• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Jimquisition (August 31st, 2015) - Review Events And Boot Camps

L~A

Member
With the recent kerfuffle over Metal Gear Solid V being reviewed at "boot camps," it's a good opportunity to talk about review events overall, and why they're total bollocks.

General rule of thumb should be - if a publisher is making you go out of your way to review their game, they should eff off. They dictate enough of the terms as it is.

Link to the video!
 

LewieP

Member
Publishers would stop hosting review events if publications stopped attending them. Publications would stop attending them if their audiences cared more about reviews being thorough than early.

People get the games media they deserve.
 

BatDan

Bane? Get them on board, I'll call it in.
Holy crap that's the first I heard of the physical PC release of Phantom Pain. That just seems like a complete waste of money, no point in even printing the discs and boxes. What the hell Konami?

Yeah, there is truth to reviewers getting "paid off", but it's not with cash.
 

erawsd

Member
I heard Jeff Gerstmann mention that there was a lot of back room discussion amongst industry people who were upset and said they weren't going to send anyone to the event, but they did anyway.
 

lazygecko

Member
That installer shit is infuriating. And it's not just something isolated to Konami or games for that matter. A couple of years ago when I had formated my PC and reinstalled Windows 7, somehow I didn't get the network drivers with that and couldn't use the internet. So I searched for network/mobo drivers for a long time on my laptop, and whenever I thought I got something and transfered it over to my desktop, it turns out that this "installer" was just a downloader client. Which I couldn't use because I couldn't access the bloody internet in the first place.

Just goes to show how fucking useless our modern forms of distribution are when things do go wrong.
 
When Jim makes another Konami video, he should let any Konami footage to be shortened in his video because of Content ID claims. But hey, Jim Sterling is Jim Sterling and doesn't know how to properly use YouTube, son.
 
Holy crap that's the first I heard of the physical PC release of Phantom Pain. That just seems like a complete waste of money, no point in even printing the discs and boxes. What the hell Konami?
Many PC gets physical releases which are essentially a steam key in a box. I think in those cases the disc that comes with them does have an installer which after doing the installing Steam will have to re-download half of it due to it being out of date. As a result I don't imagine many people bother using the discs in these cases.

Of course lack of Steam pre-load is another big concern and just reeks of mistrust if we're going down the route of Konami caring about MGS spoilers.
 

DrArchon

Member
Top tier intro!

Review events really are crap, but the thing that worries me the most is that so many review sites didn't mention that their time playing the game was at an event. I'd greatly appreciate a lot more disclosure from these sites about the events in question and any perks they may have come with (though I can imagine the publishers limiting this kind of info).
 

AlexMogil

Member
Publishers would stop hosting review events if publications stopped attending them. Publications would stop attending them if their audiences cared more about reviews being thorough than early.

People want stuff early and there will be plenty of people waiting in line (Youtube reviewers wanting likes and subscribes for example) to take the publications' places.
 
When Jim makes another Konami video, he should let any Konami footage to be shortened in his video because of Content ID claims. But hey, Jim Sterling is Jim Sterling and doesn't know how to properly use YouTube, son.
Or I'll keep doing what I intend to do and let publishers continue to show their fucking ass.
 
CNvm7puVEAEbT0p.png:large

OK, so are Konami now taking money that Sony and Activision claim cannot be had? Fucks sake Youtube, get your act together. This is so stupid.
 
Or I'll keep doing what I intend to do and let publishers continue to show their fucking ass.
Just wanted to say that the intro was strangely fitting, since people are going to complain endlessly about you putting (old and non really spoilery) footage of MGSV in your video.
I witness you.
 

Meia

Member
Many PC gets physical releases which are essentially a steam key in a box. I think in those cases the disc that comes with them does have an installer which after doing the installing Steam will have to re-download half of it due to it being out of date. As a result I don't imagine many people bother using the discs in these cases.



The only thing that really pissed me off about it is they're doing a physical PC release, and then they don't do the CE release for the platform too. Been a trend happening more and more lately, and it's annoying.
 
Brad Shoemaker remarked on MGS V that it was the first time he'd had to deal with this (and subsequent not going/cramming play for review near release) in quite a while.

I wonder if 2012 may have took the wind out of this methodology's sales as Telltale and thatgamecompany didn't have to woo and bribe to get boucoup GOTY nods.
 
Yeah, there is truth to reviewers getting "paid off", but it's not with cash.
I can kind of guarantee you that having to review a game locked up in a hotel somewhere for a few days is not being paid off as much as it is "fuck, I have to do this again because otherwise I (or my boss) loses views because the review is two days late and might as well not be written."

