SH4 rating after 1.3 - Page 2

JScones · 07-24-07, 03:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Uber Gruber

Alternatively, a completely new review could be written and linked to from the initial review. I still have to maintain that the intiail review should not be changed as we should ideally encourage publishers to do things correctly in the first instance. That said, I would also like to acknowledge the work done by the developers in producing a great 1.3 patch.

I agree. There's too much rewriting of history as it is.

The original review should stand as a valid snapshot in time. However, if 1.3 improves the game in such a way that makes the original review no longer reflective, that is, unduly harsh, then I think it should be done like this... http://simhq.com/_air10/air_293a.html . This is a review of the vastly superior BoB v2.06 but with reference back to the original BoB v2 review, which was not quite as "glowing".

I mean, fair's fair and being objective and all.

I certainly don't think that we should cover our eyes and ears and deny SH4 v1.0 through v1.2 ever existed by rewriting the original review.

nomdeplume · 07-25-07, 04:45 AM

I agree with the people who say it should be updated to reflect the current state of affairs, but in a way that makes it clear that the review is based on the patched version.

The way I see it, a review should help me decide if a game is worth buying or not. If a game is unplayable without a patch, but is fantastic with the patch applied, it's doing me a disservice to just pretend the patch doesn't exist. If all the reviews focus on bugs which were fixed post-release, I could easily miss out on a really good game.

In that vein, it could be worth mentioning the popular stand-out mods which really enhance the game for particular types of players. Basically, what use is a review of a game in an unpatched, unmodded state, if nobody actually plays it that way?

That said, there isn't much point spending time updating a review if everyone who's going to read it has already either bought the game or decided not to buy it.

Reaves · 07-24-07, 12:19 AM

Another review would have to include 1.3 in the title/heading.

BarjackU977 · 07-24-07, 12:55 AM

Speaking about mods, everyone should use the Taihosan fix (that small Japanese cargo that, if loaded with ammo, cause CTD when sunk in the default 1.3 installation). This one sounds like a must have mod.
http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/show...396#post600396

I don't think the idea of a separate review, personally, as one may end up on the "wrong" review through a Google search, or a link on another web site.
I think it is best to have a single review, made of the original one, with a clear update statement about patch 1.3.

Or you could, on the original review, put a link to the updated one, but that may be more complex than having a single one.

View Poll Results: Do you want Neal to update the SH4 review and rating after the 1.3 patch release?
Yes	93	80.17%
No	23	19.83%
Voters: 116. You may not vote on this poll

07-24-07, 12:19 AM	#3
Reaves The Old Man Join Date: Sep 2004 Location: Melbourne, Australia Posts: 1,509 Downloads: 4 Uploads: 0	Another review would have to include 1.3 in the title/heading. __________________

07-24-07, 12:55 AM	#4
BarjackU977 Gunner Join Date: Jul 2007 Posts: 97 Downloads: 6 Uploads: 0	Speaking about mods, everyone should use the Taihosan fix (that small Japanese cargo that, if loaded with ammo, cause CTD when sunk in the default 1.3 installation). This one sounds like a must have mod. http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/show...396#post600396 I don't think the idea of a separate review, personally, as one may end up on the "wrong" review through a Google search, or a link on another web site. I think it is best to have a single review, made of the original one, with a clear update statement about patch 1.3. Or you could, on the original review, put a link to the updated one, but that may be more complex than having a single one. Last edited by BarjackU977; 07-24-07 at 01:14 AM.

07-25-07, 04:45 AM	#2
nomdeplume Seaman Join Date: May 2007 Posts: 36 Downloads: 0 Uploads: 0	I agree with the people who say it should be updated to reflect the current state of affairs, but in a way that makes it clear that the review is based on the patched version. The way I see it, a review should help me decide if a game is worth buying or not. If a game is unplayable without a patch, but is fantastic with the patch applied, it's doing me a disservice to just pretend the patch doesn't exist. If all the reviews focus on bugs which were fixed post-release, I could easily miss out on a really good game. In that vein, it could be worth mentioning the popular stand-out mods which really enhance the game for particular types of players. Basically, what use is a review of a game in an unpatched, unmodded state, if nobody actually plays it that way? That said, there isn't much point spending time updating a review if everyone who's going to read it has already either bought the game or decided not to buy it.