Pillars of Eternity II Review Thread

[Mannock]

Unfortunately the problem is that you can't review a game or anything else without finishing it. I understand the time issue, but games often get worse as they progress. If you are only playing the first half of the game you are getting the wrong impression of the game.

Regarding ethics - well this is a major problem for reviewers. In theory, there should be no gifts, no limited access and you should pay for your own copy of the game.

Every other reviewer, from films to food pays for themselves and most importantly access is not an issue. Whereas for game reviewers - you get on a companies **** list you are not going to get early access, either for previews or for the actual review. Why do you think it's almost impossible to find a bad review of a game produced by the large companies? Whereas you get plenty of bad reviews for smaller companies (even taking into account that they are smaller - have less budget, experience) there are still way to many good reviews from the major companies.

Bottom line - they have to much control over access - and if you as a reviewer can't get early access to a game you are finished...

In the best of worlds you should be able to finish the game, yes. But then you have the real world to take into consideration, paying bills and all that. But that is why a lot of magazines have started with follow up reviews which is a good thing.

 

I've written a lot of reviews that were negative towards the game, along with other reviewers, and my magazine never ended up on a "s*it" list. That's all I can say about that. Doesn't mean it never happens, but I still doubt it's a major factor of anything in general.

[rheingold]

mmm...I just don't like PR masquerading as reviews that's all... And most of the time that's what it feels like. But I don't want to derail the thread further...

[Greensleeve]

Unfortunately the problem is that you can't review a game or anything else without finishing it. I understand the time issue, but games often get worse as they progress. If you are only playing the first half of the game you are getting the wrong impression of the game.

 

Regarding ethics - well this is a major problem for reviewers. In theory, there should be no gifts, no limited access and you should pay for your own copy of the game.

Every other reviewer, from films to food pays for themselves and most importantly access is not an issue. Whereas for game reviewers - you get on a companies **** list you are not going to get early access, either for previews or for the actual review. Why do you think it's almost impossible to find a bad review of a game produced by the large companies? Whereas you get plenty of bad reviews for smaller companies (even taking into account that they are smaller - have less budget, experience) there are still way to many good reviews from the major companies.

Bottom line - they have to much control over access - and if you as a reviewer can't get early access to a game you are finished...

 

 

Other reviewers absolutely get **** for free, and all the time. Giving out swag to journalists is a cottage industry, and I can from personal experience tell you it doesn't matter much. The risk of losing audience credibility is far worse than the prospect of slightly singing a contact 

 

The real problem is that journalism is seriously under-funded, which leads to corner-cutting. And unpopular reviews rarely bring in the cash, so... Why bother writing them? 

 

Finally, if you have to finish a game to get a sense for it, it's a kinda ****ty game. If all a reviewer talked about was the story, then fine. You'd have to finish the game. But there's a hell of a lot more to it than that, and you can get a pretty good sense for the gameplay and audio-visual elements of a game long before you've finished a title. While this wouldn't be a review of the full experience (obviously) it's good enough for pro-consumer reviews. In-depth criticism not so much, but that doesn't really seem to be what we're talking about here. 

[BijaT]

 

> Angry Joe

 

> professional reviews

 

Lmao

 

Gonna tell you a little secret: If you're paying your bills by doing any given thing, you're doing said thing professionally. But pssst! Don't tell.

 

Well go lisen to pewdiepie then =D. While technicaly your right, most ppl today use the word professional in the meeing that the work is of higher standard. Sure it is incorect way of using the word but words meenings changes.

[Karkarov]

Unfortunately the problem is that you can't review a game or anything else without finishing it. I understand the time issue, but games often get worse as they progress. If you are only playing the first half of the game you are getting the wrong impression of the game.

 

 

Regarding ethics - well this is a major problem for reviewers. In theory, there should be no gifts, no limited access and you should pay for your own copy of the game.

Every other reviewer, from films to food pays for themselves and most importantly access is not an issue. Whereas for game reviewers - you get on a companies **** list you are not going to get early access, either for previews or for the actual review. Why do you think it's almost impossible to find a bad review of a game produced by the large companies? Whereas you get plenty of bad reviews for smaller companies (even taking into account that they are smaller - have less budget, experience) there are still way to many good reviews from the major companies.

Bottom line - they have to much control over access - and if you as a reviewer can't get early access to a game you are finished...

So, you can't review a game without finishing it?  Patently not true.  Yes a game can get worse over time, but if the game is 40 hours long and you loved the first 30, what are the odds the last 10 are going to suddenly suck, or do something so bad you now hate the  whole game despite loving the majority of it?  Pretty slim.

 

Film and food is about the worst example I could ever think of.  Film requires 3 hours of a reviewers time, tops, food maybe 1-2 hours.  Deadfire takes 80+ hours to play to completion.  That isn't apples to oranges, that is apples to pork  BBQ. 

