Austrian guy is streaming, PS4 version? Just completed the install. Should be up any minute now.
https://www.twitch.tv/koba87m
The channel has been closed.
Austrian guy is streaming, PS4 version? Just completed the install. Should be up any minute now.
https://www.twitch.tv/koba87m
Generally the day of release. CD Keys isn't affiliated with publishers; it has to wait for the physical stock to arrive and scan or otherwise document the keys.
Yep, mine from ShopTo has
Lucky!
I went digital, so nothing early for me :-(
It's not a review, (title aside), it's a preview like all the other previews that came out of a press event.
So, what's the deal with Mafia III on xbox one? i haven't seen a single video, or impressions of the Xbox One version. Worrisome.
It's here
If that is their ploys why do i continue to get invited? It's never effected any of my reviews and in fact i still to this day get invited to a certain companies showing even though i have written multiple negative reviews. Why waste their time and money on me knowing it never sways me?Of course they will not tell you or even imply to pad reviews. That would be blatant. Why do you think they fly people like you out to fancy events and put you up in hotels when they could just as well send you a copy in the mail and call it a day? There is a vested interest in your review being as good as possible, and to think doing these things has no impact on your objective scoring of a game is absurd.
Publishers/game companies do this for a reason, and it's not just because they want to be nice to you gratuitously.
So, what's the deal with Mafia III on xbox one? i haven't seen a single video, or impressions of the Xbox One version. Worrisome.
I distinctly bitched about this very game, many times, both at the time the reviews came out and afterwards.The majority of reviewers get flown out to play and preview the game. You can take what they all say with a grain of salt but that also applies to reviewers who don't take those trips yet get the game for free to review.
Personally, im more interested in what the video is showing as opposed to the person talking about it. Open World Games isn't any different than all the rest. I also think that it has more to do with the game itself.
Look at MGSV. Reviewers were all in a review boot camp via Konami. Game gets 9-10's pretty much across the board, wasn't completed by the majority or the chicken hat was used to breeze through the game. Don't remember seeing anyone bitching about that simply because it was MGSV and it was Kojima so even from those who are waiting for reviews, being objective and critical doesn't exactly exist.
In summary, if it's a game you're hyped for, you'll be okay with what is said by all of these people if what's being said is positive. If it's negative, they get bashed. If it's a game that you're not hyped for then reverse what I just said in regards to positive and negative.
Why exactly do you think they're flying you out there then, if not to try to sway you and have some kind of psychological impact? Because they're your buddies or something?If that is their ploys why do i continue to get invited? It's never effected any of my reviews and in fact i still to this day get invited to a certain companies showing even though i have written multiple negative reviews. Why waste their time and money on me knowing it never sways me?
I watched an hour long gameplay video on YouTube and it was the Xbox One version. Don't have the link though sadly.
As for what I saw the game has great lighting and solid frames but the on-foot movement seemed janky (driving around looked perfectly fine) and the enemy AI was pretty bad.
Officiellement, on n'a pas reçu Mafia III. Officieusement, je peux vous dire que la version PS4 ressemble à un jeu début de gen PS3.
Officially, we haven't received Mafia III. Non-officially, I can tell you that the PS4 version looks like a early launch title of the PS3 gen.
Gotcha thanks, I am more concerned about the gameplay than the graphics (as long as it runs smoothly even if it's 720p).
There were some tweets on this thread some pages ago about a French dude saying the game ran poorly on PS4 so it worries me about the Xbox One version
In absolute fairness, isn't that a GameKult writer? They're notoriously harsh on games, they review things like an average of 13 points lower than most outlets.
Dictionary.com
I mean it's a preview video, literally nothing is stopping you from waiting for reviews if you're so apprehensive about any preview ever, (except for the games you're hyped for).Oh so it's just part of the inauthentic hype machine process of the video game industry. Got you.
That's so much better.
The impressions are the same as other impressions so it seems the game might end up being good?Fine preview. Opinion still stands. Preview is simply a review without a score attached. What they want is positive coverage.
