Why is RDR2's Online not factored into its reviews?

Aftermath · Oct 26, 2018

It's a Single Player game first and foremost, online is just a bonus kind of (even though eventually it will become a big thing like GTAVO did but remember previous R* Games online didn't have the same impact)

unlike say COD where the main focus has been Multiplayer, and SinglePlayer was secondary

Braaier · Oct 26, 2018

I just learned the online game has not been released yet. Wow. Rockstar was definitely under the gun to meet the release date. Hopefully they take their time with the online piece and give their folks some time to relax!

Is there a release date for the online game?

bitSS · Oct 26, 2018

spad3 said:
"it's not out yet, duh" cmon guys. Reviewers should have to hold their reviews/edit their reviews for the online portion of the game OR should be given access to by R* to properly review. Because if that's the case, R* is kinda cheating the review system.

No reviewer would hold their review in wait for the online component. But I get what you mean. The media are already kind of moving to a more recurrent form of reviewing games, with things like "X Game - 1 year later review" already existing. They have to adapt since games nowadays are evolving products and live services which are very different months/years later after release, and the original review could even be misleading.

Absolutely expect a ton of articles and reviews on the online alone, since it's gonna be huge!

Messofanego · Oct 26, 2018

Jumped the gun there a bit spad3 lol

hydruxo · Oct 26, 2018

I bet a lot of outlets will just review it as its own thing, sort of like how IGN reviewed Black Ops 4 / Zombies / Blackout individually.

Pancho · Oct 26, 2018

Lol the online portion isn't even out yet

Trigonometrize · Oct 26, 2018

ASleepingMonkey said:
How are we supposed to review something we can't play? Our outlet plans on doing a separate piece because Rockstar has referred to it as a second game.

Rockstar made the same comments about GTAV when that came out about Online being a "separate game" and it never really made sense to me. So, it uses the assets of GTAV. It is free with GTAV. And it is exclusively received by purchasing GTAV. How is this different from any game with an online MP component that is traditionally folded into the review of the main game?

That being said, reviewing it separately actually makes the most sense. It's just odd to me how Rockstar frames it and everyone just drops what they usually do to comply.

Coma Ecliptic · Oct 26, 2018

I think the real question is why isn't CRACKDOWN 3 factored into the score for Red Dead Redemption 2!??!?

Read your OP to yourself in the mirror and tell me you don't laugh at yourself...

spad3 · Oct 26, 2018

Aftermath said:
It's a Single Player game first and foremost, online is just a bonus kind of (even though eventually it will become a big thing like GTAVO did but remember previous R* Games online didn't have the same impact)

unlike say COD where the main focus has been Multiplayer, and SinglePlayer was secondary

So does that mean games like Last of Us, Uncharted, Halo, and the hundreds of other games with single-player campaigns should also have their online components reviewed separately?

JEFFREY GRUBB said:
I get what you're saying, but you're working backward from the viewpoint of "reviews matter." This isn't the Olympics or a court of law. Most reviews are purchasing guides. In those cases, they need to come as close to the release as possible. If things change over time, it's easier to note those changes in news stories. But the majority of people are going to be looking for buying advice on the day of release.

Other reviews are pure criticism. In that case, they aren't going to care what is going to change in the future. The game is out now. It is worthy of criticizing now.

No one who reviews games for a living is thinking that their review score is the final say on anything. So the idea that they need to wait to appropriately assess some vague notion of a complete package doesn't make any sense.

I get it, I know reviews don't matter, my point is the review system itself is broken if there's no baseline standard to review off of for similar style games.

EVA UNIT 01 · Oct 26, 2018

Itll get reviewed seperately whats the problem?

Edit-those games you listed above dont paint their MP modes as a separate platform as Rockstar does with GTA and now RDR

spad3 · Oct 26, 2018

Coma Ecliptic said:
I think the real question is why isn't CRACKDOWN 3 factored into the score for Red Dead Redemption 2!??!?

