I dont even know what to say.
-
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.
PCGamesN.com published a Red Dead Redemption 2 PC review without EVER playing the game on PC.
- Thread starter Deleted member 44371
- Start date
I dont even know what to say.
"pcgamesn"
Yet the review doesnt contain a single word about the port.
"Not a single change".
I dunno. I'd expect a PC PUBLICATION to extensively cover all the graphical options, what they bring, what they cost and run a lot of benchmarks on multiple systems.
But hey, it's just me !
Yet the review doesnt contain a single word about the port.
"Not a single change".
I dunno. I'd expect a PC PUBLICATION to extensively cover all the graphical options, what they bring, what they cost and run a lot of benchmarks on multiple systems.
But hey, it's just me !
Imagine somebody reviewing Witcher 3 on Switch by saying "well we played it on PC and it's obviously great so"
even if its the same game, what if there are issues on PC? should arkham knight have the same review score on PC as on the PS4 versions despite it being a mess on the former?
Have you heard of Batman on PC? Still doesn't work till this day
OP
OP
I really doubt Rockstar will publish a broken port of one of their most anticipated games on PC.
That said, yes. They should've waited to test it out a bit.
they didn't give it a score and they say they're going to continue updating it and it's only the first part
i guess I don't understand why it exists but it's not like they hid it or anything
i guess I don't understand why it exists but it's not like they hid it or anything
On one hand, I get why this is weird. But also consider the labor that would go into rushing a replay of this game on PC just to be like "sick, it's the same thing but prettier." If it means they dont have to crunch 50 hours for a review of a year old game, I'd rather the person take their time reviewing the core of it on console before the PC one is available and them updating it with PC specific impressions, which I'm sure they'll do asap. Also, they were totally transparent about it so I don't see the issue at all
Port impressions are very important, I can't believe how an outlet dedicated to PC gaming would think otherwise.
I mean I wouldn't expect that they go through the whole game again on PC, but at least wait and talk about the PC performance.
You don't know that.
There can always be weird performance issues on the PC. You should at least wait to play the fucking game.
This. It exist because sites need traffic to stay profitable and relevant and this is the biggest release of the week.
The site clearly states what they were doing, they didn't post a review number and they've made it clear the areas that are different will get unique attention. I mean what more do you expect? The other major review sites won't be playing this game to 100% if they already did on consoles, they are going to do the same thing as this site and Probably just not tell you.
I don't like this. People already know about RDR2. At this point the PC review should focus on the quality of the port and the new features/options.
I think "it's basically the same game" is an excuse to publish the review early and get more clicks by beating everyone else to the punch. That's not the way you should review things. Learn from Arkham Knight, for crying out loud!
Two options here:
1. Label your review properly (RDR2 PS4 review or whatever).
2. Wait and do a proper review of the PC port focusing on, you know, the PC port.
My 2 cents. Now back to you ERA.
I think "it's basically the same game" is an excuse to publish the review early and get more clicks by beating everyone else to the punch. That's not the way you should review things. Learn from Arkham Knight, for crying out loud!
Two options here:
1. Label your review properly (RDR2 PS4 review or whatever).
2. Wait and do a proper review of the PC port focusing on, you know, the PC port.
My 2 cents. Now back to you ERA.
Last edited:
Agreed, but I doubted Rocksteady would publish whatever the hell Arkham Knight's PC port was, and here I am waiting for my PC Batmobile edition. 😞
The fact that the title says PC review in the article makes it disingenuous and literally there to bait people in. It doesn't matter if they state it later in the article (which is 4 paragraphs in). This is pretty scummy. Don't label it as a PC review then.
Yeah, but do they need this kind of traffic and relevancy? There are other ways (better I would argue) to drive traffic and be relevant orher than "yeah, that's the site that passes console reviews for PC".
Considering it's a great game and Rockstars past PC games run great on all hardware, what's the issue?
When I read a review of a PC port of a game I would expect to find some information about the PC port of the game. I mean, why publish a review at all if you're just going to assume it's fine based on previous products?
I'd love to say yes, but this isn't the first time an outlet has done this ;(
Exactly, it's the same game dude, therefore THE ONLY REASON TO EVEN BOTHER WITH A REVIEW ANYMORE ARE PC SPECIFICS SUCH AS PORT QUALITY