Remember two years ago people were saying AC:Unity looks like a last gen game, no better than AC4, and my personal favorite bit of godawful hyperbole, like a mobile game.I didn't realize people already had rose colored glasses regarding last gen.
Look at MGSV. Reviewers were all in a review boot camp via Konami. Game gets 9-10's pretty much across the board, wasn't completed by the majority or the chicken hat was used to breeze through the game. Don't remember seeing anyone bitching about that simply because it was MGSV and it was Kojima so even from those who are waiting for reviews, being objective and critical doesn't exactly exist.
Even with games I'm "hyped" for, I don't rely on or trust any previews you goon.I mean it's a preview video, literally nothing is stopping you from waiting for reviews if you're so apprehensive about any preview ever, (except for the games you're hyped for).
If that is their ploys why do i continue to get invited? It's never effected any of my reviews and in fact i still to this day get invited to a certain companies showing even though i have written multiple negative reviews. Why waste their time and money on me knowing it never sways me?
I'm not gonna sit here and say that no one gets swayed in a certain direction but this fucking blanket statement of journalist are corrupt is absurd, stupid and maddening. I have been doing this for a decade and have never done anything to break my integrity when i get these fancy press kits i turn around and give them away i don't want that stuff my job is to go to an event, play the game, write down my impressions and report on it and when i get a game in the mail my job is to play it and review objectively and that's what i do. I do my job and i do it well and people saying they can't trust me because i had a free beer or a hotel room pisses me off.
In summary, if it's a game you're hyped for, you'll be okay with what is said by all of these people if what's being said is positive. If it's negative, they get bashed. If it's a game that you're not hyped for then reverse what I just said in regards to positive and negative.
The impressions are the same as other impressions so it seems the game might end up being good?
Ding ding ding ding ding.To be clear: I never said you were corrupt or being personally swayed. It's quite possible, likely, even, that you have strong ethics and are mindful not to let your opinion be consciously changed based on the niceties the publisher/developer are offering. It still doesn't mean subconsciously the experience won't bias your review. We're all susceptible to casual and daily biases, and this is no exception.
However, the reason publishers spend a ton of money on these things is at the hope that it will make their review scores are as good as possible. Otherwise they have 0 incentive to spend all the money they do on flying out journalists to these types of things. Also, of course they are not going to stop inviting you if your scores aren't good, because that would, again, be obvious and blatant. Instead they'll just cast a wide net and hope for as much of a payoff as possible from their efforts.
Again, none of this is meant to personally offend. It would just be naive to think game companies do this for journalists/reviewers just to be nice, and not because they think it maximizes their chances at a good review score. If they wanted to be nice, why not just pick random, non-influential fans of the game and fly them out?
French guy streaming Live now. Looks awesome! Love those Crocs
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1ODHuJZF6JY
The bolded is unwarranted. If you're so distrustful of previews in anyway shape or form then I don't know what incentive you have to follow gaming press at all.Even with games I'm "hyped" for, I don't rely on or trust any previews you goon.
A MAJOR flaw in your assumption is that you assume that the person who gets flown out to preview events is also the same person who handles the review of the final game, in the vast majority of instances, (in fact i'm struggling to think of one where this isn't the case), the reviewer is a completely different person than the person who wrote the preview. Another factor, a lot of the purpose behind these events is getting coverage of the game out there. Sorta the reason why it's referred to as an "event."To be clear: I never said you were corrupt or being personally swayed. It's quite possible, likely, even, that you have strong ethics and are mindful not to let your opinion be consciously changed based on the niceties the publisher/developer are offering. It still doesn't mean subconsciously the experience won't bias your review. We're all susceptible to casual and daily biases, and this is no exception.
However, the reason publishers spend a ton of money on these things is at the hope that it will make their review scores are as good as possible. Otherwise they have 0 incentive to spend all the money they do on flying out journalists to these types of things. Also, of course they are not going to stop inviting you if your scores aren't good, because that would, again, be obvious and blatant. Instead they'll just cast a wide net and hope for as much of a payoff as possible from their efforts.
Again, none of this is meant to personally offend. It would just be naive to think game companies do this for journalists/reviewers just to be nice, and not because they think it maximizes their chances at a good review score. If they wanted to be nice, why not just pick random, non-influential fans of the game and fly them out?
