People want their purchase "confirmed" by the enthusiast press, for whatever reason. Not sure why when that same enthusiast press is deservedly shellacked for numerous reasons.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Gameplay as spoilers, restricted from reviews, isn't this a dangerous precedent?
- Thread starter KillerIsJed
- Start date
People want their purchase "confirmed" by the enthusiast press, for whatever reason. Not sure why when that same enthusiast press is deservedly shellacked for numerous reasons.
Neuromancer
Member
The developers felt they shared too much, too early with their second game.
I can understand, I knew so much about Saints Row 3 from their marketing that by the time it came out and I got to play it there weren't any surprises at all really.
I don't think it's a dangerous precident as I understand this case. They didn't want every power disclosed in reviews and I see no issue with trying to keep some elements of character abilities a secret to give the player a (hopefully) nice surprise.
It's not like this prevents reviewers saying whether powers (both disclosed or not) are good, effective or fun or lame.
TBH I'd prefer to go into more games with less public knowledge of every ability to be unlocked, etc. bandied about beforehand.
It's not like this prevents reviewers saying whether powers (both disclosed or not) are good, effective or fun or lame.
TBH I'd prefer to go into more games with less public knowledge of every ability to be unlocked, etc. bandied about beforehand.
JoeyJungle
Banned
Wasn't Fez's late-game gameplay considered spoilers? It's not really related to the story at all, but nobody wanted to talk about THE REVEAL until weeks after the game was out, because everybody knew that was a really amazing, unexpected moment.
So I can see it being considered spoilers in some circumstances. The first time I played Metroid, for example, I was always really excited to see what the next weapon/ability I would get was, and I would've been really pissed if I was reading Nintendo Power at the time and they revealed every single ability in the game to me.
I definitely think that there's an argument to be made here about gameplay being spoilers.
So I can see it being considered spoilers in some circumstances. The first time I played Metroid, for example, I was always really excited to see what the next weapon/ability I would get was, and I would've been really pissed if I was reading Nintendo Power at the time and they revealed every single ability in the game to me.
I definitely think that there's an argument to be made here about gameplay being spoilers.
Hoho for breakfast
Member
Personally I don't mind it because I don't like to know a lot about something going into it. I know it's an Infamous game and it's pretty and that's really all I care to know before playing it.
If there's a specific power that unlocks 3/4 through the game then I'd like to get 3/4 through the game and then discover it. I'd much rather be surprised than told what happens/what I get in some random review.
Edit: I could see the flip side though. If there's some stupid mechanic that comes into play and they don't let reviewers talk about it, what then? The reviewers may be able to say there's a game mechanic that really sucks, but what is it and what does that mean? I'd sure like to be able to know something like that before buying and then judge for myself if I agree or disagree with the reviewer.
Shrug, I don't think it'll be a big issue anyway.
If there's a specific power that unlocks 3/4 through the game then I'd like to get 3/4 through the game and then discover it. I'd much rather be surprised than told what happens/what I get in some random review.
Edit: I could see the flip side though. If there's some stupid mechanic that comes into play and they don't let reviewers talk about it, what then? The reviewers may be able to say there's a game mechanic that really sucks, but what is it and what does that mean? I'd sure like to be able to know something like that before buying and then judge for myself if I agree or disagree with the reviewer.
Shrug, I don't think it'll be a big issue anyway.
old
Member
It really comes down to are they hiding something to simply hide it for fear of lower reviews, or hiding it to protect the player's surprise. I don't want spoilers, but I do want to know what I'm getting into. At $60 I demand more information in a review to make a more informed purchasing decision than I would a review for a $10 movie ticket. I don't throw $60 around carelessly. Game prices price them out of the "I'll take a chance and see if I like it" range.
I'd hate to buy MGS 2 and the reviewer never mention that you only play Snake for the first 30 minutes. That could affect my purchasing decision.
I'd hate to buy MGS 2 and the reviewer never mention that you only play Snake for the first 30 minutes. That could affect my purchasing decision.
Because I like to know more about it before I spend money on it, but showing spoiler content of late gameplay would ruin enjoyment not just from me but anyone who any kind of interest in the game.
I remember Gametrailers showed the last area in Uncharted 2 in their review and completely ruined the discovery of that moment for me.
These restrictions are a good thing in my opinion.
What if ya got the electric powers from some other source? People could think its from Cole and go wild while in reality you get them from Elec Man!
That don't make much sense but you're right all the same cause thats how things seem to work!
But what about bad parts late in good games? *coughbayonettavehiclelevelscough*
EmptySpace
Banned
gametrailers spoil every game in their reviews.
I appreciate the gesture - to try and preserve the experience for gamers - but I am uneasy about publishers/developers putting conditions on their review copies that restrict what content they can talk about.
I'd prefer a polite request and leave it up to individual publications to decide if they want to honour it or not or perhaps find a way to deal with it (like specific spoiler sections in their review).