 

As for "lists" evidence please?  I remember the old Kane and Lynch nonsense, good review or else?  Guess what, they released a crappy review anyway.  And years later when Kane and Lynch 2 released, funny story, the guy who wrote the scathing review of 1 was told to review part 2 as well.

 

Also these are video games, even if you get on a "list" somehow, you can still just buy a copy and do a non release day review.

[anathanielh]

I would also want to bone down the Eothas statue.

[morhilane]

My favourite review though, had to be one of DAI - from a well known website, just can't remember which, where he absolutely loved the game, and praised it extensively for the fact that you didn't start at level one, and had some cool abilities because of that - which meant he didn't play past the intro scene - 2 minutes in the game...

 

Can't be DAI, you start at level 1. You are probably thinking of Dragon Age 2.

 

Although, reviewers spending top 20 hours with a game before reviewing and claiming they finished it are becoming very commons, or they are becoming real crap are hiding it these days. This unfortunately affect single player RPGs a lot more than other type of games.

[drain]

Does anyone know for sure when the embargo is lifted? I think I remember the PoE 1 embargo being lifted at least 2 hours before the game was released on Steam.

[Karkarov]

Does anyone know for sure when the embargo is lifted? I think I remember the PoE 1 embargo being lifted at least 2 hours before the game was released on Steam.

I would assume it is lifted now, but bear in mind it is only 10am on the east coast of the US.  Many of the people who do reviews for major outlets may not even be at work yet.

[morhilane]

 

Does anyone know for sure when the embargo is lifted? I think I remember the PoE 1 embargo being lifted at least 2 hours before the game was released on Steam.

I would assume it is lifted now, but bear in mind it is only 10am on the east coast of the US.  Many of the people who do reviews for major outlets may not even be at work yet.

 

 

Most websites with articles requires those articles to be written and locked a day before their date of posting so editors can go through them and the posting is done automatically via a scheduler. No need for anyone to be at the office...unless someone didn't enter the right time on the scheduler.

 

Source: I wrote articles for a small webmagazine a few years back.

[Karkarov]

Most websites with articles requires those articles to be written and locked a day before their date of posting so editors can go through them and the posting is done automatically via a scheduler. No need for anyone to be at the office...unless someone didn't enter the right time on the scheduler.

 

Source: I wrote articles for a small webmagazine a few years back.

Different strokes for different folks.  If I ran an online reviews site I wouldn't post crap unless someone was on staff just in case something went wrong or a last second change had to happen.

[drain]

 

 

Does anyone know for sure when the embargo is lifted? I think I remember the PoE 1 embargo being lifted at least 2 hours before the game was released on Steam.

I would assume it is lifted now, but bear in mind it is only 10am on the east coast of the US.  Many of the people who do reviews for major outlets may not even be at work yet.

 

 

Most websites with articles requires those articles to be written and locked a day before their date of posting so editors can go through them and the posting is done automatically via a scheduler. No need for anyone to be at the office...unless someone didn't enter the right time on the scheduler.

 

Source: I wrote articles for a small webmagazine a few years back.

 

 

Yeah, you usually see 10-20 reviews pop up in 15 minutes as soon as the embargo is dropped. It's pretty clear that they are all finished at least a few hours before. If the embargo was up now, we would see more than these 2-3 reviews out.

[Valmy]

Does anyone actually read these "professional" game reviews any more? Speaking for myself, I haven't taken these paid shills seriously for years, I look at user reviews and nothing else.

 

I mean sure game reviews have always been a little suspect going back to the 80s when game companies themselves owned the magazines that released them but even then they were not completely useless. And I remember the glowing reviews Ultima IX got LOL. So, you know, pinch of salt.

 

These days are a few I know well and thus I am aware of their biases and my opinion is likely to coincide with theirs. I cannot possibly know the users well enough to know what theirs are so I generally find it not very valuable to look at user reviews...unless the game has serious issues. Generally there is no reviewer or user I am going to take as authoritative, but I do think it is useful to get a little taste of what other people are thinking.

Edited May 8, 2018 by Valmy

[stratigo]

The game reviewing industry is more credible today than it ever was really. There's been a shift from reviewers to influencers (eg, youtube personalities. The people you check out for them and less the game they play) by companies, meaning less pressure on reviewers, a lot of the shadier outlets have closed, and a lot of the most popular review groups have shifted practices.

[eclap78]

The game reviewing industry is more credible today than it ever was really. There's been a shift from reviewers to influencers (eg, youtube personalities. The people you check out for them and less the game they play) by companies, meaning less pressure on reviewers, a lot of the shadier outlets have closed, and a lot of the most popular review groups have shifted practices.

It's all different nowadays. Big mainstream outlets (IGN etc) can go do one. Magazines, nobody buys those. If you compare the big reviewers of today vs those of 20-30 years ago, reviews were  a lot more honest back then. 