French guy streaming Live now. Looks awesome! Love those Crocs
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1ODHuJZF6JY
For the reason you outline below: previews are fairly often written by someone different than the final reviewer. They're part of the absurd hype-machine behind games and why you see ridiculous previews touting games like NMS and Evolve as the Second Coming of Christ, only to review with the potency of a fart in the wind. I can easily throw most previews in the garbage and then see what I think of the final reviewer's writeup.The bolded is unwarranted. If you're so distrustful of previews in anyway shape or form then I don't know what incentive you have to follow gaming press at all.
I'm thankfull there are some jaded and cynical people to counter balance the hype culture surrounding most AAA titles these days. You don't want every discussion to be a circle jerking.
You said it.
And people need to stop thinking that being skeptical is "being negative". It's being a conscious consumer. It's taking everything a publisher says with a grain of salt because you haven't got your hands on the game itself.
Remember No Man's Sky? Remember Alien Colonial Marines? Remember Spore?
There's nothing wrong with questioning what a publisher, developer or even reviewer says. It's healthy.
Lolwut?
Best gaming website to trash games, right...
I mean I can't even think of a game last gen with facial animation this good, straight up magic the way the faces realistically contort in this game, (eyes are slightly dead though outside of closeups). Best facial animation in an open world game since AC:Unity imho.Nothing about this game looks like a PS3 game. i really do think people forget what MOST PS360 games looked like. I just watched a refresher for Gears 3 to get ready for 4 and it still looks pretty good but it's rough compared to most modern titles (as it should, it's like 5 years old)
There are also many examples of games that had good previews and then released to great reviews as well, Evolve and NMS are outliers in this regard hence the reason why they're so notable. I doubt most people read as many previews as they can, (or should), as pretending that every preview for any triple A game ever has zero criticisms, (or too little based on some imaginary metric), is solely positive really tells me that you don't read enough previews and instead would rather lazily make blanket statements about the gaming press.For the reason you outline below: previews are fairly often written by someone different than the final reviewer. They're part of the absurd hype-machine behind games and why you see ridiculous previews touting games like NMS and Evolve as the Second Coming of Christ, only to review with the potency of a fart in the wind. I can easily throw most previews in the garbage and then see what I think of the final reviewer's writeup.
In my opinion and I'm talking in general here, not to you in particular, the problem is that some people really want to be negative at all costs these days and this is happening with many games ruining the discussions around these games.
I'm thankfull there are some jaded and cynical people to counter balance the hype culture surrounding most AAA titles these days. You don't want every discussion to be a circle jerking.
"That was really hard," admits Harlin. "I didn’t know for a fact that the game was cancelled until the day the company shut down. While we had a bad feeling the company was going to close, we didn’t have any advanced actual confirmed warning. In fact it was the opposite." In early 2013, office murmurs and hearsay prompted LucasArts employees to question their place in the studio. GDC was fast approaching, which would present ample opportunity to seek new employment, however Harlin et al were told not to worry. A month later, Harlin tells me, everybody was let go.
"That was a real crushing blow for a lot of reasons. 1313 was really shaping up to be something special," he says. "The team loved what we were doing and we were experimenting a lot. It’s funny because it’s becoming this sort of mythical game. We were making a game about being inside Coruscant where people hadn’t seen before. I was getting to do a lot of stuff with the music that I hadn’t had an opportunity to do before too—I was creating music for street performers who would play in back alleys, there were Star Wars dance clubs that you couldn’t even go into but I was having to think: what does an alien dance club sound like?"
As a war veteran, Lincoln's theme music has a flavour of Vietnam about it too, with authentic Vietnamese instruments used in certain set pieces. "When I first started on Mafia 3, I thought this was going to be amazing, to do something so radically different, and I love working on different stuff," explains Harlin. "The most transferable thing between it and Star Wars is that it needs to be a thematic score, which is what Star Wars does so well. Every character has a theme and you can tell what’s going on on-screen by listening to the music and the music will telegraph to you this interplay of character themes that helps tell the story.
