Review: Rage 2 - PS4 | Pure PlayStation

Pure PlayStation: There’s not much to Rage 2 except the gameplay and combat. The story is still uninspired and the overall experience before things feel repetitive is pretty short. I’m just glad the developers injected a much needed yet familiar boost in how the player can cause gory and over-the-top mayhem. It alone was the driving force for me. I don’t know if this sequel was necessary, but it was a serviceable three-day distraction.

[TopherMan]

Someone has a buddy at GameStop.

[harmny]

pure playstation is cancer. they did the same thing with days gone. they generate traffic by getting a copy from some asshole that break the street date and publish their review a day before the embargo date

[Palitera]

You are helping them when you interact with their posts. The clickbait needs the click.

[robtion]

These guys only gave Metro Exodus a 7.9 and I loved it. Mad Max was so good I am willing to take a gamble on Rage 2.

[rdgneoz3]

8 is good, so not much of a gamble. Curious how others that haven't broke the street date will go. Either way, it's your money.

[InMyOpinion]

Thought the embargo was tomorrow?

[djplonker]

If you signed a contact to receive a review copy then yes the embargo is tomorrow.

These type of reviews are from copies recieved early from retailers and the reviewer (most likely) rushed through the game to be the first review it to maximise clicks and that is what makes these early score's unreliable for the most part.

[meep316]

You think any review scores are reliable at all these days? I don’t trust any website anymore personally. They are getting desperate to keep the lights on, and it’s getting worse.

[Lon3wolf]

At the end of the review:

Note: The official review embargo is May 13th. We did not get our copy of the game from Bethesda so we’re under no obligation to adhere to the embargo or any other conditions placed upon those who agreed to Bethesda’s terms.

[TopherMan]

Explanation under the review:

"Review Disclaimer: This review was carried out using a physical version of the game with the latest patch (1.02) bought at retail at the expense of the reviewer. For more information, please read our Review Policy.

Reviewed on a PS4 Pro.

Note: The official review embargo is May 13th. We did not get our copy of the game from Bethesda so we’re under no obligation to adhere to the embargo or any other conditions placed upon those who agreed to Bethesda’s terms. "

[NecrumOddBoy]

I think if you didn't get a copy from the publisher, you should still wait to post the review at embargo.

1. You are showing that you would respect the integrity of a publishing relationship.
2. You're not pushing out a rushed review for clicks and skipping the updates.
3. You're not buying an illegal copy or supporting a company that disregards a contractual agreement.

It doesn't harm you to wait to release your review.

[SPEAKxTHExTRUTH]

How is it illegal to buy a copy of the game early at a legitimate retailer? Is there some kind of law I don’t know about? Secondly these publishers shouldn’t need day one patches for their games to function properly. Third how is it disrespectful to post a review of the game he bought and paid for? I see nothing wrong with what this author did. These game companies are shady and ashamed of the product they put out which is why they want to wait until the last min to allow reviews.

[rainslacker]

It's not illegal to buy them early from the store. However, most stores sign a pretty binding contract with some hefty penalties to the retailers, either monetary, or revocation of their right to receive games early for day one sale if they're caught. The store has more to lose than the person buying the game, and if it's an employee at the store, it's likely they'd be fired if they're caught. If it's the retail owner, then it could be pretty bad for them if they're caught. Even though it's a Bethesda game, the contracts are usually issued by the distributors, who do so on behalf of the console makers, so Sony could pull their rights to get games early.

The customer themselves have no legal obligation to wait until release day if someone will sell or give it to them early.

I signed such a contract for my online business, but I don't buy new release games, because there isn't enough profit in them for me to make it worthwhile. If I did though, I could preorder games and get them 3-4 days before release. Typically the Thursday or Friday before a Tuesday release.

[Garethvk]

Embargo on all coverage is tomorrow.

