Bethesda's Being Dishonest About Dishonored 2 Reviews

Bethesda is no longer giving out review copies of their games. Bethesda
says, since Doom was so successful. That games like Elder Scrolls Skyrim
Special Edition, and Dishonored 2 will not have review copies on day 1.
That means no reviewer will have Bethesda games review on launch. Meaning
we won't know if these games are actually good. This trend that Bethesda is
trying to set is a scary one, and here is why.

[oof46]

Before the age of the internet, I remember when I would have to wait a month or two AFTER a game came out to read a review on EGM.

[Hoffmann]

That is weird. I remember that the big games were actually reviewed weeks before a game was launched, back in magazines.

The not so big ones got smaller articles and sometimes reviews after launch, guess simply because the magazine editors had their priorities

[oof46]

@rainslacker@Hoffman: Ocarina of Time was the one review I could find. It came out in November of 98, but they didn't review it until February of 99. But, it did happen. Some publishers gave out early review copies, some gave them late, and some didn't give them out at all.

[morganfell]

I remember the review having been written by one individual but the game had actually been played by several people in the office. The reviewers had a set of grading standards. And they had an editor in chief that would strain as much opinion from the article as humanly possible. This was before the days of scabs like Dan Hsu at EGM who ran the magazine into the ground and posted articles of joy concerning how he screwed with companies. What a pig. It is people like him that were on the cusp of game reviews becoming the bane of the industry which we now see.

And I do not require a review of Dishonored 2 to form an opinion. I played the first one, played it again on PS4, and have seen enough previews to form an opinion and pre-order. I didn't require some wanna be game reviewer celebrity thinking for me and telling me to buy or not buy it.

[rainslacker]

It could go either way really. It kind of depending on the release schedules between the game being ready to be handed out, and the magazines printing deadline.

[NapalmSanctuary]

@morganfell How do you strain opinion from what is, inherently, an opinion piece. I could understand editing conclusions drawn from unfair or irrelevant standards i.e. slamming FFVI for not having a jump button or Gran Turismo for not having on foot free roaming but a review is a series of value judgments, and value judgments are subjective.

[Soc5]

Exactly, it's not that big of a deal. If anything it will just hurt their day one sales and preorders, because people will hold off a couple of days before buying. I will. They are just shooting themselves in the foot. I don't mind waiting a couple of days for reviews.

[NapalmSanctuary]

I distinctly remember reading reviews for Colony Wars and Bushido Blade before those games were released. Those were the only games I read reviews for before 5th gen so I can't say in general.

[SaveFerris]

Colony Wars was a fantastic game. I have never played Bushido Blade.

[TC731]

I've never had a problem with Bethesda games. Elder Scrolls, Fallout, Dishonored, WET, Rage, the new Doom...I've always felt like I've gotten my money's worth.

Instead of going after a publisher that puts out great (if a little buggy) games, why don't you go after Hello Games for the POS known as No Man's Sky?

[DivoJones]

Well.. c'mon.. No Man's Sky has absolutely gotten plenty of feedback. I think we've all read through a dozen scorching opinions and reviews to know what happened there.

I do agree that I've had only positive experiences with Bethesda games though.. while Fallout & Skyrim are prone to glitches, I've never personally had a game-breaking bug. Bethesda is simply doing this is a result of the 'uh oh, Doom is going to suck because it didn't give out review copies' feedback, and the result/effect it may have had on pre-order numbers. Want to get a company's attention? Go after their reputation or their bottom line, and they must feel that early reviews/reception has negatively affected one or both of those.

[Hoffmann]

A "little" buggy?

[LamerTamer]

Yeah, just like the sun is a little warm...

[pumpactionpimp]

Rage didn't work with amd cards on release. On console and pics, it had horrible texture loading problems and often crashed. Fallout and elder scrolls run on the same engines, and have seen the same issues time and time again. Corrupted saves, crashes, clipping issues, wonky a.i., quests not completing, etc.

I like the elder scrolls games, and I've begun to like the fallout series. But saying you don't have an issue with bethesda, doesn't mean their games don't need to be reviewed. Doom is the first day 1 purchase from bethesda, I've played, that worked as advertised out of the box, without an issue.

Reviews are good for consumers. Regardless of how jaded they can be. Just like you and I enjoy bethesda games, others may see the issues I've listed, and feel cheated that they bought a broken game.

