Description

You won't find any scores in here, but if you're wondering what GameSpot's reviewers are working on right now this is the blog you should be bookmarking.

Hi all! I've had several readers ask me about Ninja Gaiden II, and when they could expect to see a review post. The short answer, of course, is always the same: we will post a review when it is ready.

The long answer is that Microsoft did not send final code to review outlets. The build we received suffers from loading issues, visual glitches, and other noticeable flaws that may or may not be present in the game you buy. Here is the statement we received from Microsoft when we pressed them on the matter:

Just a quick note from Team NINJA below regarding the "Ninja Gaiden II" red discs. Please note that the delay in load times you may experience is not representative of the final game. In the final boxed copy of the game, which you will receive once the game ships to retail on June 3 in the U.S., you will not experience any lag in load times. Team NINJA is aware of the issue and requests your patience as you play through the review red disc.

Xbox 360 spins DVDR media slower than replicated media, so it's not representative of how final media will perform. Also, please keep in mind that this build distributed early to you guys for review purposes is not final retail code (emphasis added -- KV). While the build contains many final gameplay features, story elements, and graphical capabilities, it's a press evaluation build so it is not as fully optimized as a retail product. Generally, load time is one feature that improves between review builds and final product. While there typically is not a major noticeable difference between review builds and retail product, it can vary, so please keep this in mind while working on your review.

You may remember that we reviewed Lost Odyssey based on code provided to us as reviewable, and rightfully called out load times that lasted close to two minutes in our evaluation. The retail game did not suffer nearly as much as our review build did, and we replayed a significant portion of the game and adjusted our review text to reflect as much once the issue came to our attention. We do not wish to repeat that circumstance, and will only post our Ninja Gaiden II review when we know that it is factually correct.

Frankly, we aren't willing to accept any developer or publisher at their word when we're told that flaws in the review build will not be present in the retail game. While we want to bring you timely reviews, we are strongly committed to bringing you accurate reviews based on the same exact game that will be in the box. Games are expensive, and you deserve an honest evaluation based on the final product. Publishing an early review with potentially incorrect information (or one that glosses over important information because we take the publisher at face value) does a disservice to our readers.

We will publish our Ninja Gaiden II when we are fully confident that it reflects the game you will purchase. You deserve nothing less.

40 Comments

  • terminationtime

    Posted Aug 1, 2008 11:11 am PT

    MUST GET NINJAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! PARENTS ARE BLOCKING ME FROM GETTING

  • obywan

    Posted Jun 3, 2008 10:19 am PT

    This is exactly why Gamespot gives me the only reviews that I trust. Unlikely those sub-reviewers who came out with a review of Ninja Gaiden 2 one week ago saying "there are too many glitches" based on a nonfinal version of the game. Vote 6.7 and adding "but I've played only 70% of the game". That's not a review in my opinion.
    I am sure Gamespot will be more reliable.

  • DemannameD

    Posted Jun 3, 2008 9:03 am PT

    "While we want to bring you timely reviews, we are strongly committed to bringing you accurate reviews based on the same exact game that will be in the box. Games are expensive, and you deserve an honest evaluation based on the final product. Publishing an early review with potentially incorrect information (or one that glosses over important information because we take the publisher at face value) does a disservice to our readers."

    So why did they fire Jeff?

  • CannibalFerox

    Posted Jun 2, 2008 1:39 pm PT

    I don't mind if the review comes later. I think, given recent history, that this is a wise decision. I don't really care whether a review comes immediately or not. I've already pre-ordered this game anyway. I expect reviews to contain information that will help me decide whether or not I should spend my hard-earned money on the product. Control, difficulty, stability, saves, multiplayer options, characters and story: these are the things I'm looking for regardless of whether the reviewer likes or dislikes a game as a whole.

  • ionicuk

    Posted Jun 2, 2008 6:26 am PT

    This is a good decision. I am SOO eager to hear if the framerate issues are in the final game or not (load times I'm not too fussed about, will give me a chance to breathe!). Mainly because I hope a tonne of these websites will re-review the game with the final code and give this game the justice it deserves.

    Although, I will undoubtedly buy it regardless - NGB was a truly outstanding game. One of which many of my friends have tried, loved, but couldn't beat. Perhaps this game will be slightly more forgiving (I hope not)!

    I also would like to know how long the game is! No review has actually put a time on it yet (seems odd to me)!!!

