No Planet Zoo Reviews

[Jileha]

Why all the speculations? Frontier surely has a marketing department that makes decisions not on a whim or because somebody hurt their feelings. They will have thoroughly considered the pros and cons of their action and decided accordingly. Not disclosing any more details is a better and much more professional way of handling a situation like this than airing one’s feelings on social media and does not allow any conclusions regarding what did or did not happen.

All you are doing is giving this reviewer even more publicity - and that’s exactly what he wanted to achieve by posting. Mission accomplished.

 

[Voids Light]

I still think Frontier probably gave IGN a key for the beta, and they basically ignored it, hence why there's no beta coverage from them, and no free game.

 

[Sclurp]

Why all the speculations? Frontier surely has a marketing department that makes decisions not on a whim or because somebody hurt their feelings. They will have thoroughly considered the pros and cons of their action and decided accordingly. Not disclosing any more details is a better and much more professional way of handling a situation like this than airing one’s feelings on social media and does not allow any conclusions regarding what did or did not happen.

All you are doing is giving this reviewer even more publicity - and that’s exactly what he wanted to achieve by posting. Mission accomplished.

I would take this up with the person who posted the original tweet rather than the person who wanted clarification and said thanks after getting it.

 

[NL_Mutso]

I don't know what big deal is about...

I never bought a game on recommendation of IGN (or didn't buy the game).
The last time I read an IGN review/visited their site has to be 10 years ago (or maybe even longer)

I rather read the user reviews.

 

[Voids Light]

I don't know what big deal is about...

I never bought a game on recommendation of IGN (or didn't buy the game).
The last time I read an IGN review/visited their site has to be 10 years ago (or maybe even longer)

I rather read the user reviews.

I never will understand why people are thinking this is such a big deal to be honest. I mean, its one game reviewer who didn't cover much on the game itself, when probably given the opportunity to do so. Heck, IGN not reviewing it isn't a miss, since they probably would have not played but 2 hours of the game or something, like they always do.

 

[meimento]

I don't know what big deal is about...

I never bought a game on recommendation of IGN (or didn't buy the game).
The last time I read an IGN review/visited their site has to be 10 years ago (or maybe even longer)

I rather read the user reviews.

When was the last time you watched an IGN review video?

 

[NL_Mutso]

When was the last time you watched an IGN review video?

That's an easy one... never !

(Also a never for other reviewers site's videos)

i do watch Angry Joe

 

[Silhouette]

It's incredible that some people feel so slighted by the way a company chooses to market their game (in this case, who gets to make early reviews), that they would actually refund the game over that. Amazing.

Like people said: who cares about reviewers anymore? I never read reviews before I buy a game. Hell, I've enjoyed games that have gotten really negative reviews.

I watch one YouTuber that whenever someone asks on a live stream if the game is good or if he'd recommend it, his response is "watch me play for 30min or so and decide for yourself if it looks like a game you'd enjoy". Which I think is the best response possible. Just because some reviewer rates the game badly, doesn't mean you'd not like it... And vice versa.

If you're not sure about a game then watch gameplay and decide for yourself. Reviews are incredibly biased anyway to the person actually reviewing it.

 

[Crea_TivELA]

It's incredible that some people feel so slighted by the way a company chooses to market their game (in this case, who gets to make early reviews), that they would actually refund the game over that. Amazing.

Like people said: who cares about reviewers anymore? I never read reviews before I buy a game. Hell, I've enjoyed games that have gotten really negative reviews.

I watch one YouTuber that whenever someone asks on a live stream if the game is good or if he'd recommend it, his response is "watch me play for 30min or so and decide for yourself if it looks like a game you'd enjoy". Which I think is the best response possible. Just because some reviewer rates the game badly, doesn't mean you'd not like it... And vice versa.

If you're not sure about a game then watch gameplay and decide for yourself. Reviews are incredibly biased anyway to the person actually reviewing it.

Exacly this happend to me with NFS Payback... I was uncertain because of "magazine" reviews, which sounded pretty bad (at least over here), but I decided to buy it and had tons of fun with it for many hours - even in times were EA is constantly in criticism.