I find it funny that a lot of people on this site are for these kinds of anti consumer practices. Over the years, game companies have drip fed us very anti consumer practices. I always here the same thing, it's just this, or just that, it's no big deal. But now games come out with preorder bonuses, day 1 dlc, not working properly but may have a day 1 patch of several gigs, micro transactions, not working correctly in general, very little in the way of content, and many others. So your right. Let's just not review them before their release as well.

[hellothere1977]

Your sense of entitlement is blinding. Bethesda is under ZERO OBLIGATION to give out free advanced copies of games to many of these parasites reviewers. Lol, need i remind you about the youtuber that SPEED RAN THRU 'THE ORDER' AND LEAKED THE ENTIRE GAME 1 WEEK BEFORE RELEASE? The game may have been shorter than usual, but considering the money, time, blood, sweat and tears the development team put into the game, they didn't deserve to get their game hosed like that.

It was a linear game with high production cinematic progression gameplay...who the hell would really buy it when the entire hybrid game/movie was leaked a week before release? So, who did the leak? A "consumer" of whom you are championing? Nah, it was a scumbag reviewer with an advance copy of the game. He made some money on his youtube views, but he cost a lot of game developers their jobs when the game flopped and Sony cut ties with the studio for the poorly selling game.

[GrimmyReaper]

"Over the years, game companies have drip fed us very anti consumer practices. I always here the same thing, it's just this, or just that, it's no big deal."

Yeah and people didn't mind apparently. Micro-transactions, DLC, Season Passes, Pre-orders BS, exclusive pre-orders, season passes that don't cover all DLC packs, Day-one DLC, empty promises, lies, broken games, unfinished games and the list goes on and on and on.

While I don't support Bethesda's decision per se, I am not against it either. You people feel so entitled because you can't play the game day one because God forbid you have some patience and self control, right? Get real. Those who already don't buy into the hoax of buying a game day one are not affected and people that do buy games day one will buy it day one regardless. So many games had lackluster scores and people bought them anyway and then are pissed off.

Not to mention, just because Bethesda announced it for all future games, you are all in uproar. Are you people blind?! Many triple A games have review Embargo's very close to release, also a day before launch, sometimes even on launch itself! Or did you not notice? Companies have already been doing this. At least Bethesda has the decency to announce it rather than doing it regardless in vain hope people like you don't notice anyway.

Also on a side note "Reviews are good for consumers. Regardless of how jaded they can be."

Are you fucking shitting me?! If they are jaded then that exactly amplifies what the problem is! That they can't be trusted and are just used to drive more sales! Think before you type!

[pumpactionpimp]

@hellothere1977

I have no sense of entitlement, and don't believe I portrayed such a notion. I am a consumer, nothing more. I do somewhat agree with your spat, in the sense that bethesda shouldn't just give review copies to any moron with a website or youtube channel. I've said as much before. I also don't purchase games day 1. Doom was the first time I had done that in years. Stop assuming I have to be the first to own a game, and read what I said.

@grimmyreaper

Bethesda is at fault here. It's simple, bethesda controls who gets early review copies. Bethesda sent them to everyone. Obviously hoping it would get them a lot of free hype. Today's generation wasn't raised on dooms arena style multiplayer combat. Thus some people slammed it in their reviews.

Ultimately bethesda can do as they wish, I've not claimed they couldn't. But just because they can do things, doesn't mean they should.

As for other review embargoes, your correct. It's happened before, and look how most turned out. Destiny fooled a lot of people. As did the division.

Lastly the dlc, microtransactions crap. Your right bro, everyone's to blame for that. I screamed from the hill tops years ago. But people spend their money as they see fit. Sadly, it's left us where we are now. And now that companies know they can take it this far, they will see how much further they can go.

Regardless I belive bethesda is overreacting to a situation they've created. And implementing this policy will not only hurt consumers, but likely hurt themselves as well.

[rainslacker]

I find it funny how so many of these sites are so pro-consumer now, despite not really caring unless it can bring them clicks. They didn't fight for better consumer representation and ethics or transparency, which is very pro-consumer when GG started. They demonized us almost across the board. Yet now they are saying how them not getting early review copies is somehow detrimental to us?

Bethesda games generally get plenty of good reviews. There's no real reason for them to have to do this policy. Despite their bugs, they are a pretty respected publisher. They have their faults, and release some duds, and I do agree, it would be nice if gamers had access to that information as early as possible.

But in this day and age, when so many people are excited for their midnight releases, day one digital unlocks before reviews get published, and pre-ordering to get some sort of crappy bonus material, is it even that relevant anymore? In this day and age, when the reviews glance over problems, and don't even inform the consumer, are they even worth having? In this day and age, where there are almost no review standards for games to have some sort of equilibrium on reporting, and some reviews often devolve into some politically agenda driven tirade, what relevance do they even have anymore?