  • AzelKosMos

    Posted May 30, 2008 10:13 am PT

    Thats the way it should be and I'm glad even if the review is slightly late.

  • pvt_richard

    Posted May 30, 2008 4:26 am PT

    i fell a little bit disappointed cuz this game is not as hard as the original ...i mean ..beating the original game made you feel that you have made an achievement ..yeah it is hard but that is what i like the most about this game specially master ninja mode... tell me who wants to play a game and finish it in a blink of an eye...i shall play the original one more time before playing this one....can't wait to play this one.

  • BenGenio

    Posted May 29, 2008 5:58 pm PT

    Quality is more important for me than time in this case. I find this section to be very informative and will keep a lot of fans in the msg boards calm while we wait for the release of the game. I wonder why other websites like IGN like to post their review one week ahead, what for? The game is not out yet, that could only hurt the time reviewers spent playing the game and therefor also the final review of the game..

  • C_BozkurT_C

    Posted May 29, 2008 3:55 pm PT

    i smell corruption

  • SirSmokeal0t

    Posted May 29, 2008 3:42 pm PT

    No race? BS. If you're the first to bring out a review of a high-profile game it will draw attention to your site, so of course there's a race -_-

    It's good you guys are still waiting for the retail build though, so far the reviews have been one big joke.

  • mujeeb1

    Posted May 29, 2008 2:38 pm PT

    All I want to know is, how much does any of this have to do with the demo? A website reviewing a game is well and good, but if I can play a game before I buy it, that's even better. Team Ninja and Xbox.com maintain that there will be a demo in May. Today is the 29th of May. The game comes out in 5 days. What happened to the demo, and why is no one being informed? Another case of the higher-ups screwing the consumer if you ask me.

  • ThaGreatness007

    Posted May 29, 2008 11:47 am PT

    Ok so in Europe the retail version is out to reviewers but in the states, sites like GS received a product that is not complete or finished? The game will be out in 5 days how much can they change?

  • hyonoid

    Posted May 29, 2008 11:36 am PT

    9.0 confirmed

    and MGS4 7.5 :lol

  • shakur

    Posted May 29, 2008 11:28 am PT

    DAMN!
    DARKFIGHTERSOUL hit it spot on.

  • Kevin-V GameSpot staff member

    Posted May 29, 2008 10:53 am PT

    khalid_b, CVG stated they reviewed a PAL disc, which is a format that will not play in an American Xbox 360. Eurogamer also had a retail copy. European outlets have apparently been provided retail discs. American outlets were not.

  • khalid_b

    Posted May 29, 2008 10:33 am PT

    So CVG were lying when they said they reviewed the boxed retail version when questioned about the glitches and that said glitches were "still very much present?"

  • kratos_karmakar

    Posted May 29, 2008 10:31 am PT

    Kevin, u guys already have the review build right. tell me is it hard for u to have the actual game yet not be able to play it since it might spoil the actual review. personally if i were in ur place id have to have myself tied to a chair with adamantium chains to stop myself from going near it. and i wud have done it since i hate spoiling stuff for myself. seriously who does that harm..... me ofcourse.

  • kratos_karmakar

    Posted May 29, 2008 10:27 am PT

    yep thats wy i come here. but i heard or read some where that the retail version will have the still existing camera problems fixed .also the jittery framerates wont exist either. Kevin please tell me ur opinion on that.

  • Kevin-V GameSpot staff member

    Posted May 29, 2008 9:53 am PT

    VirtuaCast, reviews are meant to be a tool for people who wish to decide if a game is right for them. That is "the point," not to be first in a race that doesn't exist, except in some people's minds. If you are buying on release day, chances are reviews for this game are meaningless to you. Our responsibility is to give readers a review based on the game they buy, not to rush a review to publication based on software that's different than what you pay $60 for. If you want a rushed review based on incomplete software, there are other sites that will provide you that. We simply aren't one of them.

  • VirtuaCast

    Posted May 29, 2008 8:19 am PT

    Yeah thats nice but I hope GS is mad because this is BS whats the point of the review if it's last. Waste of time GS.

  • TheCarnagedOne

    Posted May 29, 2008 6:54 am PT

    xgalaticax hit it right on the nose. If you're not sure about a game, rent before you buy. Although we would like to think different, human nature causes us to be slanted in the reviewing of games. I don't mind hacking through hoards of mindless foes, but many reviewers and other people find this boring. The point is, play what you like. If you don't know if you will like it, rent it. I've had this game pre-oredered forever.....June 3rd, please come quickly!!!!

