Psychoward
Banned
What about something like Evolve, where it was $60 for only a portion of the game's content at launch?
-
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.
Crash Bandicoot N Sane Trilogy - Review Thread
- Thread starter Kenzodielocke
- Start date
What about something like Evolve, where it was $60 for only a portion of the game's content at launch?
Renna Hazel
Member
While I agree that it shouldn't play a factor in reviews, it does. Price is mentioned in many indie reviews, also when the Switch launched most reviews slammed Bomberman and 1-2-Switch for being full priced games. That's just in recent memory. Price always seems to be factored in when it's a negative thing in the mind of the reviewer.
Also, anytime I see a review say something should have been a downloadable game, I assume they're just saying the price is too high and should be priced at the indie level.
OrbitalBeard
Member
I think if a game is actually missing content, sure, bring it up.
This is a good point. With service games becoming even more supported by publishers, content-to-value judgments at launch will be more important than ever. Not everyone has to agree about it but how much I'm getting for my dollar is crucial to me.
Oh, it definitely does, I'm not denying that.
But nevertheless, it doesn't bother me that much. My favorite reviewer right now is ACG, and clearly he incorporates some measure of price into the review with the scale used.
DOT DASH DOT
Member
As usual it's almost impossible to find out if a game supports HDR or not.......why the hell is it so difficult.
So does Crash?
CharminUltra
Member
Great reviews, but it's not like I wasn't going to buy it regardless. I want me some Crash (plus I want to encourage more Crash games.)
FonkyByNature
Member
I will for sure buy the game one day, i just have a huge backlog. Got Ratchet and Clank with the sale, so i'm gonna play that this weekend. But Crash is next !
OrbitalBeard
Member
The pricing model of many games directly affects how the games themselves are developed, so pricing kind of has to be brought up in those instances.
There are so many games where this isn't the case though and a reviewer's personal value judgement based solely on the game's cost is not helpful to me in the slightest. If you've just played the best five hour game ever created, but you ding it two points because it's $50, you've done absolutely nothing to help me understand the actual quality of the experience.
If you want to talk about a game's price, discuss it in a sidebar. Don't allow it to directly affect the score you give the title. Are we ok with games being viewed as disposable products do we want them to be treated as art?
Bronetta
Ask me about the moon landing or the temperature at which jet fuel burns. You may be surprised at what you learn.
Thats what the rest of the (hopefully a well-written) review is for. Having a little blurb or paragraph to comment on the price to value ratio is much appreciated.
Ori is a 12 hour game. Resident Evil 7 is also a 12 hour game.
How do I know which one gives me more bang for the buck? The price. Ones a $20 game, the other is $60. Price is very important to most people, especially ones who have to pay for it themselves.
Games come in all sorts of sizes and prices. This isnt like movies where each ticket costs the same at the theatre.
Would the Crash Trilogy have been good value at $60? Debateable. At $40 its definitely a good value.
At the end of the day these are consumer products being reviewed and price is one of the most important aspects consumers look to.
OrbitalBeard
Member
Why did you cut this part off?
If you want to discuss price, fine. But it has almost nothing to do with the quality of a game and it should almost never affect a game's score. Breath of the Wild or Bloodborne would not be better games if they launched at $40. Crash would not be a worse game at $60. Value is important to many people and I have no problem with it being addressed, but a game's MSRP should rarely, if ever, result in a higher or lower score.
swearing-circle
Member
So price is important. Im not saying every review needs to say whether it's worth the asking price. In many respects games usually do have the content.
Something like MGSV: GZ. Has very little content for the initial asking price. Reviews should be informing everyone and not just the hardcore so I think it's fair that people should be told how much they're really paying for.
Games don't usually get updated reviews after patch fixes and they are reviewed as they are on release. Hence why I think price is absolutely important to consider if necessary. Again, I'm not saying every review needs to consider price but if it's worth noting it absolutely should be.
EDIT: im also not talking specifically about scores. Im talking about the actual content of the review itself.
A few people have been shitting up Crash threads continuously about how the games were never popular/acclaimed/good. It's gotten so obnoxious that the OT for this game has a request in the OP to not make those shitposts.
While a Metacritic score certainly isn't a definitive determining factor of a game's quality, it's a pretty good rebuttal to that nonsense about nobody liking Crash but deluded fans who never owned a N64 or whatever.
