Jump to content

Edge #378


K
 Share

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Keyboard Koala said:

 

That's a great cover!


Yes, I should have made that clearer - it’s an amazing cover and a striking image. Blanka’s chest hair did make me feel a bit weird, admittedly. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not sure if they take pricing into account, but when you factor in that it's literally the price of a few tins of beans for everything, vs the Battlepass progression stifling, skin shop, fomo ridden guff attached to Overwatch "2", it's really odd.

 

Edit: this is actually the first month in a very long time where I've played a large number of the games the magazine has reviewed, and I've never felt more as completely at odds with it as far as I would rate the games I've played.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, Benny said:

I'm not sure if they take pricing into account, but when you factor in that it's literally the price of a few tins of beans for everything, vs the Battlepass progression stifling, skin shop, fomo ridden guff attached to Overwatch "2", it's really odd.

 

Edit: this is actually the first month in a very long time where I've played a large number of the games the magazine has reviewed, and I've never felt more as completely at odds with it as far as I would rate the games I've played.

 

I hope price is almost a complete zero factor in review scores.

 

Skins and FOMO guff are shit but aren't required. They can result in marking down because they're bullshit in general or because other rewards are non-existent. But not based on being bad value. Just don't buy them. Anyone who is happy enough without them continues to play exactly the same game.

 

Review text is welcome to mention value for money against some very specific criteria but it's so subjective.

 

And of course the "value" of a battle-pass is a reasonable thing to try to judge but it's going to change every month. Review outlets that decide to directly attribute scores based on this sort of content rather than core mechanics are at risk of simply being wrong in 2 months time.

 

So many outlets give a soft pass to multiplayer focused games, desperate to review at release when they can pass no or little judgement on that element of the game.

 

In fact, I sometimes think most reviews to come two weeks after a game is out when everyone has had to eat the shit that is day one patches and broken servers. Review it when you're most angry at modern gaming. Knock 3 points off for being unable to ship a complete thing first time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think you can ignore those things for review if you want, but ultimately the way they are integrated into Overwatch 2 does, whether people would like to ignore it or not, fundamentally affect the experience of the game with the way it's been designed.

 

Even if you completely ignore the way things are priced, given the fact that pricing can effectively gatekeep a huge part of a games potential audience, ignoring how much these things actually cost is a bit of a luxury I would argue.

 

But ultimately I disagree on a lot more than just "value" in the case of these two particular games though.

 

EDIT: and as you point out, a score for the multiplayer only Overwatch 2 at launch is almost entirely worthless. As it doesn't reflect the actual experience any normal person is going to have with the game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don’t think price should ever be considered, it’s a separate argument. Imagine if Returnal was marked down for being £70, or, I dunno, Kate Bush got poor reviews because it’s so expensive getting tickets. 
 

Then again micro transactions make games a unique case, I wouldn’t even bother reviewing games which rely on those as part of the game play. Ones that just alter visual appeared etc. I couldn’t give a shit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Has anyone else who subscribes had a price increase to your quarterly DD without being advised? I had a letter in the post earlier in the Summer explaining there was a problem with the one DD payment which was as a result of a system error and therefore to cover a slightly extended period the charge would be £11.25 as a one-off.

 

Anyway it turns out I've had two £11.25 payments taken and upon contacting the customers services, they've told me I'd been advised that my price was increasing from £8.99 to £11.25. They never mentioned this was permanent in the letter sent and they say my offer has now finished and I'm on a higher priced DD now. 

 

Well erm thanks for checking with me and blaming a technical problem with the system for this. Annoying because yes I've had that offer for the best part of a decade, so I get prices will go up but don't lie about it and blame a technical error collecting a DD!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just picked this month's Edge up whilst on my weekend break. Didn't check the price before doing so and I was a bit shocked at the till coming up with £7.50! It has been a while though.... Think the last one I picked up was £5 or £5.50?! This has the calendar with it so was perhaps more expensive than normal not sure. 

 

Anyway enjoyed the issue however not sure if pick it off the shelf without checking the cover price as again next time!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, MattyP said:

Just picked this month's Edge up whilst on my weekend break. Didn't check the price before doing so and I was a bit shocked at the till coming up with £7.50! It has been a while though.... Think the last one I picked up was £5 or £5.50?! This has the calendar with it so was perhaps more expensive than normal not sure. 

 

Anyway enjoyed the issue however not sure if pick it off the shelf without checking the cover price as again next time!

 

The Christmas issue is now always £1 more than the standard ones. It seemed to be a new Future policy applied some years ago to all of its titles; to do a 'premium' edition with some freebie or special edition. I guess they choose Christmas because they can flog a calendar each year and more sales as stocking fillers maybe. It is a weird thing though to have pricing different on one issue a year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. Use of this website is subject to our Privacy Policy, Terms of Use, and Guidelines.