Read your OP to yourself in the mirror and tell me you don't laugh at yourself...

Most games get reviews weeks ahead of launch and usually include their online portion in their reviews. Why is this a surprise to everyone here? seriously?

EVA UNIT 01 said:
Itll get reviewed seperately whats the problem?

The problem is that reviewers don't hold that standard for other similar games and their reviews incorporate the online portion of the game into their review scores which may impact the overall score for the game.

cakely · Oct 26, 2018

spad3 said:
This is a strange omission from almost all reviews of this game, yet other games that have online functionality have their campaigns AND online ranked together. Should RDR2's reviews be revisited and re-tweaked after Online comes out next month? And why does this game's online functionality not affect its review score?

Obviously, because RDR2's online component isn't out yet.

The game is being reviewed for the single-player content shipped on the disc.

EDIT: Are you under the impression that the quality of the online component would somehow lower the score of the single-player game? It's a free bonus.

TheBaldwin · Oct 26, 2018

I say review it as a separate entity.

The game appears to offer a stupid amount of single player contetn anyway, and any issues the online has will probably be unique to its online (seriously they better not have the GTA Online level of loading screens. )

M. Wallace · Oct 26, 2018

Everyone bitching at the controls in single player...hoo boi MP will be a shitfest

Parenegade · Oct 26, 2018

SP games (and SP gamers) always give great SP games a pass. Ironically some of those same people criticize MP only games for their lack of a SP option.

Reviewers for most outlets are usually SP gamers.

Deleted member 13798 · Oct 26, 2018

Secondary or follow up review later, you can't Factor something in that doesn't exist as of right now. It doesn't seem like the game has suffered for it any in terms of content so there's really nothing to say about it until it releases and can be judged on its own.

Deleted member 32563 · Oct 26, 2018

Online component is not out yet.

But imo Its Rockstar and it's a "generational" title so they get a pass.

Some devs/pubs are like big banking to big to fail. This is not to say it won't be polished but it is what it is.

Dick Justice · Oct 26, 2018

sambills said:
interesting they call it a "second game". I assume the world and mechanics will be the same right?

It's just Rockstar being full of shit. Same as GTA V, it's simply the multiplayer component of the game that's being released later to avoid affecting the reviews.

TheBeardedOne · Oct 26, 2018

What? Why would you even ask this since it's not playable? How is it possible to include and factor it in?

Burrman · Oct 26, 2018

I agree with the OP. It sort of breaks the whole review system. There are plenty of games that would have higher review scores if their MP or SP parts were not included. I always found it weird. If rdr2 launched with a janky online mess it probably would of brought some reviews down for sure. Even though it's a bonus to even have an extra mode in the first place regardless of how trash it is

Burrman · Oct 26, 2018

molnizzle said:
wat

Having less game generally doesn't increase scores. If someone thinks RDR2 is a 10/10 value with no online, then the online portion will just be seen as a bonus.

Having less might of benefitted some games for sure. The MCC for example might have got better overall scores if they put it out as campaigns only. Like the uncharted collection did. Less might earn you more.

JeffGubb · Oct 26, 2018

spad3 said:
I get it, I know reviews don't matter, my point is the review system itself is broken if there's no baseline standard to review off of for similar style games.

There is NO review system. What are you talking about?

spad3 · Oct 26, 2018

TheBeardedOne said:
What? Why would you even ask this since it's not playable? How is it possible to include and factor it in?

The gap is what creates the problem. You're seeing people reviewing half of a game. If the two are considered separate entities, then every game that has a MP component and SP component should be reviewed in halves.

StuBurns · Oct 26, 2018

I don't understand the logic honestly. I'm not crazy about RDR2, not far in, but so far it's not looking to be anything like a 9/10 for me, but if I thought it was, a terrible MP, or the total lack of it, would have zero impact on a score if I gave one.

Edith Finch is my favourite game this generation, it's already a ten, any and all MP additions launched at a later date would make no difference to that.

KillLaCam · Oct 26, 2018

entremet said:
Seriously?