I'd prefer a polite request and leave it up to individual publications to decide if they want to honour it or not or perhaps find a way to deal with it (like specific spoiler sections in their review).
Your first mistake was going to Gametrailers and not expecting them to spoil areas in the game in a video review. Seems like the problem goes both ways.
plasmawave
Banned
How many reviews go out of their ways to mention all the powers in any games?
Should reviewers spoil the ending for games because some people might not like it?
Should reviewers spoil the ending for games because some people might not like it?
If it's a good game it shouldn't matter. Just deal with the flaws.
PeakPointMatrix
Member
Gameplay is still a form of content I am experiencing. Therefore, I wouldn't want it all spoiled. Imagine if a review mentioned the ability to control
in MGS4.
Rex in the Ray vs Rex battle
Chobel
Member
So it wasn't a requirement? Then why did Sessler say "Sony and Sucker Punch required..."?
Apparently, it was a polite request.
Its stupid to me, I dont know what all this obsession with spoilers is. I can understand spoilers in the case of where something hinges on a plot point like the ending of The Sixth Sense.
In the case of Infamous it sounds to me like a case of creating hype by keeping irrelevant insignificant information secret. "We've gotta keep these powers secret because there's not much else going on." I dont know whether that's the case but that's they way it seems to me.
Hiding gameplay elements because they will somehow spoil the game is ridiculous, the game must be really bad if that's the case. If you dont want to know what some power is or what some power looks like then dont read any reviews or watch anything about it. How can knowing the name of some powers spoil the game? I dont understand that at all.
I want to know as much as possible before I buy a game, gameplay is the most important part I want to know about.
I'm not saying there might not be cases where spoilers of gameplay should be kept secret like where you've got to crawl down some corridor or something. In this case it just smells of some company manipulating the message to gain something from it.
In the case of Infamous it sounds to me like a case of creating hype by keeping irrelevant insignificant information secret. "We've gotta keep these powers secret because there's not much else going on." I dont know whether that's the case but that's they way it seems to me.
Hiding gameplay elements because they will somehow spoil the game is ridiculous, the game must be really bad if that's the case. If you dont want to know what some power is or what some power looks like then dont read any reviews or watch anything about it. How can knowing the name of some powers spoil the game? I dont understand that at all.
I want to know as much as possible before I buy a game, gameplay is the most important part I want to know about.
I'm not saying there might not be cases where spoilers of gameplay should be kept secret like where you've got to crawl down some corridor or something. In this case it just smells of some company manipulating the message to gain something from it.
Acquiescence
Member
Reviews have been so partial to spoiling moments in games that I actively avoid reading them now, at least until I've completed the game. I don't see it as a dangerous precedent at all, and I appreciate the fact that Sucker Punch have kept so much of Second Son under wraps, even as we're on the cusp of its release. Makes the prospect of playing it all the more exciting.
I think it's great that even though Infamous has released I still only know about 2 of the 4 powers. I feel like Sony did the right thing to may surprise me once I get to play the game. You can still talk about whether or not these powers are good and offer a lot of variety and so on. I don't really see a problem for reviews here.
Gameplay bits can be very much a spoiler, of course.
Now I only need to be able to buy a fricking PS4 here in Germany and try to keep spoilerfree until then, lol.
Gameplay bits can be very much a spoiler, of course.
Now I only need to be able to buy a fricking PS4 here in Germany and try to keep spoilerfree until then, lol.
MiamiWesker
Member
Good, I don't want the late game gameplay spoiled. There is absolutely no reason at all to go into detail of a boss battle unless it's some insane circumstance. I do not want to hear how you beat a boss, you can simply tell us if it was fun of not. Same goes with late game powers or secrets. How hard is it to say the "later powers add much depth to the game" or "the later powers doesn't add much".
In a Zelda review I don't want to hear what items I will be getting late in the game. I don't need a description of every dungeon.
This is a non issue
In a Zelda review I don't want to hear what items I will be getting late in the game. I don't need a description of every dungeon.
This is a non issue
Neuromancer
Member
Because knowing everything about a game beforehand takes away the feeling of discovery and surprise. Personally I value those feelings.
Stare-Bear
Banned
Because Sessler is a dramaqueen. It's just to imply that maybe somethings up with the game. A ton of games come with a request not to show certain parts of the game.
Bloodworth
Member
This isn't a new thing in any sense. inFamous was just stricter than most in what they considered spoilers. Sure it pushed me to write my opinions without talking about those things, and there are a few shots I would like to have shown, but it didn't adversely effect my ability to illustrate my thoughts on the game.
If the restrictions did prevent us from bringing up important criticisms, we would have simply waited to post the review on release day.
In the end, it took some extra work, but I had the privilege of experiencing the game without knowing those things, and I'm glad people can watch my review and have a similar sense of surprise when they play the game.
