 or $100 at launch?

      Capcom basically asked them to review a game that doesn’t even exist, they asked them to review a dev build.

      • chiliedogg@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        8 months ago

        They should automatically deduct 3 points from the publisher’s titles for “X” amount of time when they pull this shit.

      • TimLovesTech (AuDHD)(he/him)@badatbeing.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        10
        ·
        edit-2
        8 months ago

        Anyone that reviews a game in advance of release knows they are playing a different game than the release version. The guy in the article even stated they told him exactly what he was getting, but he didn’t READ it. Then afterwards felt entitled to those things in another SKU and so wrote a hit piece that everyone, that also didn’t look at the store page, is now all fired up about.

        EDIT s/did/didn’t

        • CleoTheWizard@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          8 months ago

          This is only partially true. Reviewers know that the exact build and exact code aren’t final when reviewing, that is true and normal. The reviewer does however expect that gameplay systems, graphics, audio, and the rest are mostly complete with only minor tweaks needed. The game should be 99% done by the time reviewers have it.

          Yet nowadays the game is not 99% done. This even applies to huge day 1 patches. Like great you patched stuff but also reviewers can’t assess performance and bugs properly for consumers that way. Same is true of monetization which is a huge factor for enjoyment in modern games.

    • TimLovesTech (AuDHD)(he/him)@badatbeing.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      8 months ago

      This is misinformation. No “bait and switch” occurred at all. You have to go out of your way to even find the micro-transactions, and then when you do they are useless if you have actually played your way through the game. Reviewers got all of this in detail with their review keys, but adding time into your review to talk about something that is basically an afterthought and has no affect on the actual game seems like a waste of time. These people are all rushing to release content as soon as the embargo is lifted. So putting extra time into a review to talk about something 99% of people will never see does not have a great return on effort.