Days Gone Actor Thinks Some Reviewers Didn't Finish the Game

Days Gone actor has suggested that some reviewers either didn't finish the game or rushed through it to write their reviews.

Read Full Story >>
The story is too old to be commented.
-Foxtrot68d ago

I think this to be honest, but I think it happens to a lot of games, even the ones on the other side of the coin, the ones which get perfect scores but overall they aren't as good as the reviewers hyped them up to be, and it comes down because they didn't play the game the whole way through to see when things start to get repetitive, or when the second half of the game starts to take a dive.

bouzebbal68d ago

Most reviewers nowadays only want to get the review out asap.. I never watch reviews, I used to read reviews on gaming magazines back in time it was much less biaised

bradfh67d ago

most reviewers now, don't care about games and care more about pushing an agenda.

Thundercat7768d ago

Totally agree with the actor. It was strange that the game had some bad unfair reviews but at the same time it was selling a lot and was being very popular.

This is not the first time and this is happening more that we think. I would even go to the extreme to request the account and trophy showing that the reviewer really finished the game.

Eidolon68d ago (Edited 68d ago )

LOVED Days Gone. Played it Day One, and wondered, even throughout my playthrough, why it was receiving such flak. I didn't platinum it because I was renting it(due to well, money, and criticism) and was sharing the disc with my brother(and he platinumed it, rat bastard). I was hoping to revisit and platinum it with my PS5, which I still don't have. Days Gone is still one highlight of my PS4 gaming repertoire.

fiveby968d ago

I am loving this game right now. Taking down a horde is so much fun. I've played less enjoyable games which received better review scores than this. Perhaps one day Sony will revive the title with a sequel.

Father__Merrin68d ago

Good idea show game gamer card or trophies card at least you can say he's either finished it or spent 20h judging the game properly

68d ago
InUrFoxHole67d ago

The game was buggy with the cut scenes on base ps4. It's why I stopped playing. Not worth the $ to me though.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 67d ago
isarai68d ago

Honestly i thought it was one of the least polished SCE published games of the gen, but it was still damn good fun, and deserved a bit better than many reviews gave it. But if anyone recalls, many fans called it ahead of release. It just seemed many outlets had already made up their mind on not liking
it before even playing it, and the reviews reflected that.

68d ago Replies(5)
Iltapalanyymi68d ago

Well what did you expect, they are journos.

Rimeskeem68d ago

I thought journalists were supposed to get the whole story and not make a conclusion off of half evidence.

CrimsonWing6968d ago

You’d think that’s be the case, but game journos don’t follow any kind of standards.

KingofBandits68d ago

LOL journalists or at least a solid 80% of them (covering any topic) have not had any integrity or free thought in a LONG time, its all just paid for propaganda.

NecrumOddBoy68d ago

You don’t have to finish a game to write about it but you should have academic integrity to disclose that in your piece. I personally don’t think a review should post if the game wasn’t completed. If it is truly bad or broken, then just say that in the review.

Days Gone also had some racist reviews like Kallie Plaggue from Gamespot. She is a wokey as usual and gave the game hits for having “white” zombies and a white male protagonist. These types of people are a disease to games media.

WeaseL68d ago

Reviewers should have a work gamer profile and then link them to the review with trophy/score for completing the game.

Pricey68d ago

Thats an excellent idea!

Yi-Long68d ago

Some games can take 60-80+ hours to go through, and if you’d force a reviewer to quickly rush through that to meet a close deadline, that demand in itself would also affect the experience and thus the score.

I worked at a gaming magazine many years ago, and I believe the requirement back then was 8-10 hours for writing a review. Obviously you’d want reviewers to finish a game but it’s just not a very realistic demand for many games, plus for most games you can form an objective opinion within a few hours because there will be mechanics and gameplay loops which will remain mostly the same throughout.

Double_O_Revan68d ago

Agreed on the part where certain games can take way longer than others to compete. But what WeasseL is proposing in no way requires them to complete the whole game. But what it actually does is shine light on the credibility of a review. Being able to see just how much they played or how far the reviewer progressed can give you a good indication. If reviewer A shows they played for only a few hours and give a bad score, but reviewer B, C, D & E played for 3 times longer and gave a higher score, we can see a little more accuracy or at least consistency.

GamingonPC67d ago

In this particular case, there are new mechanics being introduced after the ten hours mark (for instance, being able to deal with hordes). I feel it's a game that becomes a lot better as you play it. It starts a bit too "generic" but over time, you can feel the passion Bend put into it. That's something you wouldn't get if you played 8-10 hours for the review. I understand what you mean though, deadlines often SUCK.

Thundercat7768d ago

Exactly what I said. It should be required for anyone making a review.

DOMination-68d ago

They should certainly disclose how long they spent on it and what percentage they completed. Having a public gamercard isn't a bad idea of course and trophies earned can be a good indicator, but not always.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 67d ago