Topic: Starfield and (lack of) Review Copies

Expand

@ArmoredMore UPDATE 1/9/23: With the dust now settled after Starfield's review embargo, I'd like to clarify a couple of points I've seen misunderstood about Digital Foundry's access to Starfield code. To be clear, Digital Foundry staff received Starfield code (without Eurogamer being involved in that process, as is standard) without agreeing to any specific proviso they could not share that code with Eurogamer. Eurogamer was separately told code was not available by Bethesda, which then stated that Digital Foundry's code could not be shared.

In other words Digital Foundry sourced their OWN review code as is standard and were NEVER told they could NOT share that code with Eurogamer. It was Bethesda that said code wasn't available and that they couldn't share the Code that had been sent to DF. If they are given a code to 'download' the game for 'free' from their store, then that code can't be reused/shared - like you can't share the Code to DLC or some cosmetic freebies you get with some games - that 'code' in the box is a one-use, not sharable...

It was NEVER anything malicious or underhanded, and as soon as the spoke with Bethesda, who told them that they couldn't share the DF code but then sent them their OWN code.

As for reviews, New Vegas made by Obsidian lost out on 'bonuses' from Zenimax Management (who no longer 'exist' as they sold up to MS) who stipulated that they would get a 'bonus' if their game was 85+ on Metacritic - the game ended up with an 84 score - which meant Obsidian lost out on bonuses. It was Zenimax who used that to screw out Obsidian of Bonuses. Its no different from setting a developer a target of 6m sales for example and then negotiating with MS to put their game in Game Pass to screw over the Studio - they get 3m sales but 10m players - no bonus because they didn't 'sell' 6m coopies. Didn't get 85 on Metacritic, no bonus...

https://www.eurogamer.net/obsidian-fallout-new-vegas-deal-wit...

As I said, review scores don't necessarily MATTER when it comes to Sales. Cyberpunk 2077 had some terrible reviews and a low score yet sold immensely well and yet other games that scored much higher didn't sell anywhere near the same numbers. If review scores mattered that much, then HiFi Rush should sell more than Starfield, but won't despite the exact same 'community' of gamers having the exact same opportunity to buy. Its not like 'Returnal' which is only on Playstation so can't expected to sell more than the Crew Motorfest which is available on more platforms so even though Returnal scored much higher, it won't help them outsell a game that scores much less...

What it does do though is raise that Studios profile and critical acclaim. It leads to recognition and potentially awards - like GotY or 'best' sound design etc. Its no different to Movies that are 'critically' regarded as the 'best' films of the year don't get more 'ticket' sales at the box office against the 'mediocre' big blockbuster movies that won't be at the OSCARs like the critically acclaimed movies will. If sales and scores were aligned, then games like CoD, Fifa, AC and many of the other 'blockbusters' would not be the best selling games every year. Baldurs Gate 3 would be the best selling game of the year. Returnal, an award winning game and critically successful would be more popular than Call of Duty on Playstation but it isn't.

All I said is that Review scores don't necessarily mean that those games will sell 'more', Its more about recognition and reputation for their craft. An 83 vs 87 average is so close - especially as that will likely have many 9/10's as well as a few 7/8's but overall is still regarded as a generally positive review and could make the difference between being nominated as a Game of the Year or not.

Some of the 'best' reviewed games every year never make the top 20 best selling games of the year so Reviews don't necessarily translate to Sales. Also games that were 'terrible' at launch (NMS, Cyberpunk etc) can turn things around and outsell games that scored much better.