"Hangar 13’s creative director, Hayden Blackman, wanted the exact same thing to be happening in Mafia 3—he wanted a thematic score where all of the characters were represented by themes. I took it a little further so every character is also represented by their own type of string instrument that’s probably one of those super nuanced composer things that no one is going to pick on. I massively over-think things like that."
Burke is a slightly unhinged Irishman who's tied to a 12-string guitar, for example, while Vito's melodic moniker is a mandolin—an obvious throwback to his Mafia 2 lineage. "This is what 2K does so well with character development and the writing and the interplay of these personalities," adds Harlin. "I think it would be a disservice to not try and do the same thing with the music for each character, and develop each character’s music as ritually as I could. I think it works well."
I made a new thread for that. Different response times for police AI depending on the neighborhood is some of the most relevant attention to detail i've ever seen in a game.
thanks for the link
EDIT:
Of course there is a racist already posting once I open the link. Thats YT
And I'm not sure that you read enough previews if you're unwilling to admit that they're part of the industry machine that is largely not beneficial to consumers. Sure, many games have great previews and end up great games. And many have bad previews and end up great. And many have bad previews and end up bad. The point was that there's no reason to treat them as definitive rulings on anything given A) how much games change in development and B) how much corporate wants to utilize their wining and dining to have some kind of psychological effect on journalists.There are also many examples of games that had good previews and then released to great reviews as well, Evolve and NMS are outliers in this regard hence the reason why they're so notable. I doubt most people read as many previews as they can, (or should), as pretending that every preview for any triple A game ever has zero criticisms, (or too little based on some imaginary metric), is solely positive really tells me that you don't read enough previews and instead would rather lazily make blanket statements about the gaming press.
How is finding out info about how a game works not beneficial to the consumer? How having tons of unscripted videos of a game released, (if you're so afraid of the big bad "hype machine" just mute the video and watch the footage), not beneficial for a consumer? Does every preview or video have to have the cynicism of a zero punctuation review for you to take it seriously or what? And that video was released almost a month ago, what he was showing was damn near the final build.And I'm not sure that you read enough previews if you're unwilling to admit that they're part of the industry machine that is largely not beneficial to consumers. Sure, many games have great previews and end up great games. And many have bad previews and end up great. And many have bad previews and end up bad. The point was that there's no reason to treat them as definitive rulings on anything given A) how much games change in development and B) how much corporate wants to utilize their wining and dining to have some kind of psychological effect on journalists.
But then again, I'm not surprised you're defending corporate activities even though we've clearly had other industry professionals admit this stuff.
I don't know. Maybe you can read some headlines and read some hyperbolic content to think about how previews negatively contribute to the overabundant hype culture that is a cancer on this industry? And maybe some basic psychology could help us figure out how all-expense paid trips to developer events might create skewed impressions of games?How is finding out info about how a game works not beneficial to the consumer? How having tons of unscripted videos of a game released, (if you're so afraid of the big bad "hype machine" just mute the video and watch the footage), not beneficial for a consumer? Does every preview or video have to have the cynicism of a zero punctuation review for you to take it seriously or what? And that video was released almost a month ago, what he was showing was damn near the final build.
But nah. Must be that I'm wrong. Previews are great. Keep on wining and dining those reviewers slick.Reviews only have an impact if they're 90+, and then the impact is huge.
We don't take steps to get good reviews, we take steps to make good games. Then we invite reviews to fancy promotional events to warm them up on the game before they play it on their own.
I think of our launch parties as warm-up comedians for the main act. Warm-up comedians are there to get you laughing and excited, so when the star performer walks onstage, you're primed and ready to enjoy the set. Our promo events are the same way. We bring out media to a fancy location, wine and dine them, show them the best parts of our game, and generally build anticipation for release. The theory is that, once they get the game and play it privately, they already have a positive association with the game, which may influence their final score.
Can we stop arguing about some YouTuber and review procedures and hear some impressions from people who played the game?
Fuck Lucasarts - what a shitty employer.
This is almost new thread worthy
Can we stop arguing about some YouTuber and review procedures and hear some impressions from people who played the game?