TTK12G3 on 28/6/2009 at 15:23
I don't remember reading one professional game review which even made a mention of DRM. Reviewers typically focus on gameplay, storyline, playability, music, sound, voice acting and graphics. Gamespot seems to have taken to giving little awards for tidbits such as really cool gimmicks or some other aspect of the gameplay. I think that this is a positive step forward as it highlights what exactly makes game A different from game B, C, and D. I don't see this as superfluous because "it's a great RTS with classic elements" does not really tell me all that much anymore.
Modding and DLC are two elements that have been rising in importance. While I think that DLC can allow the developers to try something different with a successful title without spitting out a bastardized sequel, modding is where the true potential lies. Modders will always be limited by time constraints relating to work, school, family and life, the occasional hit which makes its way out of a (mostly) dedicated modding community is worth mentioning. I've seen DLC mentioned in updates to reviews, but I don't remember ever hearing much about a game's modding potential other than "it has an editor".
The aspect of games which seems to become anathema is DRM. While Steam flaunts its existence quite openly, SecuROM and SafeDisc are hidden secrets while StarForce is seen as the destroyer of everything. Their presence is not mentioned on the packaging of a game that has them other than a yellow tag which vaguely indicates some sort of copy protection software which may or may not be compatible with your disk drives. Steam is guilty of this too, as even the Orange Box has only a tag on top of the box which mentions some sort of "provisions" that you should review on a website prior to opening the box. Only in-game advertising seems to be loathed more than DRM. However, I've yet to ever see it mentioned on a professional review.
My question is this: Should any or all that I have mentioned be mentioned in reviews as often as "core" aspects of any give PC game?
ZylonBane on 28/6/2009 at 16:12
What the hell, man? It looks like you took three different topics and stuck them all in a blender.
gunsmoke on 28/6/2009 at 16:14
Honestly, GameSpot has been careful to mention any in-game advertising. Don't know about any other sites.
Paz on 28/6/2009 at 16:30
I've seen reviews mention DRM. Don't ask me to quote precisely which ones, but I have seen it.
I think modding etc is an important topic to cover, but most games press will do it in the form of features (either a HOT MODS THIS MONTH thing, or a longer piece on a specific game.) It can be difficult to talk accurately about modding potential in a review, because the majority of the time you're playing a release copy before anybody else so you'd be trying to guess how it might take off.
This is pretty dicey ground, because you might be enthusing about things that haven't happened yet. It's good to mention the potential - especially if it's a well loved series or something, where you can be pretty sure all the mod-squad will be hopping over to the new title - but giving extra score for something like that is risky.
Sort of a similar problem with reviewing MMOs - they're so reliant on community experience and change in content so often, that it's hard for a stand-alone review to cover them accurately. I think a lot of publications now do MMO in 'stages' with a kind of first look, followed by 'how's the community doing now then?' later on.
So, uh, to answer.
I think DRM should be mentioned if the reviewer feels it's particularly heinous. The main issue here might be finding out about it - the developer/publishers aren't gonna publicise it, and in any case the writer may have received DRM-free review code. In which case they're relying on research by other people, which may not even come to light until after the review goes to press.
Mods et al are best mentioned in features after the fact, but are certainly worth dropping into reviews in an informed way.
EvaUnit02 on 28/6/2009 at 17:18
With consoles becoming the predominant platform, we'll see more ports, more premium DLC (including map packs), less free content (incld. map packs) and less SDK's released for games.
Most publishers prefer not to have their premium DLC competing with user-generated content. So you could consider modding a dying concept as far as the big Western publishers are concerned, namely EA and Ubisoft.
To combat piracy on PC, we'll more subscription-based games.
But more significantly we'll see more and more games that resemble Korean MMO's. The game clients maybe free, but the companies make their cash via storefronts selling in-game items. The latter is the direction that is going in for the platform. Hence Battlefield Heroes and the upcoming FIFA Online, Tiger Woods Online and Need For Speed Online.
(
http://arstechnica.com/gaming/news/2009/06/eas-new-motto-please-pirate-our-games-er-storefronts.ars) Read this article for more information.
mothra on 29/6/2009 at 14:04
but don't they fail miserably ?
(apart from asia/special genre)
I can't think of a single person I know that would play or rather "BUY" something in BattlefieldHeroes.................
everybody gets map packs for popular MP games.....but how many did
buy the ridiculous FarCry2 - weapon bonus pack (or whatever it was called)....
Matthew on 29/6/2009 at 14:12
I'd buy some DLC for LOTRO if they gave me the One Ring.
