Miller and Schreiber Q&A on GOG Forums

For those that may have missed it, Scott Miller and Fred Schreiber did a brief Question and Answer session on the GOG forums earlier today. Here’s the link:

I’m happy to hear they’re working on patches now. The discussion also confirmed my suspicions that the review copy that went out wasn’t anywhere near the final launch day build. Really unfortunate, but it’s in the past now. Hopefully they can get things fixed up and have a strong launch on the consoles.

1 Like

In general I don’t look kindly to critics, they produce nothing except give their opinions, and sell ad spots. But it is hard to ignore metacritic’s score.

Due to my very old age, I am qualified to make up my own mind if the game is worth playing or not. Worst thing, I buy a game, and is no good. Right-Click Delete does the trick for me.

As for Bombshell, I am half way through, and I got exactly what the trailer videos showed. A fun video game.

Yes, there are some issues, but someone tell me one game that did not need patches. My first game I bought was Quake, shockingly it needed patches.

Bottom line, thanks in advance to fixing stuff and for the game itself.


There’s that saying “those who can’t do, teach.” I’d amend that to say “Those who can’t create, criticize.”

To put it another way, I think that even the most flawed creation carries more value than the most eloquent criticism.

1 Like

Why on earth would they send reviewers copies that aren’t their very best, it’s like Disney letting movie critics watch the new Star Wars when majority of the special effects aren’t done yet.

By doing this, they have irreparably damaged the game’s and the studios reputation.

Hmm…sounds like a mess…

But I still can’t get Bombshell(on Steam), since it’s still not unavailable on my region(Taiwan, it was showed but no price)…and I noticed RotT 2013 also unavailable too(but RotT 1994 is fine), what the hell?

No, GoG version just more expensive due to exchange rate. So I guess I have to wait until it finally available to me… :frowning:

Apparently they really wantd to have reviews ready on launch day!
This also shows that devs were really confident of their game, and didn’t have any doubts about its quality.

Except for the fact that every human on the planet criticizes everything they encounter.
Doesn’t matter what it is, who it is, in everyone’s mind they make an opinion… they form a belief about it.

While I do agree professional reviews are taking far too seriously, there’s nothing wrong with them being there.
Because they are NOT factual statements handed down from God.
They are the single opinion of the person that did the review. That one guys personal tastes, preferences and experience.

And yes, if that experience was flawed by playing a buggy, unfinished pre-release copy… it will leave an impact that will come into play in the review.

But, reviews are not meant to be solid “Yes buy this/No don’t buy this” answers.
They are guides. Tools to be used to help inform people. That’s why there are mutliple places one can get reviews, player feedback and insight into a product.
There’s nothing wrong with Professional reviews, or Youtube reviewers. Or even STEAM user reviews (well, okay there’s a lot wrong with Steam user reviews) when they are used properly.
Too many people throw them around as if they are final answer, stamped in Gold factual statement about the game.

And others get far too defensive when a bad review comes out for a game they liked. So the person who reviewed it didn’t like it. So what.
Maybe the person who reviewed it… doesn’t like that type of game. Maybe he didn’t enjoy that style of writing, maybe the tone didn’t fit his taste.
Most places like IGN, Gamespot and many, many others… they hand the reviews out. They don’t have a “shooter” guy who does all the FPS games.
And even then, a shooter guy may love BF4 but hate BulletStorm. While I hate BF and loved BulletStorm.

yes, the popular expression is “Those who can’t, teach”… but every person on the planet judges, criticizes and forms opinions. Just because someone gets paid for theirs, or because theirs differs from yours… doesn’t matter. It doesn’t affect yours.

I agree, but personal opinions don’t have a real platform, so they’re usually not influential. I can offer criticism in a review on Steam, but it isn’t going to have the same impact as a professional review on a major website. But, you’re absolutely right–we all criticize in some way. And that’s why professionally, it has so little value to me. Anyone can do it, but somehow these professional reviewers manage to build up these cult-like followings, as though they’re some great mind with amazing insights.

Reviews don’t have any real impact on me as far as making choices what to spend my money on. For the most part I’ve learned to ignore them, and when I visit the big websites it’s to see if I’ve missed any news, rather than looking for reviews.

I’m not irritated that Bombshell got bad reviews–unfortunately 3DR sent out a buggy review copy, and paid the price. The only review that really irked me was the Gamespot one. It was as close to a hatchet job as I’ve seen in professional reviews in a long time, and highlights a lot of the problems with game reviews.

They know full well that an extremely harsh review will hurt sales, and they know that since it’s not a AAA release, their publication will never revisit the game, or report on patches. So the damage is done.

