Ghosts in the machine
I'd worried awhile back when consoles started drifting in the direction of always having an internet connection that it meant that the technical quality of console games would drop since, like PC games, it became possible patch them instead of having to recall the discs. This hasn't yet been an overwhelming issue, but it does come up now and again.
Shin Sangoku Musou 7 (Dynasty Warriors 8) has an asinine RNG-dependent weapon upgrade system that basically boils down to "reload until the Random Number God deigns to have mercy". Said system is universally hated, to the extent where it's possible to differentiate between series detractors who just like bashing the game but have never played it and actual gamers who have played it by noting whether or not this feature is mentioned in their reviews. So it's perhaps not surprising that the most recent 1.3 patch revamped the system to be a lot less RNG-dependent.
The question is, however, how would you review a game like this? Unlike an evolving game like an MMO, in which the user agreement usually includes "game experience may change during play", a single-player game marketed as such is generally expected to be complete in terms of features out of the box. While patching games to fix bugs is pretty common and welcomed by all players other than those who revel in bug exploits, actually changing gameplay mechanics is a slightly different field and it's theoretically possible that there are some players out there who like mind-numbing RNG grinds (insert snarky comment about kMMOs here). Would we eventually have game reviews that call out specific versions of the games as being better or worse, or give different ratings depending on whether or not the prospective gamer has the ability to download updates?*
Single player games are, generally, not going to be subject to the sinking feeling when you wake up to find that your class has been nerfed due to PVP balance, but there are some lines being blurred when products are expected to have continued support. The question of whether the user has purchased a static product, a service, or a product with service options keeps getting harder to define, and what the publisher is expected to change during the lifespan of the product range from bug fix patches to having your eBooks deleted due to copyright issues. It's an interesting question to observe for the future, especially given that entire "Always Connected" NextBox kerfluffle.
*Not always a rhetorical question, getting content from the PSN as an import gamer requires jumping through a couple of hoops such as making up a street address in Japan.
**Musou 7 is really rather more buggy than you'd expect out of a completed game, though they've been on the ball about patching it. The objective review would be "decent but not stellar". The subjective review is unavailable due to having melted into a puddle of squee some time ago.
Shin Sangoku Musou 7 (Dynasty Warriors 8) has an asinine RNG-dependent weapon upgrade system that basically boils down to "reload until the Random Number God deigns to have mercy". Said system is universally hated, to the extent where it's possible to differentiate between series detractors who just like bashing the game but have never played it and actual gamers who have played it by noting whether or not this feature is mentioned in their reviews. So it's perhaps not surprising that the most recent 1.3 patch revamped the system to be a lot less RNG-dependent.
The question is, however, how would you review a game like this? Unlike an evolving game like an MMO, in which the user agreement usually includes "game experience may change during play", a single-player game marketed as such is generally expected to be complete in terms of features out of the box. While patching games to fix bugs is pretty common and welcomed by all players other than those who revel in bug exploits, actually changing gameplay mechanics is a slightly different field and it's theoretically possible that there are some players out there who like mind-numbing RNG grinds (insert snarky comment about kMMOs here). Would we eventually have game reviews that call out specific versions of the games as being better or worse, or give different ratings depending on whether or not the prospective gamer has the ability to download updates?*
Single player games are, generally, not going to be subject to the sinking feeling when you wake up to find that your class has been nerfed due to PVP balance, but there are some lines being blurred when products are expected to have continued support. The question of whether the user has purchased a static product, a service, or a product with service options keeps getting harder to define, and what the publisher is expected to change during the lifespan of the product range from bug fix patches to having your eBooks deleted due to copyright issues. It's an interesting question to observe for the future, especially given that entire "Always Connected" NextBox kerfluffle.
*Not always a rhetorical question, getting content from the PSN as an import gamer requires jumping through a couple of hoops such as making up a street address in Japan.
**Musou 7 is really rather more buggy than you'd expect out of a completed game, though they've been on the ball about patching it. The objective review would be "decent but not stellar". The subjective review is unavailable due to having melted into a puddle of squee some time ago.