It's a shitty practice nobody really likes outside of the publisher.
 
Publishers would stop hosting review events if publications stopped attending them. Publications would stop attending them if their audiences cared more about reviews being thorough than early.

People get the games media they deserve.
It is a bit of a cart and horse problem, people are used to the pre-existing review structure. The market for longer form, "slower arriving" reviews is a bit nebulous.
 

The Technomancer

card-carrying scientician
I can kind of guarantee you that having to review a game locked up in a hotel somewhere for a few days is not being paid off as much as it is "fuck, I have to do this again because otherwise I (or my boss) loses views because the review is two days late and might as well not be written."

It's a shitty practice nobody really likes outside of the publisher.

And I guarantee that even if there is a backlash in the press towards this sort of thing very few people will actually talk about how maybe ad revenue as a business model has some serious and fundamental flaws and maybe is just kind of a shitty system
 

Bladelaw

Member
Publishers would stop hosting review events if publications stopped attending them. Publications would stop attending them if their audiences cared more about reviews being thorough than early.

People get the games media they deserve.

This needs to be repeated over and over again.

Publications need to disclose when they attend these things (most do these days which is great) and people need to understand that a review (not just "first impressions") out of this should always be subject to additional scrutiny.

I'd rather wait until reviewers can actually play it at their leisure and fully explore the content. For example how many reviews site the micro transactions, what they can buy and if/how you can earn the currency in game? This was a big deal with MKX but beyond GAF I haven't seen much explaining what you get in MGSV and what kind of grind wall it's attached to.
 

patapuf

Member
And I guarantee that even if there is a backlash in the press towards this sort of thing very few people will actually talk about how maybe ad revenue as a business model has some serious and fundamental flaws and maybe is just kind of a shitty system

If papers like the New York Times have trouble getting people to pay for Internet articles i don't think IGN or Gamespot (nevermind the smaller sites) can bring people to pay for reviews.

The majority of the internet is ad based. Gaming sites are just small fry really.
 
Top tier intro!

Review events really are crap, but the thing that worries me the most is that so many review sites didn't mention that their time playing the game was at an event. I'd greatly appreciate a lot more disclosure from these sites about the events in question and any perks they may have come with (though I can imagine the publishers limiting this kind of info).

Seriously. Konami acting like a sack of shit is one thing (next you'll tell me that grass is green!). But I can't believe we're still at the point where major review sites fail to disclose basic, essential information like whether they got the game for free, whether the game was played under insane restrictive conditions, or whether they got any free meals/plane tickets/swag from the publisher. It's an embarrassment.
 

Roussow

Member
Brad Shoemaker remarked on MGS V that it was the first time he'd had to deal with this (and subsequent not going/cramming play for review near release) in quite a while.

I wonder if 2012 may have took the wind out of this methodology's sales as Telltale and thatgamecompany didn't have to woo and bribe to get boucoup GOTY nods.

When was this? I haven't seen any MGSV content on GB lately -- or is this going back to the preview a month ago?
 
And I guarantee that even if there is a backlash in the press towards this sort of thing very few people will actually talk about how maybe ad revenue as a business model has some serious and fundamental flaws and maybe is just kind of a shitty system
It is, but who is going to pay for the content? The largest media companies in the world have trouble with getting people to subscribe, so a lot of websites are certainly not in the position to do so.

Some personalities based media can, but they are mostly smaller scale and will not cover the amount of games or news the larger websites do.

It's an interesting time to be sure to see how this all plays out (in gaming media and elsewhere) in the next decade or so. I hope paying for content becomes more acceptable again, so journalists don't have to write for the pageviews and Google hits, but instead for their paying audience.
 
Brad Shoemaker remarked on MGS V that it was the first time he'd had to deal with this (and subsequent not going/cramming play for review near release) in quite a while.

I wonder if 2012 may have took the wind out of this methodology's sales as Telltale and thatgamecompany didn't have to woo and bribe to get boucoup GOTY nods.

When did they talk about this? At PAX?

Edit: Nevermind answered above.
 

jschreier

Member
Publishers would stop hosting review events if publications stopped attending them. Publications would stop attending them if their audiences cared more about reviews being thorough than early.

People get the games media they deserve.
Kotaku didn't attend the review event; we have yet to run a review; and our audience cares more about our reviews being thorough than early. This isn't some sort of unsolvable problem. Getting rid of review scores would certainly help.
 

jacobeid

Banned
Kotaku didn't attend the review event; we have yet to run a review; and our audience cares more about our reviews being thorough than early. This isn't some sort of unsolvable problem. Getting rid of review scores would certainly help.

Thank you for all of your diligence, Jason.
 
Top Bottom