Days Gone actor suggest some reviewers didn't finish the game, posted misleading reviews

https://www.playstationlifestyle.net/2021/05/20/days-gone-actor-talks-reviews/

Days Gone has been the subject of much debate following the revelation that Sony Interactive Entertainment shot down a sequel pitch. Since then, former and current developers have been weighing in on the matter, and so have fans who believe that Days Gone wasn’t given a fair chance. Now, Deacon St. John actor Sam Witwer has chimed in via a Reddit AMA, suggesting that some reviewers either didn’t play the game or rushed through it, resulting in misleading reviews.

In response to a question about game reviews, Witwer wrote:

I read a review today from a website/publication that will remain nameless. In it, the horde mechanic, the show-stopping center piece of the game, it wasn’t mentioned once. Not ONCE. There were other tells, but it was pretty clear that this reviewer played the game for several hours and then wrote his review. He did not complete it.

Days Gone was always meant to be a slow burn game and story. For better or for worse, it was designed for you to take your time. The best story beats and the best game play happen much later in the game, and it’s clear that the nature of game reviews and this slow-burn philosophy of game development are not compatible.

These journalists, the ones that rush in, they do NOT take their time, they do NOT play the game on the terms the game presents, because it is their job to put out an article on a deadline.

I think that’s not only too bad, but misleading to actual audience members who would like to read an actual review of what we actually did.

Thoughts, SW? Was this game given a fair chance? Seems like a lot of players enjoyed it.

I mean he's not wrong, a good chunk of reviewers are shit. More interested in talking about political mumbo jumbo than gameplay.

But, the game is shit. And he's a salty dog.

Damage control for Days Gone...😂 Desperate times call for desperate measures.

@SolidGame_basic: I don't think it was given a fair chance and is allot better than the reviews said. I also think I would enjoy it quite a bit. I do plan to pick it up soon. Did you enjoy it Solid?

I bet you that the massive majority of reviewers rush the game on the easiest difficulty so the review is up as fast as possible. That's why they bitch about titles being too hard when they have no difficulty settings. That's what happens when you're used to facerolling everything on a difficulty created so your gf could play the game, not a dude that has been playing video games since he was a kid. Outside of a few youtubers, i don't trust any site. They're all trash since 2012 or so.

Don't review a game if you don't beat it don't review a movie if you didn't watch the entire movie i hate people that were like i couldnt take it and post a review about something.

I dunno about that. One reviewer I refer to very frequently did mention the horde mechanic. His response to it was, however, quote; "so fucking what?" Maybe other reviewers had the same impression, and the feature isn't quite as "show-stopping" as he thinks it is.

Also, first impressions matter. If a game doesn't get good within one's patience threshold, then they are well within their right to ditch it and go do something more worthwhile. "Slow burn" is not an excuse - there is a right way to do it.

@latech84: I played a few hours before switching to other games. My initial impression is the ps5 patch looks really nice graphically and performs well. As far as gameplay, it seems to give off a generic vibe to it but I would like to play it more.

Got the game. Only about an hour in and it's boring as shit.

I also hate the two characters so far. Deacon and Boozer remind me of trailer trash biker boys that used to thrash the local bar every week in my hometown.

I mean, Sony fans didn't even buy this game. I don't think the reviewers were the only issue. Sony themselves aren't even making a sequel because it flopped. :/

Game was ok but yeah he is right especially with social just warriors

Yea, coming across as a diet Phil Fish.

Same here. Maybe one day I will have the resilience to play longer. But apparently it is our fault for not persevering. 😂

This game needed TLOU2 level of animations so bad.

Thanks for the feedback and info. Appreciate it.

I skipped out on this game when it first came out. Reviews didn’t help. I enjoyed it on PS5. I beat it twice. I hope there’s a sequel. Those unskippable walking sequences suck though! What were they thinking?! You can skip some but not all? There’s no consistency.

Unskippable portions of any game rears its head the most when you are replaying any game. I hate it when developers have no respect for the player's time.

Exactly, it's so selfish.

My favorite Days Gone review was the one complaining about why there's too many white zombies....or the Gamespot review was pretty pathetic too.