I agree very much to Silhouette's explaination and often choose games that way, for other reasons I just know the developers are awesome and even manage to make a great game with low budget... see Greedfall or Outer Worlds... they are not AAA title (yet)... but they showed what they can accomplish even with limited options.

Yes this can be a fail, like it was for me in the last Bioware Game - but others enjoyed it how it was and it's always a decision everyone has to make for themselve... and see how No Mans Sky developed... most games of that kind aren't 100% ready when it comes out... not even Assassins Creed was 100% ready, so it became a service game (many games today are just a little bit over the main pillars which become more great with things developers add and correct after release).

Frontier already showed that they care during and after their other releases - no way I would think of not trusting them - they are a very special and great dev which always will have my support for what they achieve and how they take interest in the community and their wishes.

 

[eliselove]

I've never had any issues with Frontier. Plus, you are the best reviewer. If you don't like it, you have the option of a refund. I would rather trust youtubers like Geekism who'll give honest reviews rather than IGN

 

[Silhouette]

I've never had any issues with Frontier. Plus, you are the best reviewer. If you don't like it, you have the option of a refund. I would rather trust youtubers like Geekism who'll give honest reviews rather than IGN

Plus there's a difference between "this game is great, but here's a few areas I think they could improve to make it an even better game" and "I don't like this game and that's that".

One is constructive criticism that can help the developer, and the other does nothing for them. I would rather send early copies out to people that can review with constructive criticism, than those that will just dismiss the game because of a personal preference and leave it at that.

 

[mr.sugar]

I've never had any issues with Frontier. Plus, you are the best reviewer. If you don't like it, you have the option of a refund. I would rather trust youtubers like Geekism who'll give honest reviews rather than IGN

Well, IGN exists because probably quite a lot of people still read it and consider their reviews. Just because YOU don´t read/watch them doesn´t mean nobody else does and that Frontier move is alright. I consider both, user reviews and magazine reviews too. It´s not about the numeric rating, but about the content of the review and as such, I want to read as much as possible from different sources before I decide. Planet Coaster is a perfect example of a game, where user reviews absolutely wouldn´t help me to make the right decision and usually disagree with them as I think that game has many flaws.

This move feels fishy from Frontier´s part and for me, it has much bigger impact because I was sorta disappointed with Planet Coaster and Jurassic World is just horrible game (of course, my opinion, but I know I´m not only one thinking this).

 

[eliselove]

At the end of the day, it all comes down to preference and personal choice. What one person likes, another may not. Doesn't mean to say a game is terrible. As others have said, IGN wouldn't spend half as much time reviewing the game. We can all make our own minds up once the game is out, but personally I loved the beta, and I cannot wait for release

 

[NL_Mutso]

I've read some reddit posts about this.

While I'm not saying he's lying.. I wonder if this is the full truth.

I read that he already stated he was not interested in the game.
Not receiving a free review copy isn't the same as denying a copy.
I don't rely on twitter for fully accurate info, people play the 'victim' way too often. Or just looking for the most 'likes'.

OP stated more outlets were denied a review copy. Couldn't find any info on this one.. Tbh, a bit curious about this one…..

If this is denying, I think it's a bad idea.. But I simply don't care about game reviewer companies.
If people cherish those sites/videos, that's fine. Everybody gets their info on their own preferred methods.

I think it's weird to cancel your game over such small matters. If you cancel the game because the beta wasn't your expectation of this game, that's understandable.
I just don't get it ... Are people that passionate about a company like IGN or about a game review ?
It happens with movies all the time (not inviting people to pre-screening)

Most likely a lot of people actually haven't cancelled the game and will be part of this community anyway..

 

[Nova_8]

Developers not giving games media a key will never change my interest in a game. I've long since given up on any review of a game having any integrity nor the person writing it.

 

[yoav_r]

Developers not giving games media a key will never change my interest in a game. I've long since given up on any review of a game having any integrity nor the person writing it.

