• Eggyhead@kbin.run
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    58
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    5 months ago

    Out of the 25 English language reviews of Dragon’s Dogma 2‘s PC version on Metacritic, only two mention the microtransactions.

    What the fuck.

    • Sarmyth@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      66
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      5 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
        20
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        5 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
          ·
          5 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
          5
          ·
          edit-2
          5 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
            ·
            5 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.

      • jkrtn@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        5 months ago

        The whole thing is a scam. Their entire business model is dependent on receiving early access games so hype will drive some ad revenue. How many early access games will they get if they give bad reviews?

        To stop this, gamers would basically have to union up and full boycott any developer who did not give early access to their union’s reviewers. I don’t see that happening any time soon.