[rob-GP]

At most, I expect they’ve had the game for one day - not really long enough to fully play through and experience everything on offer. This is the second time they have released a review early due to them buying the game though. I would have thought they would have stuck to the embargo (as they clearly know when it is), even if it’s just to remain in good standing with Bethesda.

[chrish1990]

Kyle had the game for three days. As mentioned in the review you clearly didn't read.

[rob-GP]

I'm guessing his PSN is GOODKyle (based on that profile having played the same games this reviewer had reviewed at the same times as they were published). If so then he got one trophy on the 10th - it was played for five hours before it then was picked up for another two hours on the 11th.

Now, he could have played and got no trophies, but based on that, he's played around seven to eight hours, not the three days you, the other guy, and the reviewer claims.

Again, they knew the embargo yet they got it late on Friday then played through it fast in order to put out a review first and hope to gain more clicks. Just an observation and why I didn't read the content of the review, as he clearly hasn't taken the time to see everything the game offers.

[milohighclub]

Rob. Stop speculating and trying to grab at shit that doesn't matter and stop been such a stalker man.

Down with Bethesda and that scum bag Howard.

[rob-GP]

@milohighclub - oh be quiet, I had a look because people, like yourself, tried to counter my speculation with your own speculation by blindly believing the final sentence of the review... This was clearly a rushed review for the sake of getting it out there for more clicks. That was the only point I was getting at, yet that's hard for some of you to comprehend I guess.

If ~seven hours gameplay in an open world game, which supposedly takes around 15 hours to complete the story, is enough for you to formulate a full opinion of the gameplay, including its story direction and overall satisfaction, then fair enough.

[LucasRuinedChildhood]

Well, your suspicions are unfounded. He mentions how long he had the game in the summary. "I don’t know if this sequel was necessary, but it was a serviceable three day distraction."

There's no point being cynical for the sake of being cynical.

[rob-GP]

See my other comment - if he's the guy who has played the same games at the same time as this guy has posted reviews, based on PSNProfiles, then he's played around seven hours or so, five on Friday and two on Saturday - then put up the review shortly after.

Having a game for 'three days' doesn't mean they've played it for three days...

[No Way]

Does that mean he was online for those days/hours, as well?

[rob-GP]

@No Way - trophies earnt offline have a timestamp placed upon them. Soon as you go online they are uploaded with that 'set in stone' date and time. Anyway, it doesn't matter - I was purely correcting their speculation with a little factual information, rather than quoting what the reviewer claimed.

[Cikatriz_ESP]

@rob-GP

I don’t think trophies work exactly the way you’re assuming. I’ve had trophy info show up days after I actually got the trophy, whether I’m online or not.

[rainslacker]

He may not have an account on PSNProfiles. It doesn't list all the PSN users. It'll grab the overall statistics from PSN lists, but not all the users unless you sign up.

[milohighclub]

If they didnt get a review copy they don't have a working relationship with Bethesda so they don't need to remain in good standing with them.

I dont get it, Bethesda don't give a shit about the fans, so why do the fans still give a shit about bethesda?

After how bethesda has been treating customers lately I hope rage flops, and bethesda sinks. We already have E.A and Ubisoft trying to destroy gaming with MTs, threes a crowd.

[rainslacker]

If they procured it through a retailer, the retailer probably got it last thursday or Friday. Places like GameStop or bigger retailers generally get them a week ahead of time, maybe the Tuesday or Wendsday prior. If that's enough time is questionable. For bigger games, i'd say that's a lot of playing to try and get through the game, then actually spend the time writing and editing the review. That's why embargos allow reviewers time to play the game, write the article, and then release the review in a fair manner. It does benefit publishers, but ultimately, it means that you don't get a big rush or reviewers trying to be the first to print, which is what was happening before embargos became a thing.

[william_cade]

oh no, here come the embargo nannies.

[CP_Company]

agree. people should be thankful that someone at least warns them in advance.

