•  
  • Kevin-V
  • Level: 43 (89%) 
  • Rank: Sword of Sodan
  • Member since: Sep 12, 2006
  • Last online: 12/22/09 11:26 pm PT
  • My Emblems:
    • Staff
    • Popular
    • Greatest Game Hero Bracket Submitter
    • First espisode of TOTS!
    • Virtually There: E3 2009 Microsoft Conference
    • Virtually There: E3 2009 Day 2
    • Virtually There: E3 2009 Day 1
    • Webby Awards People's Voice 2009 Voter
    • Staff
    • Popular
    • +1 Orator of Distinction
    • Beta Tester
    • Artistic Genius
    • Tagger Maker
    • Public Access
    • Tokyo Game Show 2006
    • MK Scream It Contest
    • After Hours: Virtually There
    • Burning Crusader
    • Virtually There: PlayStation 3 Launch
    • Virtually There: Wii Launch
    • I voted
    • Derek Jeter's #1 Fan
    • Bounty Hunter
    • Tolkien's Token
    • Virtually There: E3 2007 Microsoft Conference.
    • Virtually There: E3 2007 Nintendo Conference
    • Virtually There: E3 2007 GameSpot Show Zealot
    • Sweet Revenge
    • Readers' Choice 2007 Chooser
    • Interactive Achievement Awards 2007
    • Ticket Holder
    • Virtually There: E3 2008 The Big Three Conferences
    • E3 Electric Sheep
    • Virtually There: E3 2008 GameSpot Show Future Outlaw
    • The Dread Hallowiener
    • Gears of War 2 Marathon
    • Quick Change Artist
    • Animal Crossing City Folk Live Gameplay Marathon
    • PoP-o-Matic Emblem
    • Webby Awards People's Voice 2009 Voter
    • Virtually There: E3 2009 Day 1
    • Virtually There: E3 2009 Day 2
    • Virtually There: E3 2009 Microsoft Conference
    • First espisode of TOTS!
    • Greatest Game Hero Bracket Submitter
     
     

My Friends

14Feb 08

What I Heard: Game Informer posted a note indicating that the review discs provided to editorial outlets by Microsoft performed differently than the boxed retail. As it turns out, the Internet is abuzz with anecdotal reports that the loading times reported by GameSpot and other press outlets are not indicative of the final product.

Where I Heard it From: Wise GameSpot aficionado XkilluaX and the kind C. Ciupka. Thanks for the heads up, gentlemen.

Why It Happened: As with many games, we received code from Microsoft indicated as final and reviewable. However, as is often the case, the discs were standard DVDs and not final pressed discs, so the media only plays in debug consoles, i.e., consoles developers use to test non-final code, and are designed to play code written to standard DVD.

This is industry standard, so the fact that we received debug-only code isn't unusual. As always, we only review the game if it is specifically stated that it is reviewable and final. As this was the case, we reviewed the game with the assumption that it was exactly the same game as what would be inside retail boxes. As noted in the text and video reviews, load times for Lost Odyssey using these discs were unacceptably long,often taking upwards of longer than a minute. And we weren't alone: Almost every online press outlet reported the same circumstance.

What Microsoft Told Us: According to Microsoft, last-minute tweaks improve the loading times in the retail discs anywhere from 15 to 60 seconds.

What Happens Next: We will be purchasing retail copies of Lost Odyssey this morning at our local EBGames. I plan on replaying a good portion of the game this weekend and into next week to determine how great the differences are. In the meanwhile, we will add an editor's note to the review indicating that we are investigating possible differences between the discs provided to us by Microsoft and the final retail version.

Could the Text or Review Score Change? Possibly. What happens now is based entirely on whether these improvements exist, and how drastic they are. If there are differences, the text of the review will likely be altered, and the editor's note will be adjusted to reflect that. The score is a different matter, simply due to the rigidness of our .5-based system. I do not know whether or not these differences can turn a "very good game" into a "great game" based on loading times. As soon as we have invetigated the issue and have made an office-wide decision, I'll let you know.

Who Does This Hurt? Everyone involved. The greatest injury is to our readers, who have every right to expect review text without errors. It hurts GameSpot, which is under great scrutiny from our audience based on events that many have interpreted as hurting our credibility; a circumstance like this, while out of our control, can further feed the speculative fires. It hurts Microsoft, because we and our readers trust that the game provided to us as final and reviewable, and major gaffes like these cause everyone involved to question the validity of that code in the future. It hurts Mistwalker, which trusts its publisher to provide a product to publications that represents their hard work and dedication.

