Review Copies (Destiny)

by General Vagueness , The Vault of Sass, Wednesday, September 03, 2014, 12:02 (3741 days ago) @ Cody Miller

Yeah, I don't see how Bungie could do it any other way. Since Destiny is dependent upon a population in its functioning, reviewing it without one would not be reviewing Destiny at all.

I do not see how this is true at all. If it is, then how do reviewers review multiplayer shooters and the like? I feel like folks saying this have not even played the game. Other random players are not a huge part of Destiny. If you review the game with two other people playing the story and strike, and play crucible with other reviewers as has been done for tons of other multiplayer shooters, you could absolutely come to a conclusion.

Bungie seems to think other players are a big factor. Whether they are or not, it makes sense they'd want that element to be present for critics.

Advanced reviews often feel like marketing strategies (although I guess they don't always work if the game is truly terrible); I prefer these days to try things out myself or talk to people I know to discover art & entertainment (I also don't enjoy assigning numbers, letters, or stars to those things anymore - my compulsive brain gets all caught up on the ordering when I do, so that's another nail in the coffin).

This is why Ebert had it right with thumbs up and thumbs down. Good or bad. How good or how bad? Read the review.

I think there's a point to be made there, there's some value there, but it's too polarizing. I think a lot of people won't read the review and will just watch something (or play or read or eat it) based on a thumbs-up, or more likely, not watch it based on a thumbs-down. As empty as it often is, a statement along the lines of "meh" is very important to have available.

Hell, I need like a month to think about a game or a movie or a book, and multiple sittings or viewings or reads before I feel qualified to say anything about it.

There is some truth to this, although if a game is bad you don't need to play it very long to come to that conclusion and say why. Same thing with a good game. The thing that takes time, is determining whether the game is good, or if it is great.

Don't you think that should be a goal of critics?