Meet Jose Liz's PGNx - the emblem of everything wrong with games journalism

cuyahoga · 08:22 AM

Jose is the founder and editor of PGNx Media (which I do not recommend visiting unless you have Adblock or whatever will not give Jose Liz his Google Adsense monies), a games site that provides dubious "reviews" (marketing department's wet dream), dubious "previews" (mostly just screenshots and trailers), and dubious "news" (just copy-and-pasted press releases) that you expect any amateur site to have, written by Jose or one of his buds. However, PGNx is worse than IGN or whatever major entity GAF likes to rally against, as at least there is some variety in the scores of those sites.

His site is no stranger to controversy, as PGNx's most notable moment may be when someone pointed out his review of Spider-Man 3 (9.5, four points higher than his Superman Returns score) read a lot like his preview of Spider-Man 3. To which Jose Liz replied he received six SKUs of the game and played through the main mode of three versions.

Yes, an amateur site blowing is not really news or even notable--but PGNx is listed on Metacritic and Gamerankings; the latter notes that the site's average score is 83.99%, the forth-highest average of all of the sites that the aggregate records--after 1502 reviews. Not to mention that the lowest score on the site's reviews page is an 8.0 for Ice Age: Dawn of the Dinosaurs (which features the atrocious dek of "Eurocom and Activision adapt the latest animated film to a console near year.") and the lowest score of the year is a 7.8 for the DS version of Monsters and Aliens.

Both of those games are published by Activision, who appears to be the recipient of most of the site's reviews--reviews that are, for the most part, the uncritical wet dreams of a marketing department (most of the site's reviews have this quality, but there's something to these Activision reviews). In light of this relationship, the site's Beatles Rock Band review strikes me as particularly strange--though Jose gives it the same score as Guitar Hero 5 (9.8), he goes on to talk at length about B:RB is inferior to GH5; however, Jose remarks that B:RB is "easily one of the best music games currently available, whether or not you’re a fan of the fan." (I don't feel like taking the entire night to write this post, so I'll stop my discussion of PGNx's linguistic felonies, but if you are curious enough to research, just read any original material from the site.)

Speaking of Activision, I can't help but get indignant upon learning that he gets five DJ Hero turntables--since turntables aren't available standalone AFAIK, I'll assume that he received five SKUs of the $200 Renegade Edition (I'm informed is the version that Activision sent game journos), which would amount to $1000. And that hacks like him get flown to Vegas by THQ embodies a great deal what is wrong with games journalism/criticism and why it gets no respect on a grander scale.

Simply said, Jose Liz has devised a scam to score free games in exchange for publishers recieving a bump on their aggregate scores; that in itself, to me, is a greater violation than IGN's greatest misdeed.

Jtwo · (10-26-2009, 07:32 AM)

Sounds like this guy has a pretty sweet deal.

Slavik81 · 08:05 AM

It doesn't affect the average on Gamerankings. They do make an effort to only use credible sites. That's why there a little note at the bottom saying, "Reviews with an asterisk (*) do not count toward the average ratio for a game."

For example, in the set of Guitar Hero 5 (Wii) reviews, there's 19 reviews listed, and PGNx is the only one with an asterisk beside it.

Metacritic also weights more credible sites more heavily than less credible sites, but since they don't disclose their methodology it's hard to know exactly how much this guy's reviews are worth on Metacritic. The system's a little silly.

AkuMifune · (10-26-2009, 07:34 AM)

So he's the videogame industry equivalent of a fluffer?

Yeah its despicable, but also unsurprising. How could sites like these be stopped anyway?

jooey · (10-26-2009, 07:34 AM)

really? EVERYTHING wrong?

Crunched · (10-26-2009, 07:35 AM)

Originally Posted by Jtwo:

Sounds like this guy has a pretty sweet deal.

Yeah, why couldn't I have thought of this?

Sloane · (10-26-2009, 07:39 AM)

Originally Posted by cuyahoga:

However, PGNx is worse than IGN or whatever major entity GAF likes to rally against, as at least there is some variety in the scores of those sites.

"9.9" - IGN.com

ShockingAlberto · (10-26-2009, 07:41 AM)

If Kotick is buying this guy off, that's probably the worst business decision he's made yet.

