Its $35 btw.Where was it for $30 again? Remember reading about it yesterday.
http://www.amazon.com/dp/B00BGA9ZZ4/?tag=neogaf0e-20
Its $35 btw.Where was it for $30 again? Remember reading about it yesterday.
If they are still working on features that were advertised and hyped in advance of the game's release, the game was released in an unfinished state.
Are all of the game's advertised features released?
No.
Then it's not done! Unfinished.
Also Best Buy will price match it if you want it today.
Weather was shown well before the game was released and was planned as a feature. It got held back because they couldn't get the game done in time. It was not something they added as a bonus.Weather wasn't gonna be In DC originally, with the delay they decided to add it. I'm not gonna bash the devs for working hard to add extras to the game sorry.
Do these reviews actually exist? I have my doubts this statement is truthful but I am ready to be proven wrong.Unless they patched in open world then I don't think most of the insulting reviews would have changed. Game was reviewed by a bunch of donkeys that knocked it for not having open world. Not innovative enough. Next gen = open world. Even though open world racers have existed for years. It might have changed a handful of reviews that weren't on an agenda and genuinely didn't like the way the game handled penalties or the race modes provided at launch.
I love the gameplay a lot. I still don't know why Jeff Gerstmann hates it so much.
It's a very solid Racer with a lot of content.
What does incredibly focused on racing mean exactly? Aren't every racing games focused on racing?
In the day of season passes and DLC announced and explained before a game ships, you have to realize how silly your post sounds.
Weather was shown well before the game was released and was planned as a feature. It got held back because they couldn't get the game done in time. It was not something they added as a bonus.
GCU didn't stack for me because it's a price match.Cool! I'll get it for $28 with GCU
Where was it for $30 again? Remember reading about it yesterday.
Nah. I think he is just very specific with his likes and dislikes. Not a very open minded person, as far as types of games he enjoysJeff Gertsman is a pretty big "Xbox" fanboy, is he not? He doesn't seem to like much in the Sony department. I rarely agree with his opinion and find him annoying and overrated.
DriveClub is *mainly* point-to-point tracks, just to warn you. I think each environment has one actual circuit, though. So like 5 or 6 of them I believe.
So it wasn't a feature of the game from the very beginning of development? Many things aren't. It was still made a feature of the main game and did not come out in time for launch. It was very much "part of the plan". People act like they get to count it as DLC or something because it was delayed. The only difference between challenges and multiplayer and weather in this game, is that they admitted weather wasn't ready for release and delayed its implementation, whereas with the other two they threw the game out there with non-functioning implementations of each.Except that, it was planned after a bulk of the game was done, and wasn't part of the plan. Most probably just R&D for DriveClub 2 (or DLC) and then they realised that it could be done quicker than they expected.
A beta would have helped uncover the bug. It has nothing to do with how long it takes to fix it. A beta's job is not to fix them, that's the job of the developers. What the online issue indicates is that there was a mistake in the online design which passed through specification, test, QA, and closed beta.
It was always planned to add new features after release to keep the community engaged. One update per month. I don't get why so many people loved it when Criterion did this with Burnout Paradise (even patching in the day/night cycle) but with Driveclub all we hear is "unfinished lol"
There is no rubber-banding:
https://twitter.com/DRIVECLUB/status/539934802770530305
And yes it can be aggressive, but not as much as a people online.
A bad launch can really screw a game up.
Do these reviews actually exist? I have my doubts this statement is truthful but I am ready to be proven wrong.
Unless they patched in open world then I don't think most of the insulting reviews would have changed. Game was reviewed by a bunch of donkeys that knocked it for not having open world. Not innovative enough. Next gen = open world. Even though open world racers have existed for years. It might have changed a handful of reviews that weren't on an agenda and genuinely didn't like the way the game handled penalties or the race modes provided at launch.
So is it really an arcade racer? Would it scratch my Ridge Racer itch? I haven't been paying attention to this.
That review mentions nothing at all about free-roaming.Read for yourself. http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2014-10-07-driveclub-review
Yes, Drive Club is the best arcade racer I have played in years.
Weather patch and working online along with the other tweaks should have been in the game day one, then the reviews would probably be different. Gerstman review is garbage, but I can still see that it was easy to get pissed at this game when it was in launch state (corner penalties, etc.).
Now step up reviewers and take a look at the game again.
Games should be reviewed according to their launch state, with few exceptions. Developers need to be held accountable for first impressions and the state they allow their games to be released in. Also it's unrealistic to expect there to be time, or even a worthwhile reason, to revisit and tweak old reviews. Almost every game gets improved with patches to some degree.lol they won't, they only revise reviews when it's for the worst.
Games should be reviewed according to their launch state, with few exceptions. Developers need to be held accountable for first impressions and the state they allow their games to be released in. Also it's unrealistic to expect there to be time, or even a worthwhile reason, to revisit and tweak old reviews. Almost every game gets improved with patches to some degree.
You're right.Games should be reviewed according to their launch state, with few exceptions. Developers need to be held accountable for first impressions and the state they allow their games to be released in. Also it's unrealistic to expect there to be time, or even a worthwhile reason, to revisit and tweak old reviews. Almost every game gets improved with patches to some degree.
If a game is hot and they see utility in giving a more up to date appraisal of the game's state, then go ahead. But considering the manpower and time to do this, when there are always more new games coming out, makes it virtually worthless. Very few will ever see or care. People that want a "contemporary" appraisal of a previously released game usually look to the community rather than reviews. Reviews give a coherent and cohesive appraisal of a game very early on, for people to make decisions when there isn't otherwise good info to be had yet. They work fine for that.Reviewers have taken to changing scores and reviews after the initial review when games have issues, so shouldn't it work both ways? If games improve dramatically after launch, shouldn't that mean a lot as well?
Reviewers have taken to changing scores and reviews after the initial review when games have issues, so shouldn't it work both ways? If games improve dramatically after launch, shouldn't that mean a lot as well?
Games should be reviewed according to their launch state, with few exceptions. Developers need to be held accountable for first impressions and the state they allow their games to be released in. Also it's unrealistic to expect there to be time, or even a worthwhile reason, to revisit and tweak old reviews. Almost every game gets improved with patches to some degree.
Jeff Gerstman doesn't know what he's talking about 95% of the time.
This. To me it's pretty much the Crysis 1 of racers. It's pretty, pushes some awesome weather/lighting effects, but it is pretty sub par in my opinion when it comes to the actual racing. Handling feels stale in comparison to games like Forza/GT/Horizon where each tire (and the suspension) responds to the pavement individually. Hitting a puddle at 120mph does nothing in Driveclub, it makes absolutely zero difference in the handling. Putting two wheels off the pavement into the dirt also makes no difference in handling. That's the most disappointing part of it to me.
Hahaha the obsession with Horizon by Driveclub fans continues.Im not sure if I can take this post seriously. You complaining about the handling yet you think Horizon is better. You can drive a supercar off road in that game and it doesn't make a difference at all. Come on now.
I love the gameplay a lot. I still don't know why Jeff Gerstmann hates it so much.
It's a very solid Racer with a lot of content.
Hahaha the obsession with Horizon by Driveclub fans continues.