Reviewers in general, can be very harsh, nitpicky, and all in all negative. They are not there to participate and have fun, they are there to criticize and go to the next game. Positive and helpful reviews don't garner revenue as much as angry and negative reviews.

Like most things, games take tons of time, investment and research from the devs, and years of work, only for some snobbish critic to hate it because "[they] don't like the fighting animations".

I much prefer reviews from people invested in the game, like youtubers like DeLady and Geekism, which while stating the flaws of the game, do it in constructive and positive way, thus helping all sides get a better and more fun game, while also giving information to people looking for reviews before buying the game.

 

[mr.sugar]

At the end of the day, it all comes down to preference and personal choice. What one person likes, another may not. Doesn't mean to say a game is terrible. As others have said, IGN wouldn't spend half as much time reviewing the game. We can all make our own minds up once the game is out, but personally I loved the beta, and I cannot wait for release

Actually, the more reviews there is, the better. Because, a lot of sites (speaking of gaming sites in Czech Republic) weren´t very positive about beta, and some streams they made even confirmed me that this game has very similar flaws Planet Coaster has and maybe some more. So, only more reviews can, at this point, convince me to buy the game. Of course, that might be just be. I haven´t played beta myself, but from streams, there is really a lot of things I don´t like. Mainly speaking of some tools.

 

[Sirlacker]

Actually, the more reviews there is, the better. Because, a lot of sites (speaking of gaming sites in Czech Republic) weren´t very positive about beta, and some streams they made even confirmed me that this game has very similar flaws Planet Coaster has and maybe some more. So, only more reviews can, at this point, convince me to buy the game. Of course, that might be just be. I haven´t played beta myself, but from streams, there is really a lot of things I don´t like. Mainly speaking of some tools.

That's because you agree with the review and feel that those issues raised are things that would be issues for yourself too.

I think that the whole thing the person you quoted was trying to get at is that each reviewer or person can see the exact same thing in completely different lights. For example, if I was to review the beta I'd give it a solid 9 out of 10, the - 1 being based on the bugs. I love the management and think it's just enough to still be fun. Someone else for example may rate it a 4 out of 10 because they hated the management and felt like it should be a lot more in depth or maybe they felt that the creativity side was too overwhelming.

 

[Silhouette]

Actually, the more reviews there is, the better. Because, a lot of sites (speaking of gaming sites in Czech Republic) weren´t very positive about beta, and some streams they made even confirmed me that this game has very similar flaws Planet Coaster has and maybe some more. So, only more reviews can, at this point, convince me to buy the game. Of course, that might be just be. I haven´t played beta myself, but from streams, there is really a lot of things I don´t like. Mainly speaking of some tools.

I don't understand. You came to the conclusion yourself that you're not impressed with the game because of watching streamers, right? So why are reviews important then? How would they do anything to change your mind, when watching streams is much easier to see the gameplay first hand and be able to determine yourself if the game suits you or not?

Not to mention, why would you need reviewers to put out the review on release day? Why can't you wait a couple days before getting the review? The reason I'm asking this is because some people seem to believe reviewers must get early access... But it would be the same result, whether it's done release day or a week late. In a game that, for the most part, is single player only, there's no real loss to waiting a week to get reviews. Watch streams in the meantime.

 

[mr.sugar]

I don't understand. You came to the conclusion yourself that you're not impressed with the game because of watching streamers, right? So why are reviews important then? How would they do anything to change your mind, when watching streams is much easier to see the gameplay first hand and be able to determine yourself if the game suits you or not?

Not to mention, why would you need reviewers to put out the review on release day? Why can't you wait a couple days before getting the review? The reason I'm asking this is because some people seem to believe reviewers must get early access... But it would be the same result, whether it's done release day or a week late. In a game that, for the most part, is single player only, there's no real loss to waiting a week to get reviews. Watch streams in the meantime.

Simply to have as much sources and opinions as possible. It´s nothing less and nothing more.

My big problem is that they refused to provide the game for review and did that with quite weird reasoning. That simply is more of a proof that developers themselves are not confident with their own game and that´s why they are giving it out to "fans" who are more likely to be actually less negative. We all know fans tend to do that...