[Nitrowolf2]

They list some pretty big cons, idk for three days of play time and to complain about it being repetitive, the story and how short it is only to give it an 8? Looks to me the writer rushed this out just for the sake of being first.

Not saying 8 a bad score, but the review itself seems rushed. Although from the sound of it the game also appears to be really short

[monkey602]

I mean he could easily spend more time in 3 days on a game than I would in a week or 2.
And I could certainly give you an opinion on a game I'm playing within that time. Maybe not a review but definitely my overall impressions

[Abnor_Mal]

Uninspired story and overall experience is repetitive and short overall. Yet it gets an 8 while other games gets points taken away.

Short game time being able to end the game in less than ten hours, but filler stuff that pads it out to twenty five or more hours.
Driving is just okay whether on bike or car, it's just okay. Then the bugs and glitches even though the author did not name specifics. Oh let's not forget that the game seemingly has a skill tree, all this and it gets an 8 score.

Let me not put the cart in front of the horse and wait and see how others review and score the game before tables are flipped.

[CDbiggen]

Review: There’s not much to Rage 2 except the gameplay and combat.

Shit, man. That's all you had to say. I enjoyed Far Cry 5 last year for the same reason.

[criticalkare]

Game is that short for open world game?

[Gwiz]

Pretty much what I expected from the game,seems to be a nice mindless shooter :D.

[seanpitt23]

I have been playing this since yesterday and put a walkthrough on YouTube but Bethesda took my videos down straight away. They was pretty keen. What I have played so far, I agree it's about a 8 out to 10 it's all about the gunplay at 60fps don't expect the open world to look amazing because graphically it's average playing on the ps4 pro there is a lot of pop in and there is alot of shimmer it's quite noticeable after coming from playing days gone at upscaled 4k down to 1080p it's a massive difference, that extra power was used to get to 60 fps. This generation you just can't have both hopefully next gen we can

[Bluemaster77]

How'd they get around the embargo?

[Germaximus]

LOL "Bad story, repetitive, short. Let's give it an 8."

A small example of why I call out idiots nowadays rather than letting them run their stupid mouths.

[gangsta_red]

Addictive and adrenaline injected gameplay
Many cool and distinct combat possibilities
The weapons are the bomb

Another example on why I don't trust gamers and their cherry picked point of views.

[BoneMagnus]

Based on the content of the review, I'd expect him to give the game a 7.

[Hardiman]

Just what I was expecting and I love games like this because depending on the quality and how fun the loop is, I play them on and off for long periods of time.

I'm deep into Days Gone now but I'll give this a go when I'm finished.

[Kane22]

if im correct. rage 1 was that long either.

[Thundercat77]

Looks like a rent. Not spending $60 on this.

[Cikatriz_ESP]

Came here to say I want to punch that chick with the mohawk in all the promo art.

[RizBiz]

"The story is uninspired, the game is short, and it doesn't feel at all like it even needs to exist. Serviceable at best. 8/10."
WTF? Do people not understand how fractions work? o_O

[GOODKylePS]

"Hopped up adrenaline gameplay, cool and distinct combat, and amazing weapons. 8/10"

WTF? Do people not understand how balancing pros and cons on an individualized basis works? o_O

[RizBiz]

You're absolutely right. Balancing pros and cons is very important.

Adrenaline-rich gameplay + cool and distinct combat = 8/10
Uninspired story, short game, serviceable at best = 4/10

Final score: 6/10

[GOODKylePS]

Or just make up numbers for someone who's played the game and has different, individualized tastes than you where cons and pros are weighted differently. That works.

[chris235]

repetitive asf? so just like the first one. thanks, pass.

[Lethaltare]

I don't think pure Playstation know how to score. By the sound of the review it's an average game around a 6/10... They mentioned all these game breaking bugs at the end which sound pretty bad and still scored it that high. I'm looking forward to rage 2 but at least put a score that matches what you've written.