theyarecomingforyou wrote on Oct 29, 2015, 08:46:
Personally I don't think the criticism here is fair. The game was released a mess but it was pulled and they spent months improving it. Including reviews for the old version is confusing and doesn't paint an accurate picture. However, rather than removing them altogether they simply called them 'Pre-Release', which is accurate given the game was pulled and worked on considerably before re-release - they are still included in the aggregate score, which results in a poor score.
So? They released it in a piss poor state, knowing full well that it was essentially unplayable. The people who bought it at the time, full price, were never told it was a pre-release / early access version they were buying. Why does WB get to suddenly shake off their mantle and start fresh? No other titles have had that treatment.
It comes back to the age old adage of "should we re-review a game once it's been fully patched?" And the answer is no. The review was of the game at the time of release. Whether you spent X amount of time getting it fixed or not has no bearing on the way you released it.
The reviews should stand as a warning to people to never, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever, EVER pre-order another WB PC game.
The game was originally released in a bad state. We know the publisher screwed up. However, they took action to address it and it's more than many other publishers would have done. Shouldn't we support that?
Oh please. Please stop it with this whole "OMG THEY DID SUCH NICE THINGS FOR US, WE MUST SUPPORT THEM!" rigmarole. People already supported them, by paying 60 bucks for their broken-ass game. This attitude that we should be grateful to publishers if they deem it worthy to fix the broken crap they shovel onto us is ridiculous.
And let's be honest here, the ONLY reason they went to this effort is because they were getting slammed with refund requests. Otherwise they'd have just shrugged and let people rot like they did before we (FINALLY) got a refund system.
I don't understand what people think they should have done once it had been released.
I dunno, stop whining about entirely fair reviews? Egosoft isn't whining about the old reviews for X Rebirth even though it is now a substantially better game. EA isn't whining about the old BF4 reviews, even though it is now a substantially better game.
But WB, the special little snowflake, deserves this treatment because they pulled the game from sales for a few months while they finally made it playable, just to stop the hordes of refund requests? What the bleep ever.
On a related note, why on earth did Valve give in to this? Or do publishers of games have the ability to modify the reviews themselves?