  • ahyumifan

    Posted May 29, 2008 4:48 am PT

    Now, this is the way to get my trust back on GS. Nice call.

  • odpr

    Posted May 29, 2008 4:39 am PT

    very good, the best site ever.

  • xgalacticax

    Posted May 29, 2008 3:16 am PT

    I dont care about the review. Ninja Gaiden 2 is mine regardless. If I had to look at GS reviews, I would not have played some very cool games like DBZ:BT3, Tenchu Z and Army of Two (well army of two is only fun if uve got a fun person to co-op with). My advice is...if u have a game in mind that ure planning to get but aren't sure if its worth it, rent it first, if u like it, buy it.

  • pleasurengineer

    Posted May 28, 2008 8:27 pm PT

    Too bad this will make Ninja Gaiden not beat world record sales on the first day due to this since fence-sitters will be waiting. But MS/TN have only themselves to blame.

    Ninja Gaiden is my favorite game of all-time. Can't wait for #2!!! I wish we could fight online!!! Imagine 3 ninjas bullying 1 super duper ninja player. Now that would be something. High Def Super Smash Brothers Brawl, ninja style!

  • dn3datomiced

    Posted May 28, 2008 8:14 pm PT

    Thanks, Kevin. That actually explains some of the complaints I've seen elsewhere. For some reason, the notion never occurred to me.

  • ImOldGreg

    Posted May 28, 2008 7:58 pm PT

    and thats why I go to gamespot, good work boys, high standereds all the way!!

  • ocdog45

    Posted May 28, 2008 7:50 pm PT

    so they say

  • john1912

    Posted May 28, 2008 7:17 pm PT

    That is unfortunate to say the least that you do not have the retail copy, and MS/TN are claiming that at least some of those issues are not relevant. If these issues impact the score I would like to know by how much. I think it should be clearly addressed in the review in a open manor.

  • x-2tha-z

    Posted May 28, 2008 6:40 pm PT

    Good job GS. Looking forward to the review.

  • SuperSTi5

    Posted May 28, 2008 5:40 pm PT

    Great to hear, this is why I only trust your reviews. I know you put the time and effort into it that other sites obviously don't, good for you.

  • Ripper_TV

    Posted May 28, 2008 5:40 pm PT

    "visual glitches, and other noticeable flaws" - hmmmmm.....

  • DonPerian

    Posted May 28, 2008 4:31 pm PT

    Thanks a lot for informing the community of the problem and your intentions. Greatly appreciated. Good job GS and good luck reviewing the game!

    Grrahh I can't wait!

  • leogetsitdone

    Posted May 28, 2008 4:30 pm PT

    yes sir

  • JasonLin

    Posted May 28, 2008 4:19 pm PT

    Very nice GS!

    This is exactly what we want to hear.

  • Sig12047

    Posted May 28, 2008 4:02 pm PT

    Yeah, accuracy is better than timeliness. Dont rush..

  • lantus

    Posted May 28, 2008 2:51 pm PT

    Well what do you know, you guys did the right thing.

  • darkfightersoul

    Posted May 28, 2008 10:12 am PT

    Good on you GS.

    It continues to baffle me why the game companies continue to send builds of games that do not represent the final product (especially when the review build has problems like load times or frame-rate). The point of a review is purchasing information for the consumer. So if the reviewer's build isn't the same as the final build...what is the point of sending broken review builds? You are just wasting the reviewer's time and consumer's time with a review that isn't 100% factual.

    Having two different builds makes your company look bad because it seem that you are too lazy or too freaked out about the game by having two separate builds. Also it makes it hard for the reviewer/review site, because you have the idiots on the internet saying how the site has no credibility since they have to edit the review due to screwed up builds.

    It reminds me of Bully only working on the Xbox 360s that were "fine on the developer kits" but were super jacked up on the consumer consoles. And then they basically broke the game with the "repair" patch. It seems that now we are in the future, console developers are becoming careless with their games and will just "fix it with a patch". 3 years ago that would have been unacceptable and the game would have just been trashed, no matter what potential it had....

    Like I said, baffled.

  • Mehfuz

    Posted May 27, 2008 10:02 pm PT

    good decision GS

advertisement