Support NeoGAF

[More Fun To Compute]

By the end of reading that Ubi letter I couldn't help to mutter: "No, thank you Ubi. Thank. You!" with teary eyes. Now imagine the effect on a proper recipient of that.

Some people receiving that letter might find it offensive but the same people wouldn't dare bring it up in public because they don't want to have an antagonistic relationship with the people who sent it. But the whole point of this article, which has become muddied now, is that other people receiving it would find no problem with it at all and would be overjoyed that their effort has been recognised.

 

[Corto]

That jealousy remark is the most disingenuous and intellectually dishonest comment that Jeff could make. Maybe it's the immediacy and the horror to silence on recording a podcast that makes you say stupid things, but he's not a newbie on the medium. He should be used to that.

 

[SolidSnakex]

Man anyone remember the good old days of 1up yours and how much shit Luke Smith would give Shane Bettenhausen for his love of all things sony? Those were some damn fun times.

Then that guy went on to get a community manager job at Bungie. A company that developed a series that he referred to as his Mario.

 

[EternalGamer]

Reminds me on how games press called gamers "entitled" whenever there was a big outcry like during ME3.

Yeah it has become a very clear trend in recent years. Big triple A game gets showered with 9.5 reviews. Gamers on forums play the game and half a week later start leveling their complaints and disappointments. Game reviewers call them whiney and entitled.

It happed with Dragon Age 2, Diablo 3, Mass Effect 3, Modern Warfare 2, and a whole host of others.

I played every one of those games. I don't think any of them are terrible games (except maybe DA2), but I sure as hell agree with the consensus that they are flawed and nowhere near the pinnacle of game development the way the reviews make it sound.

The user metacritic bombing of games with 0/10 scores is infantile on one hand. But on the other it can be viewed as getting even for a marketing-media machine that doesn't speak for them. That is probably overly romanticizing those metacritic users to a large degree, but I really do think it is indicative of lack of true critical distance in the gaming press.

 

[noobasuar]

Then that guy went on to get a community manager job at Bungie. A company that developed a game that he referred to as his Mario.

Well I can understand his love for Halo more than Shane's love for anything and everything Sony. It's not like Luke never had anything critical to say about Xbox.

 

[XANDER CAGE]

Then that guy went on to get a community manager job at Bungie. A company that developed a series that he referred to as his Mario.

That's not that big a deal. A transition the other way around would be more suspect.

 

[Htown]

There's also a difference between being obsessive about a specific game/series and taking it upon yourself to defend everything a certain company does.

 

[Coxy]

Well, if your proof is that IGN posted up stories on a pretty big game that is coming out, then well.. call me whatever you feel like.

no one is saying IGN shouldnt cover AC3 or that it shouldnt get coverage, what they are saying is

 

[kassatsu]

June was also E3 month, where they got more hands-on access. And the Vita version was announced then right?

 

[SolidSnakex]

Well I can understand his love for Halo more than Shane's love for anything and everything Sony. It's not like Luke never had anything critical to say about Xbox.

Well, part of the discussion in this thread has been about how some people may use their job as a journalist as a springboard to work for a game company. That's what Jason Lauritzen pointed out in his article in the OP. Industry events are an excuse to exchange business cards. Shane went on to work at Sony and several other 1up former 1up members have/had jobs at MS.

 

[XANDER CAGE]

no one is saying IGN shouldnt cover AC3 or that it shouldnt get coverage, what they are saying is

But we should all achieve to enter the SWAG ZONE.

Maybe that should be a campaign against gross PR: accepting too much free swag? Man, that ain't swag.

 

[Shinta]

Well, part of the discussion in this thread has been about how some people may use their job as a journalist as a springboard to work for a game company. That's what Jason Lauritzen pointed out in his article in the OP. Industry events are an excuse to exchange business cards.

It's really almost exactly like a member of congress who leaves and immediately becomes a lobbyist. Career changes happen, but this is more like an industry-wide tendency for revolving door employment.

As soon as a "journalist" joins the other side, it calls all their previous work into question. If a member of congress leaves and immediately becomes a lobbyist, maybe he was - more or less - a lobbyist the whole time?

 

[stephentotilo]

So what is gross about it in your opinion? Is the Ubisoft VP of marketing just wrong and naive about what he thinks the game media's role is? Did he not owe thanks to the gaming media for AC3's unprecidented pre-orders? Or is he just gross for stating things so bluntly?

Apologies if I'm making the wrong inference, but questions like this read to me like you think a reporter like me or Jason is unaware of PR's agenda and the problems with how publishers view the press until you enlighten us. If that's what you think, you're wrong. If I'm misreading, I apologize.

 

[chickdigger802]

Wow didn't notice the letter before. Fuck.

 

[EternalGamer]

Apologies if I'm making the wrong inference, but questions like this read to me like you think a reporter like me or Jason is unaware of PR's agenda and the problems with how publishers view the press until you enlighten us. If that's what you think, you're wrong. If I'm misreading, I apologize.

Those questions were not meant to be rhetorical inferences. I was literally asking why he thought the statement was gross and whether or not he thought the Ubisoft VP of marketing didn't know what he was talking about when he stated that the press played a large role and that they were "partners" in AC3 pre-order success.

While I respect the answer he gave, I also noted that he didn't answer but one of those questions directly.

 

[Lime]

The Weekend Confirmed quotes don't surprise me (they have always been huge manbabies), but the quotes still disappoint me. Completely unprofessional, juvenile, and dishonest perception of their profession and their audience.

 

[spirity]

Wow didn't notice the letter before. Fuck.

