An interesting perspective on going back to review games after release. For my own personal take games as a piece of media are still held to a similar static perspective, a finished product like a movie or book. As games continue to be patched and supported following release there is a valid argument to be made for going back to a title in its ‘finished state’ although arguably when that occurs is open to interpretation. Either way an interesting take on this subject matter.
Writing video game reviews is fun and a great creative outlet but the end requires scoring the game, which can be daunting. There is pressure to be objective here and subjective there, it should be based on your personal opinion overall though. Backlash from readers typically weighs on my mind because I want what I write to reflect exactly how I feel about the game. In order to keep that in mind, reviews of games should be updated over time.
A primary example of a game which needs to have a second look is No Man’s Sky. I have not played this title but the fact that it fell on its face upon release and was later given a revamp update, speaks for itself in requiring another review. From the Developers standpoint and the consumer, don’t you think it would need to be given a second chance? Of course if…
View original post 744 more words