Owning IGN like he already does works much better.

cuyahoga · (10-26-2009, 07:53 AM)

Originally Posted by Sloane:

"9.9" - IGN.com

IGN actually has a 68.47%, which puts them in the lower half in terms of score average number; it's an utterly shit site, but there's some variety in the numerical assignment.

Virro · (10-26-2009, 07:55 AM)

I guess if you're ok with whoring out your opinion for free product, it works.

Can't really blame the guy.

Mutagenic · (10-26-2009, 07:58 AM)

about: "PGNx Media began life in January 2002 as Pro Games Network (PGNx). The name was quickly shorted to PGNx Network, with PGNx no longer standing for anything. PGNx Network was founded to serve as a hub for independent videogame websites after Jose's troubled experiences with prior networks. Eventually, this planned was scrapped and the site was renamed PGNx Media."

Kintaro · (10-26-2009, 07:59 AM)

I have to wonder what is in it for these PR people to support dubious sites such as this. It's not like you can use them for marketing purposes since no one has heard of them and their opinion must be weighed rather low on meta sites.

Mind boggle.

On the other end, if the dude keeps convincing publishers to send him stuff, more power to him.

Seraphis Cain · (10-26-2009, 07:59 AM)

Originally Posted by cuyahoga:

IGN actually has a 68.47%, which puts them in the lower half in terms of score average number; it's an utterly shit site, but there's some variety in the numerical assignment.

I wonder if this is why IGN bothers to review virtually every Data Design Interactive/Conspiracy Entertainment title. It brings down their Metacritic/Gamerankings average.

A bit tinfoil-hat, I know, but possible.

Aaron · (10-26-2009, 08:00 AM)

Originally Posted by cuyahoga:

IGN actually has a 68.47%, which puts them in the lower half in terms of score average number; it's an utterly shit site, but there's some variety in the numerical assignment.

IGN reviews everything though, which greatly skews their average. If they were at all selective, I'm sure they'd be over 80%.

Jtwo · (10-26-2009, 08:01 AM)

Originally Posted by Aaron:

IGN reviews everything though, which greatly skews their average. If they were at all selective, I'm sure they'd be over 80%.

Wait a minute here, are you trying to tell me if IGN only reviewed good games their average score would be higher?

Keyser Soze · (10-26-2009, 08:02 AM)

Don't get annoyed about crap gaming site or you will be forever annoyed

Keyser Soze · (10-26-2009, 08:05 AM)

According to Alexa, which is not always accurate I'll admit, no one visits this site ever

http://www.alexa.com/siteinfo/http%3A%2F%2Fwww.pgnx.net

Wormdundee · (10-26-2009, 08:15 AM)

Originally Posted by Jtwo:

Wait a minute here, are you trying to tell me if IGN only reviewed good games their average score would be higher?

Shocking news of the month unveiled in this thread!

Sloane · (10-26-2009, 08:17 AM)

Originally Posted by Seraphis Cain:

I wonder if this is why IGN bothers to review virtually every Data Design Interactive/Conspiracy Entertainment title. It brings down their Metacritic/Gamerankings average.

I wouldn't be surprised.

Jon_Danger · (10-26-2009, 08:23 AM)

Thank you for posting this. Thank you so much. Please bring the wrath of GAF upon him.

Htown · (10-26-2009, 08:37 AM)

Originally Posted by Sloane:

I wouldn't be surprised.

No, they review every single thing because it gets the site more hits and they have the resources to do it.

cuyahoga · (10-26-2009, 08:52 AM)

Originally Posted by Keyser Soze:

According to Alexa, which is not always accurate I'll admit, no one visits this site ever

http://www.alexa.com/siteinfo/http%3A%2F%2Fwww.pgnx.net

Someone listed a Quantcast figure in the 500,000s on another location, which means that indeed no one visits - but he still gets five copies of a fucking $200 game for free? It's something egregious to me.

Also, did I mention Jose Liz is an Ivy League alumni who claims that a band called "Weezer's" has a song called "Play That Funky Music" in his Guitar Hero 5 review?

conman · (10-26-2009, 09:04 AM)

Far from unique to gaming journalism. There was that "film reviewer" (David Manning) a while back who it turned out was a total fabrication by Sony Pictures' marketing department. Ended up costing them quite a bit in a lawsuit IIRC.

