Tiny Diggers – An iPad Construction Truck Game for Kids Age 2-5

I have been reviewing games professionally and personally for a few years now, and I have normally had a rule that has always stated that I review the game in whatever shape it is in at the time of play. Because I normally have a decent backlog of games, I get the benefit of some patches that clean up the game play.

Recently, since I have been receiving more games ahead of release or right at release to review, I have come to a dilemma. How does downloadable content factor into a review. A good example would be something like Project Sylpheed, a game I reviewed a few days ago. Would the free content that is available now affect my review if it would have been available during my play through? It is a possibility.

I like the idea of including the extra content that is available for download, because it may affect the review. But where is the line drawn at that point? What if some of the downloadable content fixes other issues behind the scenes? Is it fair to give that content a say in how the game is reviewed, even though it fixes issues in the game? It becomes a slippery slope, but some of that content can change a review. Especially, if it is adding new cars, or new tracks, maybe even new fighters or maps. These are not fixes, and they allow the person to expand the game, albeit at a cost sometimes.

Cost is another factor that comes into play. If you have to pay for the content, how is that factored in? If one sports game gives away free content, but another one does not, do I score the first one better because of it?

Right now, you are probably asking why I allude to fixes not being reviewable. Most magazines and online sites adhere to the rule of reviewing a game in its current state. This has normally focused on patching. A lot of games will be pushed out the door early and a patch will follow shortly if not the same day the game is released to fix those last minute issues (the subject of a future editorial). These should never be allowed, because they fix something that for the most part should have been fixed before the game was released. Release patches are about bugs that are known, but will not be fixed at release, but after in a post release patch. And believe me, game companies complain about this all the time, saying things that get complained about in a review are fixed. Well of course they are, because you fixed them two weeks later after the game has been bought by thousands upon thousands of people.

So at this time, where do I come down on downloadable content, which does not fix the game, but actually adds to its potential score? I have decided that as long as it is a simple add on like a level pack or cars, something to that effect, it should be included. But an overreaching add on, that clearly goes to adding not only content but fixes underlying issues, that will not be allowed in my review.

Where do you the readers stand on this? Have I made a good choice, or will I be the wrecker of all reviews? Let me know in the forums.