  • Posted Feb 14, 2008 10:20 am PT
  • Category: Editorial
  • 78 Comments

78 Comments

  • FernandoDANTE

    Posted Feb 14, 2008 11:08 am PT

    Well, they should have put a huge "DON'T REVIEW BASED ON THIS COPY" sticker on the DVD. I mean, on all 4 DVD's.

  • Jandurin

    Posted Feb 14, 2008 11:11 am PT

    Good going MS
    I'm just glad the loading times weren't as bad as reported!
    Hope the review edit (assuming there is one, of course) tells how long we can actually expect to wait between battles.

  • f15srcool

    Posted Feb 14, 2008 11:23 am PT

    Nice one, Microsoft. "Hey, these are the review builds, right?" "Yeah man, that one dude at the place told me!" "Well, should we check em'?" "Nah." I'm just kidding. But I could see loading time changes that severe affecting .5 of the score.

  • ruff_edgz

    Posted Feb 14, 2008 11:33 am PT

    This should be interesting. That's sad that you had to experience the 'testing' copy of the game while doing your review. Maybe the retailed discs will be better then the one you used for the review so I can't wait to see what comes out of it Thanks for the heads up Kevin-V

  • mac906

    Posted Feb 14, 2008 11:39 am PT

    Thanks for the info Kev, though I'm not sure that this new information will change the review all that much.

  • NeoJedi

    Posted Feb 14, 2008 11:45 am PT

    It boggles my mind why MS would send you guys disks that do not reflect what the final product will be like. Don't they know the load times are atrocious and that you guys will actually REVIEW the game, while we, dedicated GameSpotters, await the review and, sometimes, depend on it to purchase the game? Insanity, I tell you.

  • teirdome

    Posted Feb 14, 2008 11:51 am PT

    Thanks for this post Kevin, it is very professional and I would say that your analysis is dead on. What we as gamers always tend to forget is our experience is powered by high voltage and lower voltage that has hundreds of man made layers stacked atop it, something that is in truth extremely fragile. Both in software and in sites like GameSpot that consumers trust, mistakes like this happen, yet we as consumers are always quick to judge and slow to forgive (the validity of that sentiment is another fantastic argument). I'm looking forward to you and the office's results!

  • Darrogamer06

    Posted Feb 14, 2008 11:52 am PT

    That is quite strange indeed. I have the import retail version of the game and well the loading times aren't bad in my opinion but are long enough to be irksome for some. The frame-rate dips you mentioned in the review are still there of course so that hasn't changed.

  • locopatho

    Posted Feb 14, 2008 11:58 am PT

    Weird why would MS wanna screw themselves like that?
    As for the score, if the loading goes from around a minute (!!!) to only a couple of seconds that's definately worth .5 imo.

  • Enginwolf04

    Posted Feb 14, 2008 12:08 pm PT

    First of all, much respect and gratitude to Kevin VanOrd and the rest of the GameSpot crew for sweating and toiling away at getting reviews out to us, so that we can make the call on whether to part with $40-60 or not. Secondly, I may be the minority (in more ways than one), but I believe that loading times are minimally annoying nowadays, even with some PSP games, so I personally do not think that this should or could degrade or defile the integrity of GameSpot, Microsoft, and most importantly, Sakaguchi-san and Mistwalker. From the description of the review, the quality of the game would remain intact with or without an extra minute of loading per session. Thanks for being honest and pointing this out, but I think I still would have purchased this game in the coming months. Who's with me on this?

  • Suttonjn27

    Posted Feb 14, 2008 12:17 pm PT

    I always thought Gamespot reviewed games when they received early retail copies from the publishers/distributors, but after re-reading the review guidelines, I see I was mistaken. "Gold Master" means something different than I thought. That's actually a shame, because I've trusted Gamespots reviews more, especially in regards to technical glitches because of that *mistaken* belief. Thanks for clearing it up, though.

  • Kevin-V GameSpot staff member

    Posted Feb 14, 2008 12:23 pm PT

    Sutton, it is indeed supposed to be retail code, pressed to DVD. What we receive is to be EXACTLY what you would purchase on store shelves. There should never be a difference between the discs we receive and the ones in a retail box, aside from the fact that they are not copy protected.

  • RK-Mara

    Posted Feb 14, 2008 12:25 pm PT

    You can only blame the publisher and their own bad PR.