(And I wrote the GameTrailers review if anyone's wondering.)
If the restrictions did prevent us from bringing up important criticisms, we would have simply waited to post the review on release day.
In the end, it took some extra work, but I had the privilege of experiencing the game without knowing those things, and I'm glad people can watch my review and have a similar sense of surprise when they play the game.
(And I wrote the GameTrailers review if anyone's wondering.)
Because it's fucking Adam Sessler and people from the internet... Exaggerate everything, make everything dramatic as possible, make as big of a deal of something so you can get the advertisement hits.
If the gameplay mechanic is meant to be a surprise then I think it's fine. Honestly that MGS4 example there is more damning, it's not about something that could be a surprise but unpleasant details they don't want people talking about, but even then you're typically free to say whatever you want once the game's actually out, so they could wait until then.
Knowing(reading) the name of a power isnt knowing everything about that power. You can still be surprised by those things.
In this case I dont like the subtle coercion. I could understand if there is some significance to the way these powers are doled out and what they are, is there?
But still it should be left up to the individual reviewer, and whether they feel it is a spoiler(and ruins the game in some manner) they may want to make a specific comment about something and cannot do so now.
It's up to them to drum up excitement and sell the game.
I doubt holding back on the cooler things in the game is going to do them any favors in that regard.
At most I will watch two minutes of footage for any game I'm really anticipating. I like to go in fresh for whatever medium.
I doubt holding back on the cooler things in the game is going to do them any favors in that regard.
At most I will watch two minutes of footage for any game I'm really anticipating. I like to go in fresh for whatever medium.
MHWilliams
Member
It was a request. Video capture had the hard restrictions.
block tower
Member
im going to say most of the beanie wearing gaf members will say it's not an issue. well, it is an issue. the game should be open to criticism at all points of the game. each power should be available for critique as well as plot points and other aspects of the game. some of these developers and publishers are so far up the ass of their own game they forget it's still open to a proper review. I'll wait for the Classic Game Room or Lord Karnage review of Infamous SS, those reviewers delve fairly deep into what makes the game enjoyable as well as the flaws that ruin some of the experience.
Mushroomer25
Member
The thing is, I have zero doubt that if the latter parts of the game were sub-par, critics would make that apparent without entering "spoiler" territory. You can say "the second-to-last power gained isn't very enjoyable to control, and is relied upon too frequently in mission design" - that informs the consumer that the game has problems, and stays within Sony's request. And if that power is a radical shift that is meant to surprise the player, it's in everyone's interest to stay hush.
This is absolutely a YMMV thing, but I do like to be surprised by the ways gameplay evolves over time; I do appreciate when things like that are only described in veiled terms.
Of course, there's also issues where gameplay is inherently tied to the story. Absolutely significant spoilers for Discworld Noir coming up.
It's a standard graphical adventure. You're a PI in Ankh-Morpork (Voiced by Rob Brydon, fact fans!) investigating a mysterious crime which apparently has links to the undead families around the city. There's a femme fatale, because there has to be a femme fatale, who's a werewolf, and early on she steals a kiss from you. And at the end of act one... you get murdered.
And then act two starts. and you come back to life. That kiss wasn't normal; you're now a werewolf yourself. And you can enter a separate investigation mode where you can see smells and use that to proceed through the storyline; introducing a new gameplay element that is very tightly tied to the story.
Discovering that element out of the blue was absolutely glorious, and that moment could have been spoiled by a tactless review - even though at core it's a gameplay thing.
And then act two starts. and you come back to life. That kiss wasn't normal; you're now a werewolf yourself. And you can enter a separate investigation mode where you can see smells and use that to proceed through the storyline; introducing a new gameplay element that is very tightly tied to the story.
Discovering that element out of the blue was absolutely glorious, and that moment could have been spoiled by a tactless review - even though at core it's a gameplay thing.
I'd say that this isn't a claim that the game 'is not open to criticism', just a statement that there are elements to it that offer a clear benefit if you go in blind. You don't get to experience something for the first time twice.
polyh3dron
Banned
Movie studios do this too.
It doesn't ruin the game. It does take away the joy of discovery which is what this is about. I can't believe some reviewers are really getting their shit in a twist because they can't spoil things like this. If it significantly impacts gameplay in such a way that you have to explicitly talk about it - fine go ahead. However I can not imagine they need to spoil the exact powers to discuss whether or not they were under/overwhelming.
Hades Hotgun
Banned
This is my feeling as well. Hell, personally, short of a "who done it" kind of story I don't care at all about spoilers.
My enjoyment comes from the quality of the experience, which is always gonna be there, while avoiding spoilers lets you be surprised exactly once.
. . .which is better than "no surprise".
Chobel
Member
Thanks for the clarification.
Freshmaker
I am Korean.
Yeah, stuff like upgrading your smoke to flames, increasing your damage resistance, or being able to fly in some limited fashion will be total surprises to all.