People have been complaining about review standards for years. Despite the good reviewers, the bad apples are giving a bad name to everyone. Not once have these sites decided to address their review standards and try to bring some sort of respect back to gaming journalism. They've done nothing but sit on their high horse and preach about how they are never wrong. And the worst part is, is that the good sites/reviewers, aren't even calling for better practices across the board to push out these people making them look bad. They blame others, like the publishers, or the gamers themselves.

There are more responsible consumers, or care to be more careful with their money have to wait a bit longer. But by the time the good reviews can be written, there will be plenty of feedback from the community where people can make a decision. Nothing is lost overall, except it inconveniences a segment of the community which does rely on reviews.

What it comes down to for me though, is that I am more disillusioned by the gaming press than I am the gaming industry on these matters. The industry has it's own problems to address, but that is separate from the media itself, and I don't like seeing the media piggyback it's needs on the needs of the consumers. When sites actually start acting like they're pro-consumer across the board, and represent us and the industry equitably, then I'll stand with them for what I want as a consumer.

[rainslacker]

Why not go after the press itself which has brought this situation upon themselves with their crappy practices?

There is no reason for Bethesda to really restrict their games. I don't believe their reasoning behind the policy, but never have they really been panned by the media.

However, we pan the media itself constantly for their half assed poor reviews, and constantly complain about their inept critiques.

While there are good, if not great reviewers out there, the truth is, the media itself is in dire need of some restructuring. Besthesda isn't the first company which has restricted it's review copies, and they aren't likely to be the last. The industry is getting annoyed with the gaming press. The gamers have been annoyed with them even longer.

But you don't see these sites going on about how they have a problem. Quite the opposite really...when it was brought to the forefront in a way they had to respond, they turned us gamers into misogynist pigs that supposedly the industry didn't have to consider a target audience.

When I see these sites actually take responsibility or at least address the problems the media has overall, then I'll consider their opinion on if I should be upset Bethesda or others are in the wrong. As long as they act like they are blameless, and that we should stand by this travesty of so called anti-consumer practice, then they get no sympathy from me, because it's been a long while since the press has done anything for me as a consumer.

And the press did plenty of panning of NMS...so not sure why you're using that as an example. They overdid it in fact.

[opinionated]

"Meaning we won't actually know if the games are good."

I didn't know if they were good when mainstream publications were getting early review copies. I trust the word of the people in this comment section more than I do gaming journalists.

[rainslacker]

Nope, only gaming review sites can tell you if a game is good. There is no other outlet. All of our opinions are based on the general feelings of the press and reviews. At no time, has a review ever not lined up with our own opinions, and there is no such thing as a poor review in terms of actual validity(not score).

Luckily, we can still know if the game is good or not when these sites finally do manage to print their Bethesda reviews. Might take a week or two....although I'm sure the early reviews, and rushed reviews, are sure to make an appearance. Thank god for that, because there is no way I can form an opinion on my own, and God forbid I have to get feedback from the general community on whether a game is worth purchasing. I certainly couldn't play the game myself and make a decision.....I'm not capable of that kind of critical thought because I is not too bright. I mean, Bethesda's new policy means I might have to actually rent a game....or worse, watch a lets play.....that would be disastrous.

[Swiftfox]

We live in a "pre-order" culture. A majority of sales are made before the games are even released. The money gained from pre-orders is already spent on different elements by the time the game even comes out. One poor review, or miscommunication and suddenly people are cancelling pre-orders, meaning theses companies go into an even deeper hole of loss.

How do you combat this as a company? No early reviews. If most of the sales are going before the game even comes out, why do they need review outlets to help hype their advertisement machine? At which point the sales increase from pre-release reviews are insignificant since you'd have to pre-order the game anyway. The people who don't pre-order will calmly wait for the reviews regardless stimulated by normal advertisement. They aren't losing any sales.

We'll have to wait and see how this affects things on a larger scale for the company, but this is how they are combating the shortcomings of a pre-order environment.

You want to help? Stop pre-ordering games.

[ElementX]

You can get some great pre-order deals online for consoles and pc. I think companies shouldn't assume that every pre-order will be filled. Also, you aren't charged until the game ships so preorders aren't giving anybody any money except sometimes a small charge at gamestop or something.

