Gaming

30721 readers

201 users here now

From video gaming to card games and stuff in between, if it's gaming you can probably discuss it here!

Please Note: Gaming memes are permitted to be posted on Meme Mondays, but will otherwise be removed in an effort to allow other discussions to take place.

See also Gaming's sister community Tabletop Gaming.

This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.

founded 3 years ago

MODERATORS

alyaza@beehaw.org

TheRtRevKaiser@beehaw.org

gyrfalcon@beehaw.org

Whom@beehaw.org

The_Hunted_One@beehaw.org

chloyster@beehaw.org

remington@beehaw.org

104

Reviewers giving high scores to poorly optimised games really grinds my gears (lemm.ee)

submitted 5 days ago by delitomatoes@lemm.ee to c/gaming@beehaw.org

41 comments fedilink hide all child comments

So this problem started back in 2023 as in still occurring. Dead Space Remake, Jedi Survivor and Silent Hill 2 are some of the offenders. All these games were highly rated on gameplay and graphics

Basically, even if you have a 4090, the stutters and poor fps still exist due to the way the game is designed.

Its exceptionally frustrating because open world devs do optimise for performance while corridor type REMAKES like Dead Space and Silent Hill forget the work their predecessors did on worse hardware years ago

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] Ephera@lemmy.ml 5 points 5 days ago (2 children)

I've heard the reasoning before that reviewers typically only have access to a, well, pre-release version. A day-1-patch is pretty common now.
So, as reviewer, you have to decide whether the performance problems look like they might be fixed on release day, and therefore whether you want to incorporate them into your review/score or not.

[–] Ulrich@feddit.org 16 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago)

as reviewer, you have to decide whether the performance problems look like they might be fixed on release day

No you do not. You review what they give you. If it sucks, they shouldn't have given it to you, and that's what your audience deserves to hear about.

You don't speculate about what might happen tomorrow.

[–] metaStatic@kbin.earth 12 points 5 days ago (3 children)

The answer is yes. you can only review they game you have in front of you not some hypothetical better future game.

[–] Toes@ani.social 10 points 5 days ago

I agree, if the review copy is jank then the review must reflect that.

[–] InevitableList@beehaw.org 4 points 5 days ago (1 children)

Good idea if you don't want publishers to send you any advanced copies of their games in the future, which is just as well since your review won't be relevant to anyone. At that point it's just a preview.

[–] ReversalHatchery@beehaw.org 4 points 5 days ago

it is today that nearly no reviews are worth anything. what even is that bullshit that they only rate from 7 to 10 because below 7 is somehow already the worst of worst

[–] Poopfeast420@discuss.tchncs.de 2 points 5 days ago

Reviewers don't get these games and then play them in complete isolation. They are in contact with the devs or publisher and might get told which problems are fixed at launch or something.

You kinda have to believe what you're told, and maybe adjust your score accordingly. Maybe if one dev burns you again and again, you might discard whatever they tell you, but I don't know who could fit the bill.