 

But there's a slew of other small independent YouTube channels and sites that you can chose from. I personally never look at reviews in mainstream media because it is absolutely a paid review and usually poorly written. It also depends how much I am into the genre and how complex the genre is. When ACG reviewed Project Cars 2, it was cringeworthy because he clearly isn't as involved with racing sims as I am. Also, if someone is a massive RPG buff and loves AD&D, a generic review won't do any good.

 

I have a very small selection of reviewers on YouTube that I go to and they all do specific genres. I'll go to different reviewers for racing sims and I'll go to a completely different reviewer for shooters for example. 

 

Good thing is, there's a lot of choice. It's important to know which media outlets to completely ignore though.

[Mannock]

Swedish PC Gamer gave Deadfire 92 %.

 

Swedish website fz.se gave the game 5 our of 5.

 

So very good reviews indeed.

[rheingold]

As said, I don't much like reviews myself, but good reviews are great for Obs and POE's future...

[algroth]

Reviews are starting to come in...

 

http://www.metacritic.com/game/pc/pillars-of-eternity-ii-deadfire

 

So far, pretty good. Though it seems like it'll be ranking lower than its predecessor when all is said and done.

Edited May 8, 2018 by algroth

[morhilane]

Reviews are starting to come in...

 

http://www.metacritic.com/game/pc/pillars-of-eternity-ii-deadfire

 

So far, pretty good. Though it seems like it'll be ranking lower than its predecessor when all is said and done.

 

Which is kinda amusing. So far all the reviews I checked says the Deadfire blows the first game out of the water in all aspect...

Edited May 8, 2018 by morhilane

[Awkward Davies]

In-progress review from Rock-Paper-Shotgun.  Not glowing, but not all bad.  POE1 the superior game in their opinion (but they often tend to be a collection of differing opinions, almost like real people or something).

[Fiach]

ACG REVIEW...BUY!

 

Apparently it's coming to console too, great for me as I don't have. PC anymore.

 

[Sven_]

Somebody accidentally broke the embargo: 

 

Bloody Germans initially did it just as well.  Seems the authorities had sorted that one quickly..... Arrr!

 

 

[What a fitting way to launch the press for a game like this though]

Edited May 8, 2018 by Sven_

[Augusto]

http://es.ign.com/pillars-of-eternity-2-pc/132817/review/pillars-of-eternity-2-deadfire-analisis-para-pc?p=2 IGN spain 92. The first one was 85.

[Mygaffer]

 

The game reviewing industry is more credible today than it ever was really. There's been a shift from reviewers to influencers (eg, youtube personalities. The people you check out for them and less the game they play) by companies, meaning less pressure on reviewers, a lot of the shadier outlets have closed, and a lot of the most popular review groups have shifted practices.

It's all different nowadays. Big mainstream outlets (IGN etc) can go do one. Magazines, nobody buys those. If you compare the big reviewers of today vs those of 20-30 years ago, reviews were  a lot more honest back then. 

 

But there's a slew of other small independent YouTube channels and sites that you can chose from. I personally never look at reviews in mainstream media because it is absolutely a paid review and usually poorly written. It also depends how much I am into the genre and how complex the genre is. When ACG reviewed Project Cars 2, it was cringeworthy because he clearly isn't as involved with racing sims as I am. Also, if someone is a massive RPG buff and loves AD&D, a generic review won't do any good.

 

I have a very small selection of reviewers on YouTube that I go to and they all do specific genres. I'll go to different reviewers for racing sims and I'll go to a completely different reviewer for shooters for example. 

 

Good thing is, there's a lot of choice. It's important to know which media outlets to completely ignore though.

 

 

I hate this idea that all reviews are bought and paid for. Just read them and it's obvious this isn't the case. There are other issues I have with modern video games criticism but this idea that Obsidian/Versus Evil is paying anyone for reviews is laughable. The closest anyone comes to this is "hey, we'll give you an exclusive and an ad deal" and of course the pressure is on for the review to be good.

 

And in fact some have come out and revealed publishers using that kind of exclusivity back in the days of gaming magazines to ensure minimum scores and even dictating what aspects of the game were to be covered or not. And don't forget Jeff Gerstmann, although I think that was an outlier.

 

If I trust anyone the least it's probably YouTubers, as there is all kinds of money changing hands there directly for coverage and while in the US the FTC requires disclosure it's basically a blurb at the bottom of a description, and I know there are people out there not disclosing sponsored content.

 

I really don't rely on reviews to choose which games to buy though. I look at the genre, the developer and maybe some video of it being played. Then if it looks like something I'd be really into I buy immediately, like Pillars 1, and if it's something I think I'd like I'll put it on my wish list and wait for a sale.

Edited May 8, 2018 by Mygaffer

[Archaven]

gamespot giving an 8.. that's really an average score for me. shame on them. but again i dont really trust these reviewers. if i'm good at writing i probably few hundred times better than the reviewers do with their job. most reviewers i see is that they play the game for the sake of just reviewing the game. they don't even have passion for games they reviewed for and hence giving a low score.