How can you review what is not out?

Gotta waste time and delay your review for an extra month or something lol

TheBeardedOne · Oct 26, 2018

spad3 said:
The gap is what creates the problem. You're seeing people reviewing half of a game. If the two are considered separate entities, then every game that has a MP component and SP component should be reviewed in halves.

There's no way outlets are going to wait however long it is until the online portion comes out to review the game, when consumers want reviews now.

Ruin · Oct 26, 2018

Rockstar decided not to include it on launch, that way it will not affect the reviews negatively.

Not only that. When they launch it next month, they will call it "Beta". That way people don't give them shit for any bugs or lack of good content.

TheBeardedOne · Oct 26, 2018

You're not going to get many hits waiting month(s) to post a review.

spad3 · Oct 26, 2018

JEFFREY GRUBB said:
There is NO review system. What are you talking about?

Each review site has their own review system that they base their reviews off of. That system.

a916 · Oct 26, 2018

There's a trophy for it, they shouldn't definitely include it in their review :p

That trophy is unattainable!

Forsaken82 · Oct 26, 2018

spad3 said:
"it's not out yet, duh" cmon guys. Reviewers should have to hold their reviews/edit their reviews for the online portion of the game OR should be given access to by R* to properly review. Because if that's the case, R* is kinda cheating the review system.

Should reviewers then also hold their reviews hostage until all DLC is released?

Deleted member 32018 · Oct 26, 2018

Ruin said:
Rockstar decided not to include it on launch, that way it will not affect the reviews negatively.

Not only that. When they launch it next month, they will call it "Beta". That way people don't give them shit for any bugs or lack of good content.

Yes because a 60 hour single player game with amazing detail and production values is not enough for a game to review well.

Gamers like you don't deserve to get extra content like this for free.

Toni · Oct 26, 2018

Birdseye said:
If you can spend real money to buy a game you can give it a score

Realest first post in a long time.

spad3 · Oct 26, 2018

Forsaken82 said:
Should reviewers then also hold their reviews hostage until all DLC is released?

The difference is DLC is already treated as a separate entity. They get their own reviews and their own scores that are entirely separate from the base game. HOWEVER, MP components do NOT get treated that way.

Trigonometrize · Oct 26, 2018

Dick Justice said:
It's just Rockstar being full of shit. Same as GTA V, it's simply the multiplayer component of the game that's being released later to avoid affecting the reviews.

Affecting reviews if it has a shaky launch like GTA, or alternatively getting to launch twice basically if it's good.

It feels like journos along for the ride by a very savvy company.

Frozenprince · Oct 26, 2018

So you're asking people to commodify reviews, basically, make them a transaction. The entire point of the review is to review the product, that is out and has a $60 price tag that you can buy physically or digitally. That the product may have additional features later doesn't matter, the product exists. The reason online functionality is baked into reviews of other products is because the online functionality comes with that product the day it releases, the moment it's available for consumption. This does not.

Your line of reasoning is absurd.

"There is no baseline standard" so you just, fundamentally, do not understand what a review of a product is. Got you.

ElMexiMerican · Oct 26, 2018

It's basically going to be reviewed as it's own separate entity I imagine, and then some outlets will be probably re-review all of it as a complete package. This is sort of how IGN did their BLOPS 4 review, where each of the three modes were reviewed individually by three separate people, and then a comprehensive review score was given.

spad3 · Oct 26, 2018

Frozenprince said:
So you're asking people to commodify reviews, basically, make them a transaction. The entire point of the review is to review the product, that is out and has a $60 price tag that you can buy physically or digitally. That the product may have additional features later doesn't matter, the product exists. The reason online functionality is baked into reviews of other products is because the online functionality comes with that product the day it releases, the moment it's available for consumption. This does not.

Your line of reasoning is absurd.

See the difference here is the timing. If that's the case, then EVERY company should just release their online components months down the line so that their SP games don't get affected by review scores.