[LamerTamer]

That also helps insure the game releases buggy and incomplete. If a publisher finds loads of bugs or isn't finished they ship it for the original release date anyway. If they delay it whiny gamers throw a hissy fit and cancel pre-orders. So you get broken garbage day one and need to rely on a fast internet connection to install a "day one patch". The problem there is when those patches are taken down eventually you will not have a way to fix the junk you have on the disc, a death knell for future retrogaming (and your internet data cap). If someone doesn't have internet you aren't able to play anything that works.

I never pre-order it just seems retarded. There is no point in it really.

[BLKxSEPTEMBER]

People will just pirate the games early (which is already being done) and do reviews that's way. Some games need to be reviewed days in advanced based on the size of the game. I usually won't buy a game based on reviews anyway. I go to twitch and see early game play then I will usually decide.

[mogwaii]

I dont get the pre order culture, i'll never pre order, they can stick em, eb are always trying to push a pre order onto me saying "you'll get this and this if you pre order" and i just tell them "i dont care"
I was told id get an eb exclusive hellfighter pack if i pre ordered battlefield 1, i didnt pre order and guess what?....i got it anyway, ridiculous.

[PlatinumGX]

The "journalists" with that feeling of despair. Well done Bethesda, hope others follow suit.

[Christopher]

Eh. I think it's their right and I don't think a policy like this means all their games are bad. The job of a reviewer is to review a game. I don't care when they get it, just take the time and make a good review. Complaining that a company has decided to stop giving you a review copy earlier than Day 1 isn't a problem for me and I doubt an issue for most people. People pre-order without reviews and others buy based on marketing and what others say. People will continue to pre-order or wait on what people say. The fact it's not pre-day one is actually typically worse for the publisher, and worse for game reviewers who suddenly don't get more hits prior to a big release.

So, honestly, I don't care. I also don't care if a reviewer thinks it's unfair. Don't complain to me about your inability to get things earlier, just do your job and review it when you can get it.

[BossBattle]

All I know is that Dishonored 1 was boring and was way too easy. 2 looks to be the same way.

[fanboysmackdown]

I am so sick of the whiney gaming community. It's pretty f&*king simple when you buy a game. Wait for the reviews to land, in the case of Dishonored 2, a few days after launch. Or, don't wait for the reviews and dive right in, everyone has a choice. Nobody is forcing anyone to go out and buy a game on day one, so quit your f*&king bitching already. Myself, I don't give a rats ass about a review for Dishonored 2 because I know it will be awesome and if it's buggy, so the f&*k what, it'll get patched and those are the risks I'm willing to take because Jesus H F%*k, it's $80 (Canadian), not the end of the f&^king world and not like I'm buying a goddam Land Rover with broken f*&king muffler bearing.

[Saijahn]

They all said skyrin was a masterpiece so I bought the game... exactly why reviews aren't everything. I personally found it to be simplistic, devoid of story and ending, and ugly as all heck. I imagine what they would've said had they not had review copies, I see now, would've cried and crucified it and Bethesda.

[joab777]

There is a reason that they are doing this. I am not quite sure what it is but I am sure that they have considered every point made in this video such as free advertising and knowing that their game is of the highest quality. Maybe they feel that they don't have to anymore. That most people already know whether they are going to purchase the game at launch, and those that don't can watch Twitch or YouTube and then go out and purchase it.

Honestly, these early review only affect game day launch sales, and maybe they feel that their games, while doing well on launch day, do not rely on early reviews to sell as many as quickly as possible before the hype fades. Maybe it is their confidence in their product that is the reasoning for this move.

Maybe they don't wanna give out 20,000 free copies anymore. Maybe they have reached that apex, like Rockstar and CoD (no longer), in which early reviews could only hurt them.

[Pantz]

thepolinetwork.com's Being Dishonest About Dishonored 2 Reviews? hey i can do it tooo! review sites suck and release low scores for clicks or high scores for checks. now you don't get to play games early or get checks/clicks so you're mad.

[DefenderOfDoom2]

So a person who depends on reviewers can not wait 3 to 7 days after a video games release date to buy the game ? I believe a huge portion of people who buys a game on day 1 is because they are very excited to play and give their own opinion of the game . I bought DOOM on day 1 because i am a mega huge fan of the original DOOM games.

[Seafort]

If this is the way Bethesda wants to go then so be it. I'll either buy their games really cheap or buy from steam and get a refund if the game is crap. Makes no difference to me.

I don't trust any publisher or AAA developer these days to develop a well optimised and polished game. Profits mean more to them that their integrity.

Just use your common sense and don't buy any game if you have doubts about it's quality.