You shouldn't have to finish a game to give an accurate account of it. A few hours is enough for a general idea, a few hours more is enough for an accurate review.

Very few games have I slogged through for hours upon hours only to get to the end and experience something that made the previous crap worth it.

Hordes? I don't think a gimmick like that is going to save a game when people aren't enjoying the bulk of it for 10+ hours.

THIS! OMFG This so much.

It's why I had to stop playing Marvel Avengers, and why I will probably stop playing Days GOne unless it picks up in excitement in a few hours.

AAA, alleged-AAA, and wannabe-AAA gaming is sliding into mediocrity and sameness hard. Putting all their eggs into these one-basket franchises.

that's probably the point, there's slow burners and then there's days gone. ice ages move faster.

your mate gets burnt and bed ridden at the start, and you run errands for him. that's the first 15 hours at least. nothing. f*cking. happens. and all the while you're suffering through that cliche stop start, forced cinematic walking open world treacle that certain devs love to drench their games in.

the hordes are cool, but criminally under used and utilised. on the rare occasion you do meet one and have to escape on bike, you can't look back over your shoulder at them giving chase, the camera auto snaps to the front, so you can't see how close they are or how many there are (usually hundreds). a bit more thought and they could've easily dialled up the tension of those encounters by several notches.

one of those frustrating games that could've been really good. the 5 from gs is a little too low, 6 is fair

you live by the scores you die by them

5-10

HaH

Game always looked so bland to me, generic. I mean cmon not even Sony wants to do a sequel.

If your game becomes too boring that the person playing it ends up quitting before it's completed, then it probably wasn't really that good of a game. Good games are games that make me want to play them more. Also, trying to say someone would like a game more if they played the game in a specific manner that you want them to, again, it's probably a bad game.

I disagree. How can you give a legit review if you have not experienced the whole game? You won't know the story, pacing, all the charachters, new areas, new abilities, new mechanics, twists, etc.. Imagine writing a review for Half-Life 2 without even playing with the Gravity Gun or a review for Metal Gear Solid 2 while only playing as Snake in the beginning and not knowing that you play as Raiden for the majority of the game. You have to play the whole game. If you haven't, then you can only give impressions.

For real. As with any product review, would you trust a review where the person spent minimal time with the product?

Welp! While I have no doubt that he's probably speaking truth and we know for a fact that these 'professional reviewers' can't play a game to save their lives, I got to say, this studio definitely isn't happy with TLOU/UC remake Sony put them to work on. This is their second DC whithin a very short spam of time after 'you should have bought our masterpiece game at full price'.

passed in this game on ps4 due to bad reviews. tried on ps5 as its free and it was surprisingly good game. horde mode is so much fun. easily at least an 8 imo.

I think the game looks very generic thematically, mechanically, and in terms of characterization, and I have a hard time believing I would find it more than mediocre if I sunk my precious gaming time into it. So... I'm sorry if that's wrong, devs, but it isn't my job to just buy everything that comes down the chute on the chance that stuff is better than it looks (let's be real: it's usually WORSE than it looks these days)

You would know enough. The meat and potatoes of a game, that you should know within a few hours of playing it. If a reviewer that I trusted said "I only played for eight hours, but these are the major gameplay elements A B and C, there's some story developing that's blah blah blah, and so far it's been enjoyable" then that is enough for me. Again, it's about knowing your reviewer and how their tastes align with yours that's more important than the thoroughness of the review. Even Gamespot and other places know it's not that important, hence their "in progress reviews".

The ideal of course is to play the whole game for a truly legit review, but for the layman, they should know if the game is any good within a few hours.

And my point stands: if you don't like Half-Life 2 by the time you get the gravity gun, the gravity gun won't change that fact.

Reviews are generally garbage as it is these days any way, this voice actor puts too much stock in them just like fanboys do.

The gravity gun was ground-breaking at the time and was a big part of the game. It had a big impact on people's enjoyment and perception of the game. Anyway, if a reviewer is doing a review without finishing the game, then they are just half-assing it and are shit at their job. They have no integrity and credibility.

