Multiplat Battlefield 2042

Remove this Banner Ad

Just saw that the apology bundle won't be added until March. So we're 4 weeks away from even getting that.

What a clusterheck of a game release.
 
pantskyle said:
Just saw that the apology bundle won't be added until March. So we're 4 weeks away from even getting that.

What a clusterfu** of a game release.
Click to expand...
What a debacle.


Still, I’m playing it every night and it ain’t so bad. Definitely need more maps and guns though.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

This whole situation has made me question how to review games like this in the future. BF2042 reviews, well early ones (like ours), was done at a review event in a controlled environment. Our review landed just as the game did – and it's clearly been a vastly different experience.
 
berisha said:
This whole situation has made me question how to review games like this in the future. BF2042 reviews, well early ones (like ours), was done at a review event in a controlled environment. Our review landed just as the game did – and it's clearly been a vastly different experience.
Click to expand...

Do you mean you think you got a version of the game that wasn't accurate?
 
berisha said:
Hmmm not really. More that the environment was set up to ensure the best possible experience, one completely different to the actual experience.
Click to expand...

Basically the same thing.
 
berisha said:
Hmmm not really. More that the environment was set up to ensure the best possible experience, one completely different to the actual experience.
Click to expand...

I think things like that, and anything that significantly changes the experience of the game, that occur after the review window, merits a re-review. Something to try and lower the Metacritic score.

Same with adding in MTX post-launch, or when UFC 4 added in video ads during fights, or even promised modes not arriving.
 
With no fault of the reviewers that is a very big reason reviews carry very little weight with me. Gone are the days of the old printed mags where developers were required to promo and show off as much of their game as possible to impress the journos. Now it's hush hush with a very controlled late piece of the pre-launch promo. Building the hype around an unknown and betting your game will score some 7s and 8s within 48 hours of launch is sure to drive launch day sales. The content is controlled or sent out with very little time for the reviewer to actually have any meaningful time with the game if they want their review out on time. I can think of so many games that I thought were "best in the series" (far cry 6 for example) after only 10-15 hours which is what a reviewer is probably smashing through it in. Though once that new game smell wore off and the warts were revealed my opinion changed. Then there seems to be a review hive Mind where everything is fairly similar, no one seems to want to be seen as edgy to write anything different. Only one reviewer dared to be critical of Cyberpunk pre-release and was belted for it.

I think that for like a lot of us here who aren't short a dollar reviews are nothing more than a curiosity as we're not as concerned about making a s**t purchase. For those a little more conservative with their coin would be better off waiting for the let's plays and user reviews and opinions from common plebs post launch.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Quivorir said:
I'd be questioning any game that they didn't let me play myself to review tbh.
Click to expand...

Mantastic said:
I think things like that, and anything that significantly changes the experience of the game, that occur after the review window, merits a re-review. Something to try and lower the Metacritic score.

Same with adding in MTX post-launch, or when UFC 4 added in video ads during fights, or even promised modes not arriving.
Click to expand...

So just to clarify, review events like these can be super handy because they give you (force you) enough time to try every single mode. It also means that the servers are full of players, which for a game that has 128 players is super useful. I don't necessarily hate the idea, but it does raise questions about how to approach it. Sometimes it's damned if you do, damned if you don't. Take Dying Light 2 for example. I have no doubt that the game is going to be a better experience with the day one patch – should we have waited for that? Some people would say yes, but in reality you can only review what you're given. It's a similar situation, just on the opposite side of the coin (negative vs positive).

dwwaino said:
With no fault of the reviewers that is a very big reason reviews carry very little weight with me. Gone are the days of the old printed mags where developers were required to promo and show off as much of their game as possible to impress the journos. Now it's hush hush with a very controlled late piece of the pre-launch promo. Building the hype around an unknown and betting your game will score some 7s and 8s within 48 hours of launch is sure to drive launch day sales. The content is controlled or sent out with very little time for the reviewer to actually have any meaningful time with the game if they want their review out on time. I can think of so many games that I thought were "best in the series" (far cry 6 for example) after only 10-15 hours which is what a reviewer is probably smashing through it in. Though once that new game smell wore off and the warts were revealed my opinion changed. Then there seems to be a review hive Mind where everything is fairly similar, no one seems to want to be seen as edgy to write anything different. Only one reviewer dared to be critical of Cyberpunk pre-release and was belted for it.

I think that for like a lot of us here who aren't short a dollar reviews are nothing more than a curiosity as we're not as concerned about making a sh*t purchase. For those a little more conservative with their coin would be better off waiting for the let's plays and user reviews and opinions from common plebs post launch.
Click to expand...

A few things here I want to address, based on my own experiences.