Bronetta
Ask me about the moon landing or the temperature at which jet fuel burns. You may be surprised at what you learn.
I didn't. You edited it in afterwards.
OrbitalBeard
Member
Did I? I genuinely don't remember doing so (I mean, I definitely edited that post, but it was done so three minutes before your reply), but if so, apologies!
ShockingAlberto
Member
Reviews shouldn't always do something or always not do something.
Price is valid to talk about if the writer feels it's relevant. If they don't, and you disagree with its relevance, read a review that does.
Price is valid to talk about if the writer feels it's relevant. If they don't, and you disagree with its relevance, read a review that does.
I can understand this in theory, but I don't see how you can critique the amount of content without taking into account the asking price. You get what you pay for.
Rapscallion
Member
Excited for new comers to realize that Cortex Strikes Back is the GOAT Crash game.
Warped fans are in denial!
Warped fans are in denial!
original game enthusiasts don't exist
swearing-circle
Member
Yeah this makes sense.
SuperSonic1305
Member
Poor haters expecting this to review badly. Can't accept that they are still great games.
Napalm_Frank
Member
Crash is all killer no filler anyway (minus maybe a few gimmic levels). No grinding, no boring sidequests ect. The only thing slowing it down are the loading screens so I would suggest minimizing jumping between games.
... That is precisely the point.
The price is an objective, simple measure the customer observes.
Ori is a 12 hour game. RE7 is a 12 hour game. I see the price for both when choosing what to buy. What purpose whatsoever would it serve me to have a reviewer incorporate objective information I already have into the review score?
Really? Those scores are pretty good, about what I'd expect from a 20 year old platformer collection with upgraded visuals
Not sure what you expected from the untouched gameplay of one of the first 3d platforms... The fact that it still plays well is actually the surprising part to me.
Jawbreaker
Member
Really good scores. Vicarious Visions delivered exactly what they promised.
psychotron
Member
I saw someone mention Gsmestop selling this today....anyone else hear that? I'd love to get my preorder today.
Supposedly, GameStop is doing a "launch party" for Crash, and you can pick the game up at 9:00 EST. Probably best to call 'em up and ask about it anyway, though.
BossDarkseid
Member
Pretty good scores, and the negatives seem natural/to be expected.
Yet, with this collection it's kinda what you want. No one wants to play a Crash that doesn't feel like Crash, warts and all.
Yet, with this collection it's kinda what you want. No one wants to play a Crash that doesn't feel like Crash, warts and all.
Suburban Thug
Member
Have you read or watched any? Every one I have viewed has touched upon the technical achievements.
Not technically a review per se, but there's this: https://m.youtube.com/?noapp=1&pers...=tablet&client=mv-google#/watch?v=AcWRyawH6bw
phantasmic_glaive
Member
With this logic, then all $5 games should be awesome. Thinking like that, a reviewer should give a low priced game extra points cause it was $2 or $5...
I liked axiom verge better than Fallout 4, neither was worth their respective launch prices in the first place.
I bought FO4 when it was $20 and AV when it was 10..
Fallout gives me more bang for my buck, as it being a longer game, but I bought it at a 3rd of the price while I waited till axiom was half the price. I still like AV better.
You could even see it as I paid more for axiom verge because it was bought at only half the price versus a third, and being a shorter game.
Price should not have bearing on a review. It's either a good game or not. How's a reviewer supposed to gauge price fairly if most get the game free anyway?
Chezzymann
Member
If I've never played crash before would this still probably be enjoyable or would its dated heritage hold it back?
Gotdatmoney
Member
Better than Sonic Generations? Eh yeah as a whole it is. But mainly they arr solid platformers definitely worth a try.
Suburban Thug
Member
From what I have read you might find Crash 1 to be archaic but the other two hold up well.
Griffins22
Member
I'm fine with the difficulty of Crash 1 but that save system legitimately hurts the replay value of the game for me.
Karak
Member
Do you like linear platformers? Then you'll probably like Crash. There's nothing in the 2nd and 3rd games (outside of some questionable vehicle controls) that feels archaic
dream is over
Damn he really got in stellar shape for kingsman 1, moving around like prime Jet Li.