The argument that you need to play a game all the way through in order to review is nonsense. Reviews has and will always be a gamer's impression of the game. Let's not pretend otherwise. You don't need to play a shitty game all the way to the end. There very few games that change in a meaningful way after hours of playing and it is not the reviewer or the gamer's responsibility to wade through a shitty experience to reach the better sections.

It is funny how metacritic and other reviews are only valid when it applies to specific games.😂

So, a movie review without watching the whole movie is fine as well? Movies and games never improve or get worse throughout the experience? You can experience and know everything about them in a small sample size? GTFO dude. You are ridiculous.

Games are not movies. Defaulting to movie comparison really demonstrates your limited gaming experience and if we are to use your failed analogy, you are no qualified on the topic of games so GTFO. 😂

Imagine playing WoW for 20 hours getting level 25 and not getting to the end game at level 60...and saying game was trash.

GET TO THE END OR DONT REVIEW IT lots changes at the end game raids dungeons and everything you cant review it at level 25

We are talking about a "movie game" here. A narrative driven experience. To write a review about it without finishing it is like reviewing a movie without watching the whole film. Also, games have a lot more parts to review and analyze and you are not going to be exposed to them without playing through the whole game. So, sit the fuk down. You are wrong.

Anyone else not surprised that Pedro doesn't finish his games 😄

Well he may have a point... but then the dev should've put the hordes front and center instead of having like 20 hours (more?) of mostly fluff before them.

I actually like Deacon (just stfu during gameplay) and Boozer - they did a pretty good job on their bromance , but they spend so much time on that and fleshing out the history between him and his wife, it feels like they wanted to make a tv show more then a game.

I really doubt it's any worse then the other mediocre open world games out there that have gotten better reviews. Maybe they should've made Deacon a chick . Then they could gush about the lesbian romance Or maybe a minority and they could write a few paragraphs about the beauty of interracial relationships. You know stuff important to video games.

Or they could've put the Rockstar logo on the box, that's worth atleast 2 points right there.

I don't think you need to finish a game to review it (most of the time at least), but I don't think that's even remotely the problem with a lot of today's reviews. Reviews focus far to much on politics, woke culture, etc while never mentioning anything about the gameplay, mechanics, etc.

Yeah if deacon was a girl and was a lesbian relationship 10/10 for a brokeback mtn vibe?

Eh. Perhaps some did, perhaps some didn’t. Personally it was everything that I saw of the game that made me disinterested in it personally. I doubt any difference in reviews would have changed that one way or the other for me.

It is still a game man. If the gaming experience isn't great, a reviewer has the right to stop and review the game based on their experience. A review doesn't require game completion (which opens up another can stupid when folks that arguing what is truly beating a game). That is just the fact, I suggest you calm down because you are FACTUALLYwrong. 😎

Anyone surprised that you are obsessed with me because my words trigger you. 😂

Anybody can give impressions of a game. However, that is not a review. A professional reviewer is supposed to experience the product fully and use their expertise to break it down and critique it in all aspects. This applies to all types of products. Whether it is a review of a car, TV, game, movie, whatever. You don't just half-ass it. You have to experience and learn the product fully before your assessment/analysis is worth a damn.

At least you admit it.

If it's not a big name game like Uncharted, Last of Us, or God of War, Playstation owners will not buy it in droves. And that's not necessarily a dig just at Playstation owners- it's across the board. System Wars opinions don't = real world. Real world wants sports games, COD, Super hero, and Battle Royale games mostly.

You don't even know what admittance is in your desperation. 😂

No no no. Journalists of all genres are generally very professional, they treat their work very seriously.

Once a copy is written it is submitted to the sub-editors to check for grammar, accuracy, fact-checks, potential for liabilities and etc. Then the editors will also read it before publication.

Gaming journalists will more than likely have to prove they finished the game, if not they will mention it like Gameranx does, or how GS will point out its a review in progress.

Additionally, Days Gone was a major Sony release, the reviewers would certainly have taken the game very seriously and assess it based on their company methodology.

But of course there are exceptions such as that IGN reporter who plagiarised someone else with the Deadcells review. Shit happens.

So I think the claims made above are simply sour grapes. The game was simply mediocre. Moreover, the reviews are opinions, so, sour grapes!