Quote:
|
Originally Posted by jeff lackey
Immaculata - nothing to do with "high horses". The version they sent for review is the version we review. How long do you wait? Do I wait for a couple of weeks when I get a copy for review, hoping there might be a patch? Do I tell the editor to wait for two more weeks when a patch comes out so I can run that through the paces? There will be another patch after this one - do you wait for it? This patch isn't even out yet.
If the publsiher ships copies for review, and if they ship these to the shelves for people to purchase, that's what gets reviewed. It's up to the publishers to decide what they want to push out the door.
|
Thats just being lazy. If there is a patch right after release and your deadline isnt up, use it. It is that simple. No one said you can't talk about that in your review. But if there is a patch, and it fixes some of the things you didn't like about the game, tell that as well. Thats being fair and objective isnt it? Not imagining some thought up demographic of people that reads game reviews and buy games off the shelves and do never patch.
Yes, of course I was a Joe Housesweater or what ever years ago. But guess what, EVEN BACK THEN GAMES WERE BUGGY! That didn't turn me off gaming. This "the average" consumer stramwan argument drawn up everytime sickens ME to the bone. Yes, we all want games without bugs. It shouldn't have to be stated so often (and stating it so often doesn't seem to work anyways, so why waste everyones time with it?).