You guys just don't understand how games are made these days. Keighley gets it because he's such an integral part of the process.
-
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.
Bioshock "Exclusive Review" IGN edition - A lot of annoyed journos (Ironcreed wow).
- Thread starter unbias
- Start date
Exclusive content of any sort (exclusive news, trailers, reveals, feature announcements, previews, reviews, etc.) brings in the traffic.
So long as publishers are willing to cherry pick, sites will push for exclusive content any way they can because it brings in traffic which brings in dollars.
Lactose_Intolerant
Member
which polygon employee are you?
Fried Food
Banned
Its a different level than a review. It's not important enough. The exclusiveness of a consumer guide is what is in question. There is no commentary with a trailer. Review is all commentary and it's possible to be swayed when you've been given a perk as big as an exclusive review window.
People just like to bag on Geoff. They aren't thinking this through.
Eh who cares its just video games anyways lol.
I'm going to go out on a limb and say it probably deserves it.
This message board is all about different opinions, the main difference is that games journalists get paid for theirs us here do not.
This is what I feel. I think it's hypocritical to whine about certain exclusives but be more than happy to partake in others. Either you're entirely for the principle of exclusives from these companies and how they give out materials, or you're entirely against it. You can't cherry pick, it's pitiful.
They started doing that nonsense with MMOs, but then decided to do it for more games because I guess it gets their website more hits. I think it's dumb, most people just want to see a # anyways, they rarely read the review.
grimshawish
Banned
omg am in fucking fits
Oh, hey, look.
Vire
Member
I love Bioshock 1, truly I do. But it didn't deserve a ten.
The gameplay and ending just didn't support it, I could see a high score though.
Unspeakable Evil
Member
Real men eat Chedder Fries.
Be an even better start if everyone just ignored Metacritic and review aggregators.
timetokill
Banned
jschreier, I think exclusive reviews are odious but at the same time seeing "EXCLUSIVE REVIEW" might as well be a big neon sign saying, "Ignore this review." So yeah it's terrible but easy to ignore.
It's the hidden, insidious kind of influence and relationships that PR/bloggers/journalists are part of that is more problematic, honestly.
sogood.gif
It's the hidden, insidious kind of influence and relationships that PR/bloggers/journalists are part of that is more problematic, honestly.
Especially when combined.
sogood.gif
Even if it does, the use and action of doing this is much more important then the result of the score.
Ninja Scooter
Member
That'll show him.
TheBaronOfNA
Banned
The thing is that exclusivity is one of the keys to insidious influence. Just because you ignore a exclusive review doesn't eliminate it's reactions an consequences in the long run.
No we dont. It will just give him and others more of a reason to look at the rest of us as goons and trolls. No thank you.
Vire
Member
DerZuhälter
Member
Go read this thread again before pulling me into the angry mob. NeoGaf pointing fingers and screaming integrity is just as laughable as games journalism.
There were definitely no exclusive reviews for Brute Force. I received a review copy like two weeks before release and I was a 14-year old writing for a rinky dink site that nobody even cared about.
ReturnOfTheRAT
Member
.
Uno Venova
Banned
DerZuhälter;50623710 said:
What's your point though? Looking for a contradiction of a hivemind or something?
Sorry not sure what you mean here...maybe I'm clueless haha
.I know no game is 'perfect', but that doesn't mean a game isn't deserving of a perfect score however. I'll agree, the final boss in Bio 1 was lame but still that was such a small part of a truly amazing experience that it still deserved the near perfect scores across the board. Perfect score does not mean perfect game, just means it's a game you have no excuse to not play. At least that is my opinion on the matter.
What didn't you like about the gameplay in Bioshock?
grimshawish
Banned
No.
I find this RPS article relevant to this BS.
http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2013/03/18/editorial-lets-not-pre-order-games-any-more-eh/
Unless amazon or someone else is offering something stupidly good, like $20 off just for pre-ordering, I have to agree with him, specially as of late.
FTA:
Yes, I’ve recently covered this before. But I’m saying it again, in different words – maybe it’ll work better this time. In lieu of simply saying “we told you so”.
Times are a-changing. Clearly. But not always in the most logical way...Now, with the lightning-fast reflexes of the internet, a major AAA blockbuster game will likely, er, not have any reviews accessible to anyone until either the moment of release, or moments before. We’ve gone backward. There are still exceptions, like the console version of Tomb Raider this month, but more and more frequently review embargoes match release dates, while pre-order periods can begin at the very moment a game is announced.
So yes, of course, as an olde-worlde writer-about-games, I could be cast as Mr Resentful here. My powers have been taken away! I don’t get to finish the game before you get to start it! But I can assure you it’s really not about that. It’s about our increasing inability to recommend or warn against a game before it’s on sale. Especially because it’s on sale up to a year before it’s even finished. Yes, absolutely there has been a democratisation of reviews, with anyone with a copy and a keyboard able to publish their own review. Or even just click their own score on Metacritic. But of course all of this occurs after the fact, after the game is on sale. And even if your favourite trusted source of reviews gets their opinion up a few days before the game’s available, the increasing propensity for pre-ordering renders the process a touch moot.
http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2013/03/18/editorial-lets-not-pre-order-games-any-more-eh/
Unless amazon or someone else is offering something stupidly good, like $20 off just for pre-ordering, I have to agree with him, specially as of late.
FTA:
Yes, I’ve recently covered this before. But I’m saying it again, in different words – maybe it’ll work better this time. In lieu of simply saying “we told you so”.
