Polygon lowers review score due to server & game instability

[Superbacon 380]

I knew public reception of the game would be horrible. But I didn't expect it to be this bad.

[Evil_One 119]

I knew public reception of the game would be horrible. But I didn't expect it to be this bad.

 

Ironically, you can blame the EAxis fanboys, not only for the bad game (they never complain even when something IS going wrong), but also for the rage.

 

They so massively over-defended and over-hyped EA and Maxis that no launch could've possibly lived up to the expectations.

 

Although EA and Maxis have screwed up really badly as well and that certainly doesn't help matters.

[Ma8thew 77]

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

http://www.polygon.com/game/simcity-2013/2630

 

As many worried, today's launch of SimCity has brought a number of server woes and instability with it. Some players are unable to connect to EA's servers to download the game. Others are unable to sign into SimCity'salways-online service to start a game. Others are suffering from disconnections while in-game, which often results in lost progress and bizarre glitches. Our own reviewer, Russ Pitts, has suffered disconnected sessions this afternoon that resulted in lost progress, corrupted avenue placement, and twin monster attacks.

 

After speaking with Russ and Polygon Managing Editor Justin McElroy, we are in agreement that the current state of SimCity merits an update to the game's score on Polygon, per our reviews policy. While not every player is experiencing these problems, members of our staff, other members of the press, and an anecdotally large portion of our readership are having moderate to severe difficulty playing the game. This likely-temporary scenario nonetheless affects our recommendation of SimCity, and we advise caution for the time being before diving headfirst into the game. - Arthur Gies, Polygon Reviews Editor

Seems like I may have misjudged Polygon, as this has concerned them and thus have lowered their score of the game from 9.5/10 to an 8 due to the glaring issues with the game. I still think that score is too high, but I have to give them credit for their honesty.

I foresee this happening with other reviews as well.

Maybe you shouldn't be so quick to accuse people of corruption in the future.

I don't retract anything I said previously - I still think the original review was nothing more than a corporate lovefest gush, and I don't even think SimCity deserves an 8.

So you still believe that they were bribed by EA, but also that you misjudged them?

I believe that it is likely their review scores are influenced by factors other than journalistic integrity, yes. That being said, I am happy to see them change their review score. But I think they mostly did it because of the public outcry. It's quite clear the game deserves nothing near perfect praise and a 9.5/10. Surely you must agree.

I think that if the online element worked as it should, the game could certainly deserve 9.5. I found the one hour beta to be more engaging than many other highly-rated-by-reviewers games that I have played. Now arguably, game review scores are inflated in general, but that's endemic to the entire industry rather than confined to specific reviewers.

 

And it looks like you got your wish, because the game is now rated at 4/10 by Polygon.

I found all the betas to be extremely disappointing. Sure, the simulation and data layers are nice and pretty, but at the end of the day you are working inside a tiny rectangle surrounded by nothingness. While cities are connected in some ways, Their interaction is nothing short of awkward. Also, the fact that multiplayer is pretty much forced on to the player I think is an insult to the fanbase. It was foolish of Maxis to ignore the fanbase and give them something they never asked for. The customer is always right.

 

I find it really hard to believe that a true Sim City fan would  give this game a 9.5/10.

 

Now a 4 is really more like it, especially in the game's current state. At best , if you ignore the rest of the franchise's history, it might deserve a 6 or a 7 if you're feeling generous. In any case, I have a little more respect for Polygon now. It's just really hard for me these days to take a non-indie game review site seriously after all the hilarious scores given to terrible games last year by sites like IGN.

I don't want to rehash all these arguments again. But I can tell you I am a true Simcity fan (I bought Simcity 4 and Rush Hour on their release days). Your understanding of a review is flawed, I believe. It should not be based on the franchise's history. It should be judged on its own merits alone. Your assertion that the customer is right is predicated on the idea that all customers think like you. Me disputing your assessment should be enough to convince you that this is not the case.

 

By the way, I'm not sure what your criteria for 'indie' are. Polygon are a very new operation, and they are independent in the sense that they are not owned by a media conglomerate.

In a franchise, people come to expect improvements upon its predecessors. The game is called "Sim City", henceforth, it is part of the Sim City line of games. Just because they didn't put a 5 at the end of it doesn't change the fact everyone is considering it exactly that. On its own merit, it is not a simulation of a city. It is a simulation of small chunks of cities, with some sort of Anno-type trading mechanism behind it. For a city-building game on its own merit, it's somewhat above average. Candidate for "Game of the Year"? If so, we don't have a lot to look forward to.

 

My assertion that the customer is right is the assertion of every successful business ever created.

 

Polygon is not owned by a media conglomerate, but they have major financial backing from the industry. You're a bit overzealous about defending them. I find it funny.

I didn't disagree that the customer is always right. I said I think you are mistaken in your assertion that you are the typical customer. I'm sick of dealing with your condescension though, so I'm going to stop replying.