That’s really my problem with the reviews, not that they give out bad ones, but that if you’re not a AAA game, you’re damned to the initial review, regardless of what happens afterwards. Not because they don’t have the time to revisit the game after patches, but because they don’t want to. It’s easier to post filler, like reviews of last nights TV episodes, and vital stuff like Fallout 4 mods and what someone has built in Minecraft.

The majority of games are doomed to the initial release.
Very few places even bother with Patch update reports or anything like that.

Nobody offered to comment on Arkham Knight’s current PC status after all the updates and fixes. It’s all still based on the initial release on PC.
Same can be said for Aliens: Colonial Marines. Now, while still a very flawed and disappointing game. The current form of the game on PC is miles above the original release. But, no site ever commented on it.

And, for something a bit closer to home. Duke Nukem Forever.
A patch released that improved texture quality, added four weapons slots… and fixed a lot of smaller bugs and issues.
But, nobody bothered to even give the game a second look and still throw around reviews of a PC game with blurry textures and two weapon slots.
Or RAGE. A first time effort for id Software. Their first multi-platform title, and John trying some really new things engine wise. And yeah, it bit them in the ass due to the limited options. Blurry textures up close… and horrible driver conflicts with AMD hardware.
But, they release a patch, work with AMD to update driver compatibility. And even release an update to add texture detail and more graphics options.
Not a second glance from publications.

Occasionally PC Gamer will do a patch report, but they only seem to bother with them now on really popular games that are already in okay shape and are just getting some band-aids slapped on.

It’s a long standing part of what PC gamers love about the platform. And something consoles have only now been able to start to take advantage of. Being able to receive updates and fixes that not only improve the game’s stability, but it’s looks, content and replayability.
But, they are all doomed to the initial feedback from users based off of what is normally a pre-release based review.

Good examples, I guess it’s more widespread than I’d considered. I have seen patch updates for the latest Arkham game, but I didn’t read them. The recent Diablo III update got plenty of press, so I guess I was thinking of those kinds of examples.

… and this is why I dislike the critics. They are treated by the masses as the word of god, and should consider for their influence when writing.

Me is the opposite than your experience. I bought Watch Dogs. I have top of the line comps, and could not get this game not to work. But apparently the critics did, and gave it rave reviews. After two month I tossed the game, and all critics with it, be them good or bad.

There should be a critic for critics sifting out objective reviews versus junk reviews. :stuck_out_tongue:

1 Like

Exactly. If they don’t consider their influence, ultimately they’re just parasitic. They’re taking from the industry, but giving nothing back.

1 Like

I was given a copy of Watch_Dogs by a friend. And… even trying to look past the performance issues and other problems.
The game is just… shallow. Empty. And vapid.
It’s a tired GTA clone that has one interesting concept, and that’s the hacking. But, they handle it in such a poor way… even that doesn’t feel fun.
And add in that the player character, Aiden, is lifeless. Emotionless. It’s impossible to feel anything for him… and since… you’re “him” it kills the game.

1 Like

Thanks Damien_Azreal, it looks like I did not miss much either way :clap:

p.s. I like those smilies

Why are you treating D_A’s opinion as the word of your deity of choice?
He’s just this guy, you know.

You asking me?
It’s a similar assessment from my next door neighbor, and when I played it with low render settings.
There is a difference between having played it and agreeing with those with similar opinions, and following an opinion just because it’s on PC Gamers or whatever deity publication. :pray:

On the other hand considering the vast amount of games around, it would be nice to have a reliable source of ‘reviews’ :video_game:

I’ve always said reviews are a necessary evil. No game company can survive without them, but if they crucify you (unfairly), then you are behind the eight ball.

Thing is, no review should be necessary. People should make up their own minds, and not form their own opinion based on someone else’s opinion.

[quote=Joe3DR]I’ve always said reviews are a necessary evil.
No game company can survive without them, but if they crucify you
(unfairly), then you are behind the eight ball.

Thing is, no review should be necessary. People should make up their
own minds, and not form their own opinion based on someone else’s
I agree 100%. There are a lot of critically panned games I adore and a lot of critically adored games I don’t really care for. In the end it’s all about what you get out of something, not the reviewer.

But reviews do give your game some attention at least, but I always take them as someone else’s opinion and not necessarily reflecting on how my experience is going to be.

At this point I read professional reviews more as morbid fascination, I think. Like not being able to look away when you pass a car wreck.

If I actually want to learn about a game because I’m on the fence about buying it, I’ll ask other people that have played it, or watch videos of it on You Tube.

I cant believe I missed this!

Well, I can, as I had just had my 3rd surgery of the year (2015) and was moving into a new home.
Thanks for posting though!
I really would have missed this had you not posted it.

And, sorry to resurrect an old thread, but way cool interview.

1 Like