  • Reetesh

    Posted Feb 14, 2008 12:28 pm PT

    If old system existed it would have changed to 7.8 I think, what will happen now? basing on how bad the load times actually were, it might be a 8.0. Since the mistake is on MS's part I hope no one will thing ill of GS for correcting a review.

  • locoidontknow

    Posted Feb 14, 2008 12:50 pm PT

    Loading times are fine. Go ahead and give this game an 8.5.

  • Oilers99

    Posted Feb 14, 2008 1:03 pm PT

    Thanks for the heads up, Kevin. This kind of post should be the template for all editorial alterations from now on; a transparent explanation of what happened, and why.

    Regardless of whether or not you change the score, if the load times are indeed improved, then I'm definitely more likely to play Lost Odyssey.

  • vgm007

    Posted Feb 14, 2008 1:33 pm PT

    Haven't played it yet, but I probably will sooner or later. Hope what they said about the loading time decrease is true, though... it hurts the flow if loading times are huge, but you already knew that, I'm sure

  • Blace_07

    Posted Feb 14, 2008 2:27 pm PT

    Yeah I thought it was weird that everyone was complaining about the loading screens ( reviewers). I have played a good 6-7 hours so far and they definitely aren't longer than 15-20 seconds, and that is only when switching areas in town etc... I only takes a couple seconds for battles to load. I appreciate that you are going out of your way to go back and play some again and adjust the score if appropriate. Do you think any other reviews will also?

  • fenwickhotmail

    Posted Feb 14, 2008 2:28 pm PT

    yeah i didnt know what everyone was talking about

  • Vyce3

    Posted Feb 14, 2008 3:10 pm PT

    Good to know it will get a second chance, the load times are also perfectly fine with my copy too. What I'm concerned about though, regarding your review, is when it is said that LO lacks innovation. In my opinion, Lost Odyssey is to turn-based RPGs what Halo 3 was to the FPS genre... yet Halo 3 got praised...

  • steveslugga

    Posted Feb 14, 2008 3:14 pm PT

    phew, i thought u guys at GS lost your large sized reviewer minds, cause everyone was sayin the load times are nothing really, now i DEFINITELY wanna buy this game

  • Kevin-V GameSpot staff member

    Posted Feb 14, 2008 3:20 pm PT

    Halo 3 features an entire innovative game mode and never-before-seen online console features. I am sure you understand that if you are familiar with Halo 3. However, Halo 3 is a completely irrelevant topic. JRPGs get compared to other JRPGs, and I have played many, many, many of them. I can name any number of years-old RPGs that are better than Lost Odyssey. However, I am sure that if you have also played many JRPGs, that you also recognize that many older games have more interesting and refined gameplay mechanics. However, I am not interested in debating the merits of Lost Odyssey, since the review text, in that regard, speaks for itself. I'll keep everyone up to date regarding this specific issue as I can.

  • Manjithekengo

    Posted Feb 14, 2008 3:21 pm PT

    What really worries me is that Halo 3 has a 9.5 and LO is a much better game than Halo 3.

  • Manjithekengo

    Posted Feb 14, 2008 3:23 pm PT

    Like Tales of Phantasia and Chrono Trigger?

  • dannyodwyer

    Posted Feb 14, 2008 3:27 pm PT

    This is just a shame really, especially for the guys at Mistwalker. Im sure this is the last thing they expected when signing up with MS. Totally bizzare that it wasnt duplicate code considering the review date was so close the retail release. Its great that your highlighting it, but im sure most JRPG fans wouldnt have been deterred by loading times alone.

  • Blace_07

    Posted Feb 14, 2008 3:28 pm PT

    If you need a list of a few JRPG's that ARE better than Lost Odyssey, then here are some: Chrono Trigger, Chrono Cross, Dragon Quest VIII: Journey of the Cursed King, Final Fantasy IV, VI, VII, VIII, IX, X, XII, Tactics. There are many more, but I don't feel like typing ALL of them up. It is a solid game that is definitely enjoyable, but there is no innovation whatsoever, and there are technical issues even if the load times are shorter than what critics sited.

  • Rasgueado

    Posted Feb 14, 2008 3:39 pm PT

    The internet is a slippery place with all these soap boxes scattered around everywhere.

  • Manjithekengo

    Posted Feb 14, 2008 3:58 pm PT

    You need innovation to enjoy a damned good story?

    That's pretty sad.

