• Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
  • We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.

Predict the score.

  • 100

    Votes: 37 2.0%
  • 95-99

    Votes: 141 7.5%
  • 90-94

    Votes: 727 38.4%
  • 85-89

    Votes: 767 40.6%
  • 80-84

    Votes: 175 9.3%
  • 75-79

    Votes: 27 1.4%
  • <74

    Votes: 17 0.9%

  • Total voters
    1,891
  • Poll closed .

Pat_DC

Member
Oct 27, 2017
1,637
Yeah that makes sense. Will it get patched day one? Hopefully. Considering the state of the world right now I'd like to give every publisher the benefit of the doubt with something like this. So everytime I see somebody come out of the spoiler thread and one of their main complaints is prior textures at times I can't help but get frustrated. You got a game before it's official release and before it has a chance to be patched during a pandemic that is forcing most people to work from home.
Fair point but should reviews take the current situation into account in their scores? Should they not mention any of these issues?
Pretty sure they will be playing the same version the rest of us are currently playing with no other patches.

Though I could be wrong, happy to hear from anyone who knows better regarding how it works for review copies.
 

Boy

Member
Apr 24, 2018
4,569
Based from the quality of the demo, i'll say a 90+ if it keeps up that quality all throughout the game.
 

Shadow_FFVI

One Winged Slayer
Member
Oct 30, 2017
545
I'm expecting we'll see some reviewers get very nostalgic and blame the game for "not being a full game" (even though it is a fully fleshed out experience), so I'm guessing Final Fantasy VII Remake will land somewhere in the 90-93 range.

If I had to be specific, I'll guess 93.
That seems high to me. I think that the very reason you mentioned of the game being just a Part 1 will make the game fall bellow the 90 mark.
 

Quinton

Specialist at TheGamer / Reviewer at RPG Site
Verified
Oct 25, 2017
17,291
Midgar, With Love
I really thought Era was a community where ignorant foolishness like this wasn't welcomed

Rest assured, it isn't. I'm sorry that you encounter so much of it and I promise I'll do my best to keep things moving in the right direction. That said, this thread will likely be a nightmare one way or the other, and the mod team will probably struggle to keep up with the number of reports. Sorry in advance for that, too -- but I'll be around as much as possible tomorrow to keep tabs on things.
 

jaymzi

Member
Jul 22, 2019
6,547
Any cryptic tweets from reviewers?

I remember in recent years, the big AAA games that got super high reviews all had reviewers dancing around the embargo with tweets like "I can't wait to talk about this game".
 

The Unsent

Member
Oct 25, 2017
19,439
Any cryptic tweets from reviewers?

I remember in recent years, the big AAA games that got super high reviews all had reviewers dancing around the embargo with tweets like "I can't wait to talk about this game".
"Not a game for everyone" Lol, that one would sting, it's usually bad news.
 

soul

Member
Oct 27, 2017
599
Well, this time with Coronavirus, hopefully reviewers will get time to fully play the game instead of reviewing it based on few hours (at best) like they do with some. I guess it'll land anywhere between 85-90 if it's consistent with the demo quality. Reviewers will definitely give it a hard time due to not being the 'full experience'.
 

KernelC

alt account
Banned
Aug 28, 2019
3,561
#Team90, fully expecting a lot of "but it feels disconcerting, knowing that this is only part one of an unknown amount of parts" but I think talent will prevail.
 

McScroggz

The Fallen
Jan 11, 2018
5,973
Fair point but should reviews take the current situation into account in their scores? Should they not mention any of these issues?
Pretty sure they will be playing the same version the rest of us are currently playing with no other patches.

Though I could be wrong, happy to hear from anyone who knows better regarding how it works for review copies.

I'm not suggesting reviewers should ignore it. Now, if Square Enix is telling them there will be a patch that fixes the problems I would think they should factor that in as well, but I don't know if that is happening. What I'm specifically referring to are the random people who got the game early and complain about textures missing. That is something that is most likely a bug/glitch, and it's reasonable to assume Square Enix is going to try and fix it (and maybe they already have a patch, again I don't know). Those people need to have perspective, especially considering they got the game early and there is a pandemic that is affecting everything.

And for any poster who extrapolates from there that Square Enix was lazy is being a lot of things I ought not say. I'll leave it at extremely unreasonable as the nicest I can say.
 

Hugare

Banned
Aug 31, 2018
1,853
I am so glad that I have never finished the original, so I wont mind any differences

Loved the demo, I'm expecting 90+ MC
 

Masagiwa

Member
Jan 27, 2018
9,902
After finishing the game I can say it's in the 80's
Ending will be hit or miss for people
 

samred

Amico fun conversationalist
Member
Nov 4, 2017
2,586
Seattle, WA
Any cryptic tweets from reviewers?