Are we sure that an actual person named "Jose Liz" exists and has anything to do with the content of the site?

cuyahoga · (10-26-2009, 09:16 AM)

Originally Posted by conman:

Far from unique to gaming journalism. There was that "film reviewer" (David Manning) a while back who it turned out was a total fabrication by Sony Pictures' marketing department. Ended up costing them quite a bit in a lawsuit IIRC.

Are we sure that an actual person named "Jose Liz" exists and has anything to do with the content of the site?

Yes, he exists--there's another forum where he's become infamous for his idiocy over the years, and there's that Twitter page.

Also, in response to someone attacking his nonchalant attitude:

Quote:

And besides, guys, they're just videogames, amirite?

We also need less of that.

Night_Trekker · (10-26-2009, 09:39 AM)

Originally Posted by cuyahoga:

Also, did I mention Jose Liz is an Ivy League alumni who claims that a band called "Weezer's" has a song called "Play That Funky Music" in his Guitar Hero 5 review?

Dani · 09:56 AM

I have far less respect for companies like Activision for throwing $1000 at this fucking joke of a site.

Seriously, all the multi-platform reviews are copy and paste jobs, I'm sure he gets a review game for each format, but he just copies the PR and then copies that copy for each damm review.

Stupid piece of shit run by a bunch of jokers that are probably laughing their asses off at all the free shit they get. Fucking disgraceful.

I'd love to look into the publishers that give this guy free games for a hack job. I'm pretty sure that publishers aren't stupid so either they turn a blind eye to essentially paying for higher review scores with free games or they lack any sort of judgment.

Thanks OP for raising this issue. I hope one of the many hard working journalists that frequent GAF pick up on this shit. I'm pretty sure there must be a story in there somewhere.

Edit: Looks like the OP isn't the first to question this guy's reviews.

Quote:

Other comments questioned my ability to accurately review games. Maybe they have a point. As a finance major at a business school, I’m not your typical game reviewer. But, for some reason, people have kept coming back over the past five year so until they stop… you’re stuck with me.

-- Jose Liz, PGNx Media
---- May 12, 2007

This is just the last piece of an "article" he wrote trying to defend his 9.5/10 Spiderman 3 review (Shocker, Activision again).

Sickening. I'm pretty sure now that he's aware of his shady shit and choosing to go on because he keep getting reward for it.

Keyser Soze · (10-26-2009, 09:59 AM)

Originally Posted by cuyahoga:

Someone listed a Quantcast figure in the 500,000s on another location, which means that indeed no one visits - but he still gets five copies of a fucking $200 game for free? It's something egregious to me.

I think we have only his word for that though, and it could be just him trying to look important

Unless Acti's PR in the US are vastly different than in the UK, then there is no way there are sending one guy 5 games

cuyahoga · (10-26-2009, 10:12 AM)

Originally Posted by Keyser Soze:

Unless Acti's PR in the US are vastly different than in the UK, then there is no way there are sending one guy 5 games

Given they send him six copies of Spider-Man 3, I don't see a similar number of DJ Hero as a stretch; if that means that there is a substantial transatlantic difference, then I guess there is.

McBacon · (10-26-2009, 10:36 AM)

As posted in the Quarter to Three post about this thread (so meta, dude)

Quote:

Visually, Rainbow Six Vegas 2 is quite a stunner, even if it doesn't have the same wow factor that the original game did.

Quote:

On the Xbox, the game is a visual stunner. As impressed as I was by True Crime’s recreation of Los, Spider-Man 2 surpasses it because even though it is about half the size of the real New York City, everything is so distinct (the streets’ repetitiveness plagued True Crime) that I am grateful for that decision

Quote:

Visually, the game is a stunner though more so for its art style than any technical elements.

Quote:

All in all, Treyarch did an impressive job of porting the engine over to the Wii and though there are some framerate drops here and there, the game is a visual stunner

Quote:

Visually, Shift is quite a stunner.

