Gaëtan Boulanger

Instead, they're being reviewed on dated builds, missing the essential day one patch and not reflecting the quality of life and polish players get to experience on release day. It would be time to rethink that process.. but no one does.

It gets even worse for a game such as #AnthemGame which must comply to EA's (very) questionable program, and go through various trial periods, from "demos" to an anticipated 10h version, making it only more confusing for players.

In the end, buying a live-service game is making a bet for the future and supporting a game that's destined to grow and evolve depending on the way its community "consumes" it. And part of that deal is accepting its youth flaws, helping devs to consolidate, improve it.

I agree with that idea. But, it's also important to know what are the qualities and flaws of one of these games at day one. It's, after all, the day one. Even if it will eventually change or be improved... Or eventually not. Reviews remain important.

But we also need to follow the changes of one game. No Man's Sky is a great example. Two years later, many reviewers updated their reviews.

Well the main issue with anthem is that it sucks big time Like the gameplay is pure boredom and garbage There is a lot of bugs with equipments stuffs You need to manually make the game in English in origin to have English voices And then it's really badly staged within its quests

Don't agree at all. Friends and I had a great time on it. Gameplay flow feels amazing, flying and shooting mechanics are really satisfying. To me, its quest design is as good/bad as Destiny or The Division. Depends what you expect from this type of game.

Well I expect to have Fun And I didn't except during the intro mission I just played a shitty warframe with no paced and less staged in a beautiful yet empty and meaningless world for 5 hours Not for me at all