I remember in recent years, the big AAA games that got super high reviews all had reviewers dancing around the embargo with tweets like "I can't wait to talk about this game".

Anyone who publicly dances around embargoes like that gets noticed and sometimes doesn't get advance code. I keep my yap shut ahead of embargoes no matter how I feel about a game, unless I get permission to say that my review is going live at a certain time—even then, I don't hint to an opinion.

Speaking of, see y'all in 4 hours, 20 minutes!
 

The Unsent

Member
Oct 25, 2017
19,439
Well, this time with Coronavirus, hopefully reviewers will get time to fully play the game instead of reviewing it based on few hours (at best) like they do with some. I guess it'll land anywhere between 85-90 if it's consistent with the demo quality. Reviewers will definitely give it a hard time due to not being the 'full experience'.
I feel this might end up being damage control, I think most of the reviewers have accepted it's just part 1. I think the question is how effective can they adapt the first act into 1 game. If reviewers say the ending is unsatisfying or whatever, it could be for a couple of reasons.
 

Yuntu

Prophet of Regret
Member
Nov 7, 2019
10,696
Germany
Fair point but should reviews take the current situation into account in their scores? Should they not mention any of these issues?
Pretty sure they will be playing the same version the rest of us are currently playing with no other patches.

Though I could be wrong, happy to hear from anyone who knows better regarding how it works for review copies.

Reviewers usually get a headnotice about what a potential day 1 patch fixes and thats how I often see it written/spoken out in reviews. Something like "this issue exist but we know the day 1 patch is supposed to adress this" for example.
 

Spark

Member
Dec 6, 2017
2,540
Low 80s is my bet.

Any cryptic tweets from reviewers?

I remember in recent years, the big AAA games that got super high reviews all had reviewers dancing around the embargo with tweets like "I can't wait to talk about this game".
Wouldn't be worthwhile considering hundreds of thousands of people are already playing the game right bow. And giving their opinions.
 

Adventureracing

The Fallen
Nov 7, 2017
8,037
I'm not suggesting reviewers should ignore it. Now, if Square Enix is telling them there will be a patch that fixes the problems I would think they should factor that in as well, but I don't know if that is happening.

In what world should reviewers factor in a hypothetical patch into their review score?

Well, this time with Coronavirus, hopefully reviewers will get time to fully play the game instead of reviewing it based on few hours (at best) like they do with some.

I'm torn on this because in general i feel it's hard to review a product without finishing it. At the same time games can be really long and i'm not convinced you need to finish them to have an opinion. If you're hating the experience after a few hours how long should you give something before just deciding it's not for you.

Also i'm wondering how the time to pay ratio factors in here. How much does your average reviewer actually get paid to review a game? If you're having to spend 10, 20, 30+ hours just playing the game before you can even get to the review i would imagine that would be a difficult way to make any money.
 

Listai

50¢
Member
Oct 27, 2017
5,669
Is this because of gameplay or something else? The demo got me in hook-line-and-sinker on the combat. Does it not hold up?

Take my impressions with a grain of salt, I'm only 10 hours in, but for me it's the gameplay. The battle system works well in a one-on-one situation but falls apart in other places.

(from another thread on the subject)

[T]he issue is that you can only lock on target during tactical mode when issuing orders which means if you want one character to use an ability on a particular part of the enemy when you switch back to another character you will still be locked on to that enemy/part which makes fights light the Airbuster boss an exercise in frustration where you're constantly locking on, switching, locking off, also you switch targets with your camera control. So instead of a nice independent camera that you can rotate around the enemy you're locked on to (while cycling between enemies with the d-pad) you lose all camera control so you can stay targetting an enemy. Inexplicably up and down on the dpad are also used to cycle through characters along with left and right. This is just poor system design.

What makes it even worse is that you can't issue auto attack in tactical mode - for instance I want Barret to auto attack a flying enemy so I can keep an eye on his ATB and issue abilities as it fills. Nope can't do that, that would make too much sense.
 

Dankir

Banned
Oct 26, 2017
2,513
Where can I find out how long Episode 1 is and where it ends in the overall story?
 

Pat_DC

Member
Oct 27, 2017
1,637
I'm not suggesting reviewers should ignore it. Now, if Square Enix is telling them there will be a patch that fixes the problems I would think they should factor that in as well, but I don't know if that is happening. What I'm specifically referring to are the random people who got the game early and complain about textures missing. That is something that is most likely a bug/glitch, and it's reasonable to assume Square Enix is going to try and fix it (and maybe they already have a patch, again I don't know). Those people need to have perspective, especially considering they got the game early and there is a pandemic that is affecting everything.

