When I reviewed Crimson Desert for the PS5, I remember calling out its clunky controls and a few other issues. Although the adventure and sheer scale of it all were enough to allow me to enjoy the experience, I do know that others weren’t as kind to the game as I was, and perhaps justifiably so. It was an ambitious title, no doubt, but its own flaws stood in the way of its efforts to realize those ambitions.
We all agree that the game had an unstable launch, and it’s easy to see where those who criticized it were coming from. But in the last few weeks, things have changed considerably. Where early review scores that lambasted the game’s launch build might have suggested that the game was going to start aging faster than the developer would have liked, it’s now the other way around, with a slew of speedy updates that have largely addressed most of the problems being called out.
Crimson Desert brings a lot of strange things to the world of Pywel, but perhaps the strangest of them all is how rapidly it has outgrown its early reviews and fan backlash to become a title that makes all those complaints seem provisional. It’s an interesting look at how games can turn things around through patches and updates to leave release review scores in the dust. Of course, credit must be given to the team behind the game’s reversal of fortunes, with the game now much better than before.
It isn’t universally redeemed, not yet, but it’s been altered so fast that the first wave of criticism it received now merits a thorough reexamination. Let’s dive into how Crimson Desert’s review cycle has struggled to keep up with its rapid-fire evolution.
The Merits Of Early Reviews
I’m going to say it outright: I don’t think the early reviews of Crimson Desert were wrong, far from it. Those complaints were quite valid and were things that even I, as a player, found quite annoying to deal with. The controls were baffling and felt like they were designed to work against me every time I wanted to perform a specific action. I’m still not fully okay with the interact and jump buttons being one and the same. I’ve found myself picking up flowers or catching bugs when all I’ve wanted to do is climb a wall way too often.
Like most of you, I found the story too disjointed to make me care about anything other than getting the Greymanes back together, a task I took on with reckless abandon. But even that proved to be an uphill task in the game’s early hours, with a UI that was too confusing to be useful. Of course, the game’s stout refusal to point its players in the direction of navigating its many menus and working with all of the systems it had woven into the experience was a factor. All of the potential was there, but it was buried under a ton of jank that was seriously off-putting.
But while early reviews did have merits, backed up with evidence as they were, the scores they generated operated under a simple assumption: that Crimson Desert was a static experience whose day-one version was going to be the one all of us got. But like the Greymanes, the game refused to give up in the face of adversity, with multiple patches making the controls so much better, implementing better puzzle clarity, better inventory management, balancing, more fast-travel points, more readable font sizes, and more.
The most recent patch alone addressed the issue of Damiane and Oongka being locked out of a large chunk of the game’s content, while a developer update has promised further additions like difficulty options and more combat-focused content like boss rematches and the re-occupation of liberated locations. All of those fixes feel like the game’s collective body of updates is in direct conversation with its early reviews, challenging them in a way that feels like the patch notes are almost arguing with early review scores and complaints.
But why does that matter as much as I think it does?
The Effects of Entropy
It does so because it sheds light on a factor that reviews of a game’s release build cannot fully predict: its ability to evolve into something better. Crimson Desert’s early reviews weren’t wrong, but have now been shown to present time-sensitive truths that spoke to a version of it that no longer exists. They examined a build of the game that was indeed rough, and the way that the game has managed to correct its course showcases a half-life that was decidedly short in their case. Crimson Desert changed too quickly for any review cycle in modern gaming, a feat that’s quite rare and the reason for this look into the early discourse around it.
Of course, that discourse has now changed for the better. Where complaints about clunky controls once dominated it, there is now praise for a new scheme, with the option to stay with the old system being very welcome. Early criticisms about Damiane and Oongka not being playable enough have now made way for praise at the way they’ve been given everything they need to take on most of Pywel’s challenges. There’s a lot of gratitude being sent to the developers, not just for their ability to listen and act on player feedback, but for the effort they’ve sunk into addressing it.
That doesn’t mean that Crimson Desert has magically become a perfect title. There’s still its disjointed, clunky story and the annoying cooldown on some of the coolest mounts in the game. The controls still need work, and the camera work during boss fights continues to be rather gimmicky despite improvements. There’s still the baffling requirement of Abyss Artifacts when you want to upgrade your favorite set of armor, which further strains the fact that it’s a shared pool between three playable characters, each of which needs a significant investment before you begin to experience their devastating potential.
But the conversations around the game have shifted from how rough its early build was to discussions about how quickly and efficiently it’s improving. Those early reviews, mine included, are becoming increasingly redundant in the face of the developer’s hard work to turn things around. And the best part of it all is that they’re still not done.
A Patchwork Of Great Changes
Once again, I must praise the developers and the studio, not just for the speedy fixes they’re implementing, but for the measured, well-reasoned response to the backlash the game’s early build received. The developer didn’t just throw in the towel, but has taken ownership of the situation and acknowledged the legitimacy of complaints from players and critics alike.
Its response is significant, not just because it’s an example of damage control done right, but because it has since built trust with fans and critics by addressing specific pain points in ways that have diminished early criticism enough to make the game’s potential shine through. I’ve always maintained that Pywel’s a great place for fantasy fans to have tons of fun. It’s now just easier to get to the good parts than it was when the game first came out.
The patches are evidence that a game’s launch version might not necessarily reflect what it can be after its initial reviews. But does that mean that Crimson Desert, or any title for that matter, should be reviewed twice? Not necessarily, as there are several factors to consider in the process. Yes, the game has certainly tested the limits of a single-score review system, but the ones reviewing it had no indication or reason to believe that it could, and perhaps would, turn things around. And that’s ignoring the speed with which it did so.
The fact that even the harshest analyses of the game are now considering whether those opinions are still relevant is telling, as it raises questions about whether a launch review is supposed to be a snapshot in a game’s evolutionary cycle, or a sort of buying guide to its current state. Considering the purpose of a review, which is to inform potential players about the good and bad of a game, I’d say that the original reviews of Crimson Desert must be preserved, especially when it still has a long way to go before it makes them totally redundant altogether.
A re-review of any game should not exist to help developers save face in the wake of releases that could be seen as a major let-down to players who dive into it from day one. But there is an argument to be made in favor of doing them for games that have since changed meaningfully. Crimson Desert’s an interesting case study on that front rather than being an exception. It’s a rare example of how a review of a modern title stays relevant before it becomes a footnote in its history.
Where other games age well as time goes by, Crimson Desert has earned the unique distinction of being a game that has aged out the “final” verdicts on its release build within weeks of those verdicts going live. It’s a game where the possibilities of hasty early reviews and a turnaround fast enough to outgrow them exist in the same place. Pywel’s a magical place, though, and it’s served up a slice of humble pie that’s really delicious, all things considered.
Note: The views expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily represent the views of, and should not be attributed to, GamingBolt as an organization.