Visually.
Stunner

APZonerunner · (10-26-2009, 11:15 AM)

Originally Posted by Keyser Soze:

I think we have only his word for that though, and it could be just him trying to look important

Unless Acti's PR in the US are vastly different than in the UK, then there is no way there are sending one guy 5 games

Indeed, getting anything from Activision or Nintendo here in the UK is like drawing blood from a stone.

jersoc · (10-26-2009, 11:18 AM)

screw the scores, read his reviews. they are just laughably bad. like a fifth grader can write better than he can.

Jocchan · (10-26-2009, 11:22 AM)

Starting a site stat. My average score will be 10.0, maybe even more, but it will be hard going further without a substantial help from publishers.

cuyahoga · (10-26-2009, 12:08 PM)

Originally Posted by McBacon:

As posted in the Quarter to Three post about this thread (so meta, dude)

Visually.
Stunner

Quote:

Visually, the game follows the movie's visual style pretty well.

I'm glad the Madagascar 2 tie-in game doesn't do that auditorily, or else we'd be in trouble.

More Fun To Compute · (10-26-2009, 12:48 PM)

I can't believe that people ever thought that it was a good idea to pay royalties based on review scores. Ignoring the fact that this sort of incentive is scientifically proven to kill creativity and the pride people take in their work, it just leads to people cynically gaming the system.

Cubit · (10-26-2009, 01:35 PM)

I approve of this thread.

wmat · (10-26-2009, 01:41 PM)

Visually, the stunning visuals of the visuals are stunningly visually stunning.

I'll have 5 copies, please.

Sho_Nuff82 · (10-26-2009, 01:43 PM)

Originally Posted by Jtwo:

Wait a minute here, are you trying to tell me if IGN only reviewed good games their average score would be higher?

Which is what kills me when people complain about Edge no longer using the full review scale. If Edge reviewed every telletubbies and veggietale and Dora the Explorer game, they'd have a lot more 2's and 3's.

Magazine space is limited, so you put up reviews for games people actually give a shit about.

Linkzg · (10-26-2009, 01:44 PM)

Originally Posted by Jocchan:

Starting a site stat. My average score will be 10.0, maybe even more, but it will be hard going further without a substantial help from publishers.

Not so fast. The average score on my site will be 10 ... out of 5.

C'mon, Bobby. Need two full copies of ride so I can tape the boards to my feet and go skiing.

Jocchan · (10-26-2009, 01:52 PM)

Originally Posted by Linkzg:

Not so fast. The average score on my site will be 10 ... out of 5.

C'mon, Bobby. Need two full copies of ride so I can tape the boards to my feet and go skiing.

If you start this way, you'll get less incentives to raise your scores :p

Big Baby Buddha · (10-26-2009, 02:02 PM)

I think you guys are too quick to jump on the conspiratorial bandwagon. From what I can tell Jose Liz has just found a way to monetize his absolutely horrendous taste. That finance school should use him in their brochures.

VOOK · (10-26-2009, 03:57 PM)

So how come they can get on Metacritic and Gamerankings and we can't. BAH

McBacon · (10-26-2009, 04:33 PM)

Originally Posted by VOOK:

So how come they can get on Metacritic and Gamerankings and we can't. BAH

VOOK. I like you. But visually? You're not stunning.

PepsimanVsJoe · (10-26-2009, 04:38 PM)

Son of a bitch this guy has the right idea.

TruHero · (10-26-2009, 04:46 PM)

What does this guy do that makes him a journalist?

Malio · (10-26-2009, 04:48 PM)

Gets the free games/gear and probably sells 'em on Ebay ta boot. Sweet deal, sounds like.

shuri · (10-26-2009, 04:49 PM)

So, thread starter.. how many sample reviews did you sent PGNx, hoping to get on this, before being rejecting by email the owner?

Drkirby · (10-26-2009, 04:56 PM)

Originally Posted by TruHero:

What does this guy do that makes him a journalist?

Writes?

TruHero · (10-26-2009, 05:00 PM)

Originally Posted by Drkirby:

Writes?

That doesn't make him a journalist

andycapps · (10-26-2009, 05:01 PM)

Originally Posted by McBacon:

Visually.
Stunner

Needs more visceral, compelling, and doesn't do anything new.

MikeE21286 · (10-26-2009, 05:03 PM)

wow, that's shady as hell....but the whole reviews process/industry is questionable as hell also.