And for any poster who extrapolates from there that Square Enix was lazy is being a lot of things I ought not say. I'll leave it at extremely unreasonable as the nicest I can say.
Fair points. It is something I noticed but not something I'd lose my mind over or even the reason I am not completely in love with the game.
It also is definitely not ok to call devs lazy, so I am with you on that :)


Reviewers usually get a headnotice about what a potential day 1 patch fixes and thats how I often see it written/spoken out in reviews. Something like "this issue exist but we know the day 1 patch is supposed to adress this" for example.
Ok cool, makes sense and is something I can remember being mentioned in past reviews.
 

gully state

Member
Oct 27, 2017
1,990
Question for those that played it, if I thought FFXV showcased what potential Square was capable of but was an incredibly disappointing game (completely disagreed with the reviews as the game wasn't dinged enough for how chopped up it was at the end), would it be more of the same for FFVII Remake?
 

Hasney

One Winged Slayer
The Fallen
Oct 25, 2017
18,638
Voted high 90's after playing 20 hours, but I know there will be a couple of outliers to rest it down. I will be a amazed if it goes lower.

Think I must be too engrossed as I haven't even noticed these texture issues.

Take my impressions with a grain of salt, I'm only 10 hours in, but for me it's the gameplay. The battle system works well in a one-on-one situation but falls apart in other places.

(from another thread on the subject)

Agree that the camera should be independently controlled, but not the rest. The Airbuster fight was great and easy to manage, the beauty of the tactical mode.

The issue I have is only with particular enemy types. It's hard to read some enemies who switch between physical and magic immunity without just hitting them with either and with all the numbers, it's sometimes hard to see the immune word. It's only an enemy in one specific area though.
 
Last edited:

KernelC

alt account
Banned
Aug 28, 2019
3,561
Question for those that played it, if I thought FFXV showcased what potential Square was capable of but was an incredibly disappointing game (completely disagreed with the reviews as the game wasn't dinged enough for how chopped up it was at the end), would it be more of the same for FFVII Remake?
FF XV is the definition of wasted potential
 
Oct 25, 2017
7,753
Question for those that played it, if I thought FFXV showcased what potential Square was capable of but was an incredibly disappointing game (completely disagreed with the reviews as the game wasn't dinged enough for how chopped up it was at the end), would it be more of the same for FFVII Remake?

XV well deserved the scores it got.

But VII Remake should aim for higher. XV was originally dragged down because the team had to fix the absolute mess that Nomura left in that project, and they also had to develop the Engine alongside the game. Square's management didn't give the final team enough time to work (And yet the game was good enough to score in the 80's).

VII Remake was created used a proven Engine, and it was given a proper development cycle, and it also had the blueprints of the original game to work with. The team was not working based on a bunch of cutscenes and designs made by Nomura which didn't fit together, like Versus XIII/XV did. This project was given full priority, a big enough time, a great Engine and enough years.

VII Remake should rightfully be a more polished product than what XV was at launch. There is no excuse this time.
 

stryke

Member
Oct 28, 2017
2,347
Having played the game, I can see it scoring well in the 80s
Critical points I anticipate are likely to stem from level design, possibly pacing (some may find it particularly grating compared to the original) and maybe the "incompleteness" nature of it.
 

Hasney

One Winged Slayer
The Fallen
Oct 25, 2017
18,638
Critical points I anticipate are likely to stem from level design

It was strange, I've been playing XIII up until I got FF7 and about 15 hours in I was just bitching about endless corridors and being bored. After 10 hours of FF7, I realised it was the same, but with much nicer environments and some characters that I love hearing talk with each other rather than actively annoy me. It goes a long way.
 

Knightsoftheround

Alt Account
Banned
Mar 7, 2020
376
I'm 10 hours in and the only way this game gets a 90+ is nostalgia.

I really hate it whne people say shit like this. Just because your not fond of it doesn't mean the only way it can get 90 plus either is through nostalgia. Your taste doesn't equal everything.

For the record I'm 15 hours in and think it will get high 80s. It wouldn't suprise me if it got 90 though
 

leng jai

Member
Nov 2, 2017
15,119
If a publisher says there will be a patch Day 1, especially for something that isn't game breaking, responsible journalists should absolutely factor that in.

Didn't that happen with Ori 2 and it turned out the patch didn't fix much and even to this day I still in the same state? I'm pretty sure the reviewer went back to increased their score.
 

Adventureracing

The Fallen
Nov 7, 2017
8,037
If a publisher says there will be a patch Day 1, especially for something that isn't game breaking, responsible journalists should absolutely factor that in.

They should review the game based on what they actually played. What if the patch doesn't actually fix the problem? What if they can't actually get it out on day 1? What if it breaks the game in some other way? You can't expect them to adjust their score based on something that wasn't actually out when they played it.