Times are a-changing. Clearly. But not always in the most logical way...Now, with the lightning-fast reflexes of the internet, a major AAA blockbuster game will likely, er, not have any reviews accessible to anyone until either the moment of release, or moments before. We’ve gone backward. There are still exceptions, like the console version of Tomb Raider this month, but more and more frequently review embargoes match release dates, while pre-order periods can begin at the very moment a game is announced.
So yes, of course, as an olde-worlde writer-about-games, I could be cast as Mr Resentful here. My powers have been taken away! I don’t get to finish the game before you get to start it! But I can assure you it’s really not about that. It’s about our increasing inability to recommend or warn against a game before it’s on sale. Especially because it’s on sale up to a year before it’s even finished. Yes, absolutely there has been a democratisation of reviews, with anyone with a copy and a keyboard able to publish their own review. Or even just click their own score on Metacritic. But of course all of this occurs after the fact, after the game is on sale. And even if your favourite trusted source of reviews gets their opinion up a few days before the game’s available, the increasing propensity for pre-ordering renders the process a touch moot.
Sorry not sure what you mean here...maybe I'm clueless haha
Using exclusive reviews, no matter how good the game might be believed it is going to be, adds a layer of publisher and media manipulation to the consumer. Those not as well informed as enthusiasts or hardcore will be very susceptible to such tactics. There is a very good reason why publishers tie dev's pay-checks a lot of the time to the metacritic average.
Bioshock was a braindead, mostly linear shootbang where the developers and press hyped up the importance of choice, but none of the decisions mattered. The art/sound direction and atmoshere were top notch and the story wasn't completely terrible, but everything else ranged from mediocre to bad.
SneakyStephan
Banned
POW
This entire article is great and to the point but that underlined sentence is brutally honest.
Nice to hear that from a game journo for once and to hear them condemn review embargoes.
Those are in nobodies' interest but the publishers trying to sell shitty games before people find out how bad they are.
I've been bitching about review embargoes, lack of demos and unfinished games going hand in hand for years, it seems like such a no brainer.
That DICE conference talking head explaining to other developers how demos are bad for them made my blood boil!
They aren't even ashamed to say it anymore.
http://neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=512742
Pure... unadultered... rage.
lol I agree.
For 2007, it was pretty good. Agreed on all accounts, though.
TheBaronOfNA
Banned
To be fair, if they are truly shitty and the journo is decent, you would probably hear a lot of indirects to that game.
Pretty much. When you brand something as a "spiritual successor" to something, there are a set of expectations and Bioshock did not meet many of them (for me at least).
Messofanego
Banned
Especially when combined.
SO GOOD
I've always thought of making a "why do people pre-order?" thread but that was enough.
SatelliteOfLove
Member
What has Vinny's Evil Twin NOT done to catch hell like this? He's (in more ways than one) the EA of games media atm.
Ivan A Nguyen
Member
REV 3 is more YouTube based so I hope their numbers are betters. As for the rest, seems about right.I think that it's just IGN since they have the greatest reach. For example, here's IGN vs. the sites that had staffers complaining about the exclusive review
Late, but the problem is not that we think exclusive reviews are awesome. The problem is that it looks from the outside that you're* willing to accept all other types of shady publisher behavior, while dismissing that it has any impact on how you treat their games.
What it looks like is that game writers only grow a conscience when they don't get a taste.
It's not that we don't care about exclusive reviews. It's that we're amused that certain folks only seem to care about publisher/outlet grossness when it doesn't benefit their outlet.
*"You" in this case meaning the general body of game reviewers/journalists/whatever. It's a completely unfair generalization, but I'm sticking with it.
If a game I want on Steam will have a pre-load, I will pre-order it. But the idea of doing so for a console game is baffling to me.
SneakyStephan
Banned
But they aren't decent since we almost never find out about major problems, bugs, missing features etc in reviews... And if we did it wouldn't be effective since it is too late (pre order suckers have already bought the game)
Pretty much no reviews told of mw2 lacking dedicated servers, most wanted reboot stutter? NOPE (just reassurance that the stutter in their videos was due to recording set up, lying cunts!) , skyrim ps3 fiasco? haha NO, saints row 3 amd performance,nnnnnnope, just cause 2 input lag? nah. not enough keybinds in far cry 3 due to consolised controls? hell to the no, input lag in killzone 2? please.. removing mod support from series built on the mods? pshhh let me tell you about the awesome achievements and trophies instead.
Anyhow making a list like this is kind of pointless since it includes every game that has problems....
They USED to be decent 15 years ago when I looked for reviews in independant gaming magazines.
Those had actual journalists in them that served noone but the reader, I never once encountered any nasty surprises when I bought games based on reviews until I switched to online trash like IGN/gametrailers/happypuppy/gamespy and what have you for a while before getting burned several times and catching on.
Since then I've read those reviews after playing games out of curiosity and have consistently found them missing any kind of information relevant to the reader, instead they are filled with 'clever' word constructions and a whole lot of talking besides the subject.
You get 1000 word reviews that manage to not say a single tangible thing about the mechanics, polish, replay value or bugs of a game.
Derrick01 nailed it in the first post.
I don't see how the IGN review score could end up being wildly different from others. They would look like fools if it scored well and everyone else was giving it a 7.5 or 3/5 (I know that is not mathematically analogous, but those review scales seem different to begin with).
Whiny, hypocritical shits.
I don't see how the IGN review score could end up being wildly different from others. They would look like fools if it scored well and everyone else was giving it a 7.5 or 3/5 (I know that is not mathematically analogous, but those review scales seem different to begin with).
Whiny, hypocritical shits.
Similar threads
- Locked