Codes are received at various stages. I've had codes a month before launch and a day after. Usually the latter tends to mean the game might be a little rough or it could simply be the devs are likely crunching to get any last-minute fixes in before reviewers get their hands on it. We currently have Horizon Forbidden West, and have had it for a week. That's a good lead time, but the NDA is tight, but it's not sinister or designed to encourage reviewers to praise the game, it's purely to protect the experience for the players (i.e. spoilers). The Last of Us Part II was the tightest embargo I've ever seen, essentially you could talk about the second half of the game, but those who have played it know why. I was fortunate enough to dodge the leaks before reviewing it and my experience was better off for it. No NDA I have ever seen has stated that we couldn't talk about issues with games, sometimes they will include a list of known bugs that will be fixed before launch.

Crunching reviews is definitely a thing, and as a reviewer, you need to learn how to process that and not let it affect your critique as best as possible. For what it's worth, if we get a game where the embargo is too short of a turnaround, I don't force my writers to kill themselves to make it. Furthermore, playing a game takes as long as it takes.

I disagree with the hive mind comment. Generally there is a reason why reviewers are on the same page. But I guarantee no one worth reading reviews games to play it safe or appease PR etc. PR doesn't care if you review a game poorly, in fact if it's a bad game, they're expecting them. Cyberpunk is an interesting one. Review code was limited and was only on PC, where the game ran the best. I played it on day one on PS5 and had zero issues. In fact in the 5-8 hours I played I didn't notice any bugs, I guess I got lucky. The issue for Cyberpunk was that it should have been delayed and it shouldn't have launched on PS4 and Xbox One. I think if it skipped those consoles there wouldn't have been such a huge uproar. Is it a good game? I guess that's subjective.

This last one is a little insulting (I know it's not meant to be). Let's plays is where you'll find streamers/CCs paid to talk up a game – this does not happen with traditional reviewers. The notion that we review games highly so we can continue getting code is simply untrue. Game reviewers are simply people who enjoy games and are paid (or not) to give their critical analysis of a product. We work hard – I work hard, often putting in 16-18 hour days with my day job to do this. Not to say anyone's opinion is greater, but listening to common plebs, the same people who review bomb games, send developers death threats and more bullshit over people whose jobs are to review games is insulting. I get where you're coming from though and I know that's not likely what you meant.
 
berisha said:
I have no doubt that the game is going to be a better experience with the day one patch – should we have waited for that? Some people would say yes, but in reality you can only review what you're given.
Click to expand...
Your whole post is great but I wanted to discuss this point in particular. Should you (or maybe this should be pointed more to the devs, not you) not want to review the game that consumers will be actually playing? Nobody else will be playing without the day one patch so a review without that is a bit disingenuous isn't it?
 
Strapping Young Lad said:
What a debacle.


Still, I’m playing it every night and it ain’t so bad. Definitely need more maps and guns though.
Click to expand...
I can’t even get on.

PC version. Tried numerous times to play during peak player traffic periods.

Stuck matchmaking/filling lobbies for 15 mins+ before disconnecting.

The only reason I haven’t joined quiv and pants in refund request is I got it cheap on Xmas sale and didn’t use my own money.
 
Art Vandelay_ said:
I can’t even get on.

PC version. Tried numerous times to play during peak player traffic periods.

Stuck matchmaking/filling lobbies for 15 mins+ before disconnecting.

The only reason I haven’t joined quiv and pants in refund request is I got it cheap on Xmas sale and didn’t use my own money.
Click to expand...
That’s odd that you can’t find a server as I really don’t ever have that problem with cross play on and there’s plenty of PC players within those servers.
 
Strapping Young Lad said:
It’s far from dead. I’m on every night and there’s plenty still playing it.

All the hating on it seems a bit over the top now, considering pretty much every BF game of the last 10 years has had its problems.
Click to expand...

r/battlefield2042 - Wow...
 
sataris said:
r/battlefield2042 - Wow...
Click to expand...
Two weeks later and I’m still on it every night, still getting consistent servers.

It’s not half as bad a game as people have made it out to be.
 
Quivorir said:
Your whole post is great but I wanted to discuss this point in particular. Should you (or maybe this should be pointed more to the devs, not you) not want to review the game that consumers will be actually playing? Nobody else will be playing without the day one patch so a review without that is a bit disingenuous isn't it?
Click to expand...
That is a very good question.

Here's a good response from Techland to a very similar question.


As soon as a game releases, interest in reviews drop. Most of the time the day one patch doesn't fundamentally change the experience, and as I said often PR will include a list of known bugs that will be fixed, so you can give them a bit of grace. My frustrations with Dying Light 2 mostly stemmed from the junk story and frustrating gameplay elements. Bugs were annoying but the more impactful ones had been fixed (game crashes).

The other thing is time. Waiting until a day one patch is live would encourage a reviewer to crunch the game as fast as possible, potentially missing or skipping content in the process.
 
Strapping Young Lad said:
Two weeks later and I’m still on it every night, still getting consistent servers.

It’s not half as bad a game as people have made it out to be.
Click to expand...

The game crashes constantly on AMD cards, Sometimes you can't change your loadouts at all. Sometimes your loadouts go missing entirely. Sometimes the game say 'Cannot peristent data'.

I bought this game day 1, and I've got a total play time of 77 hours, because the game doesn't actually function.

It really is a steaming pile of garbage. That is basically pre-alpha
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top