Frozenprince · Oct 26, 2018

spad3 said:
See the difference here is the timing. If that's the case, then EVERY company should just release their online components months down the line so that their SP games don't get affected by review scores.

That is not how product reviews work, and that's not how companies think. The reason RDR:O isn't out yet is because it's not done yet. Not because they want to save face on review scores from pundits.

This is not an incomplete product, this is a finished, to market product that consumers can legally acquire now in exchange for money.

eso76 · Oct 26, 2018

Oh wow, didn't think of it.
So the actual score will be around 179%

spad3 · Oct 26, 2018

ElMexiMerican said:
It's basically going to be reviewed as it's own separate entity I imagine, and then some outlets will be probably re-review all of it as a complete package. This is sort of how IGN did their BLOPS 4 review, where each of the three modes were reviewed individually by three separate people, and then a comprehensive review score was given.

This makes sense. This is exactly what I'm getting at right here.

Frozenprince said:
That is not how product reviews work, and that's not how companies think. The reason RDR:O isn't out yet is because it's not done yet. Not because they want to save face on review scores from pundits.

This is not an incomplete product, this is a finished, to market product that consumers can legally acquire now in exchange for money.

It doesn't have anything to do with saving face or any of that. The point is, since this game gets its multiplayer reviewed separately, every other similar game that's also finished should also have its multiplayer component reviewed separately.

Deleted member 32018 · Oct 26, 2018

spad3 said:
See the difference here is the timing. If that's the case, then EVERY company should just release their online components months down the line so that their SP games don't get affected by review scores.

Some are/have.

You are still not getting that RDR2 is a single player game at it's heart, what other multiplayer games have a 60+ campaign? There's not many that's for sure.

Ruin · Oct 26, 2018

steviejd1 said:
Yes because a 60 hour single player game with amazing detail and production values is not enough for a game to review well.

Gamers like you don't deserve to get extra content like this for free.

I really don't care about multiplayer. In fact I dislike multiplayer games. But yeah, if it was included, red dead would not have been given a 10

Deleted member 32018 · Oct 26, 2018

Ruin said:
But yeah, if it was included, red dead would not have been given a 10

Do you know all the reviewers then? You know what they would give in a hypothetical situation?

Wulfric · Oct 26, 2018

You review the game as it stand right now, not what it COULD be 6 months down the line.

Acetown · Oct 26, 2018

spad3 said:
See the difference here is the timing. If that's the case, then EVERY company should just release their online components months down the line so that their SP games don't get affected by review scores.

Well, If it turns out that Red Dead Online is complete waste of time, it's not like that should weigh down the overall rating. A game is as good as it's best mode.

Jiraiya · Oct 26, 2018

spad3 said:
See the difference here is the timing. If that's the case, then EVERY company should just release their online components months down the line so that their SP games don't get affected by review scores.

Your thread has gone full circle. Tell the devs to release their games that way otherwise it'll be reviewed as released. It can't get any simpler than that.

Shingi_70 · Oct 26, 2018

If it's anything like GTA online traditional games media private won't care about it anyway

JeffGubb · Oct 26, 2018

spad3 said:
Each review site has their own review system that they base their reviews off of. That system.

OK. So which one, specifically, is broken by this approach? Don't speak in generalities.

Because, generally speaking, people approach each game differently.

xabbott · Oct 26, 2018

spad3 said:
See the difference here is the timing. If that's the case, then EVERY company should just release their online components months down the line so that their SP games don't get affected by review scores.

If they can't give a date, then the outlet shouldn't wait. If you can pay now review what's here now. I mean if the game is a 10/10 and the multiplayer comes out in 2 months and sucks it didn't really matter. If it's amazing it can't be scored any higher.

Why is RDR2's Online not factored into its reviews?

Self-requested ban

▲ Legend ▲

User requested account closure

Giant Bomb

Self Requested Ban

Prophet of Truth

User requested account closure

Prophet of Truth

User requested account closure

User requested account closure

Giant Bomb