  • _Bear

    Posted Feb 14, 2008 4:03 pm PT

    Hey KV, sorry about this, but thanks for being upfront and trying to explain what happened in a very real honest way. Try not to take it to heart what has happened here through no fault of yours or GS. Mistakes will happen, these things happen. You based your review on what was available to you at the time. Updating it now, is doing things the right way. You have nothing to be upset about, it was out of your control. That being said I think its bending over backwards, buying retail copies and playing it again and if necessary amending the score. You are to be praised along with Gamespot.

  • fenwickhotmail

    Posted Feb 14, 2008 4:04 pm PT

    enjoy playing the game again :p

  • MrClean44

    Posted Feb 14, 2008 4:47 pm PT

    Thanks for the explanation, now everyone doesn't hate you guys.

  • Blace_07

    Posted Feb 14, 2008 4:57 pm PT

    I didn't say you need innovation to enjoy a good story, because I completely disagree with that. I am simply stating that with the way technology is today, innovation is the best way to get good nods from critics and fans.

  • hawaiiinsomniac

    Posted Feb 14, 2008 5:01 pm PT

    Mahalo nui loa for the 411. I was debating on buying or renting it. I'll wait until I hear the updated review.

    Who ho!! 3 day weekend!!!

  • doolies

    Posted Feb 14, 2008 5:03 pm PT

    I did find it odd that you said loading times were bad, as us Aussies got the game almost a week before the USA did. The game is brilliant and load times are not bad at all.

    Now we see reason as to what actually happened. Unfortunate that it would happen at such an inconvenient time for GS.

  • Moti_Biran

    Posted Feb 14, 2008 9:37 pm PT

    Here we go again!

  • GtheMVP

    Posted Feb 14, 2008 9:46 pm PT

    Kev, thanks for being honest with it.

    With Gamespot's credibility in the crapper these days, it would serve the company well to put a post on the site regarding this matter. It's M$ fault, so be sure to blame them, but tell the people the review is subject to change, cause the loading times you gripe about aren't in my version.

    "Do it, do it"

  • paul939

    Posted Feb 14, 2008 9:53 pm PT

    As usual, MS defends its products vehemently, and good to see GS has salvaged its reputation.

  • RebornJeremiah

    Posted Feb 14, 2008 10:46 pm PT

    I am kinda losing my faith in mystwalker when I purchased Blue Dragon and found out that the game is so weak in storyline and the game play is kinda half assed. Now that LO is given 7.5 which is way better than Blue Dragon I am still not convinced. Well Kevin, I think if you add another .5 point to 8.0 I might be convinced to get this game.

  • Telekenesis123

    Posted Feb 14, 2008 11:39 pm PT

    I totally understand where your coming from, they actually kinda shot themselves in the foot. But now since it's known the load times are actually pretty fast what needs to be done is perhaps the score changed to a 8.0 or in the very least remove that long load times medal of shame in the review.

    It needs to be re-evaluated (thats good your doing it) because you could say the review is not a review of the actual game in a sense.

    I just made a post in the forum of lost odyssey to a couple of youtube vids showing the in game loading times could actually be considered pretty fast...They sure look that way to me and everyone who has commented on them so far.

  • TheForgotten0ne

    Posted Feb 15, 2008 4:26 am PT

    Haha, take is easy matcio! Ever review site have had this problem I think, and it's not sure that they edit the score but just one of the bad things. But let's just wait and see how long the loading time really is!

  • X-DonCorleone-X

    Posted Feb 15, 2008 4:31 am PT

    gamespot must change the score ..because its really realy nice game its best game i played ever...nice story..nice gameplay...and nice loading...thanks kevin

  • Hoobinator

    Posted Feb 15, 2008 5:22 am PT

    I've put in about 25 hours in this game so far and I was wondering where the FPS problems were and where were the long loading times because I seriously haven't encountered any so far. There are loading times just akin to most PS2 JRPG's nothing to moan about really.

  • TheNay-Sayer

    Posted Feb 15, 2008 5:24 am PT

    Hang tough Kevin. No one blames you for anything Atleast I hope not.

  • majadamus

    Posted Feb 15, 2008 6:02 am PT

    It's fair. You play the game the way it's suppose to be.

  • miketuck3r

    Posted Feb 15, 2008 7:32 am PT

    I have spoken to numerous people who have the retail version the majority of load time are less than 7 seconds, max so far has been 15 seconds

  • Hardknock

    Posted Feb 15, 2008 7:35 am PT

    I hope this ups the score because the game is absolutely fantastic from what I've played.

advertisement