What's more worrying is the fact that it's just the tip of the iceberg. I do not believe for one second that this is an isolated incident, nor do I believe that it's even the worst example. This has been going on for a long, long time.

 

[lazer_bean]

I'm going to tell you that every journalist who has covered finance has gotten something from financial institutions. The same way every doctor has gotten stuff from the pharmacological companies whose drugs they prescribe, and every pro movie reviewer has gotten special treatment from movie studios.

If you're looking for someone ethically pure, even Gandhi isn't going to satisfy. You have to get rid of this black and white notion, this one drop rule of 'the journalist accepted a free game once so he is forever tainted' because the real world just isn't that easy. What you need to do is gauge for yourself how influenced any particular reporter is by the institutions they report on, and weigh their opinion accordingly..

hey i knew that

as i was saying, a journalist should avoid being in a situation that could be perceived as a conflict of interests. Your example though: the free copy of a game (or gifts from a publisher): dont you think it's up to an individual (especially a journalist) to avoid being in such a situation for so little ?

as for the rest of your post (to make it short): the company i work for isnt ethically pure either but i dont think working for it makes me or my colleagues evil persons.

 

[Freeza Under The Shower]

Yeah it has become a very clear trend in recent years. Big triple A game gets showered with 9.5 reviews. Gamers on forums play the game and half a week later start leveling their complaints and disappointments. Game reviewers call them whiney and entitled.

It happed with Dragon Age 2, Diablo 3, Mass Effect 3, Modern Warfare 2, and a whole host of others.

The user metacritic bombing of games with 0/10 scores is infantile on one hand. But on the other it can be viewed as getting even for a marketing-media machine that doesn't speak for them. That is probably overly romanticizing those metacritic users to a large degree, but I really do think it is indicative of lack of true critical distance in the gaming press.

the truly offensive thing about that is that A) they clearly have pink goggles and B) they didn't work a bunch of hours on a dead-end job so they could play this supposedly 'awesome' game. And THEN they have the nerve to call people entitled.

As much as I'm willing to defend certain things and realities that come with the field, I find name calling of the audience you are supposed to serve utterly unacceptable.

 

[DidntKnowJack]

GL: "I'm always avoiding using the word 'journalist.' There's some space for journalism in the video game world but it's not really what the audience really wants."

JC: "Exactly ... 95 percent of what people online are referring to games journalism is not. If you're approaching it as a reader expecting that from it, that's a mistake."

GL: "It's entertainment reporting."

That's one of the things that struck a chord with me when listening to the Weekend Confirmed podcast. The utter cop-out of saying, "Hey if we were journalists - you're right. All of this stuff would rightly be considered icky. But we're not journalists so it's ok!"

They are so far up their own asses they can't see why anyone would have a problem with this stuff. It's amazing, really.

 

[Freshmaker]

Independence Day will no longer be known as an American Holiday. For it is the day the world declared, in one voice, we will not go quietly into the night, We will not vanish without a fight, we're going to live on, we're going to survive. Today, we celebrate Our Assassin's Creed Launch Day!

So bizarre. I don't care about AC3 at all. I've been honestly puzzled as to why the game's been getting any hype. Everything about it just seems so boring and uninteresting.

A buckskin jacket? Well now. Strap in for electric visceral dynamo excitement!

That's one of the things that struck a chord with me when listening to the Weekend Confirmed podcast. The utter cop-out of saying, "Hey if we were journalists - you're right. All of this stuff would rightly be considered icky. But we're not journalists so it's ok!"

They are so far up their own asses they can't see why anyone would have a problem with this stuff. It's amazing, really.

To be fair, the same can be said of people who think that the gaming industry is worth covering like someone would goings on at the White House.

How much time do you spend complaining to TMZ about their lack of effort promoting social justice via progressive celeb bonafide journalism?

 

[Dr Dogg]

Blimey this thread is moving fast.

Although there is still some good stuff being posted the last catching up on the last few pages has felt like groundhog day.

As with everything else in life it's much easier to observe something from the outside looking in. Although I work mainly in trade media and working with far more established industries as a whole and find the way that they act is indicative of the immaturity of the medium as a whole.

Let me put it this way, many games critics will say they need copies of games to do their jobs but out of the 50 plus journalists I work with on either catering, hospitality or leisure publications none of them get offered a free meal, concert tickets or a round of golf to facilitate their jobs. Yes once in a blue moon we get PR and Ad Agency's contacting us asking if we will review their client in exchange for a free pass but it is seldom taken up. Yes I admit that bad eggs do seize the opportunity to get a free pass but this is the exception not the rule.

How many outlets reporting on games have to fork up every penny toward what they feature? How many are even honest about what they get for free?. RedFalcon's article really touched upon the fact you need that disconnect from the medium upon which a journalist, commentator or critic is writing about to maintain not just your integrity but to show to your audience that you're unbiased, ultimately they are the ones that will be your judge.

Anything else can lead to questions about why anyone would trust someone's review of a game if they have just unbowed a high value amount of merch that was not only from the publisher of said game but given freely and that your outlet had not bothered to take a hit to financially to see if it was worth our while.

Trying to defend some act of the sort by simply saying "but we have published good articles. Look at x" is by the bye. Surely it's your audience that would determine if your article is of a high standard? What baffles me more that if one of my colleges under my management was using social media to reflect one view like Twitter, Facebook what ever, then go visit an open discussion board and engage in a further but more in depth discussion with what could be considered our audience and then go back to one of our publications and write something of a dismissal of the whole situation I would be pulled in front of my editor and the directors sharpish.

I'm sorry if this seams like I'm singling out kotaku or anything but this is bigger than them, christ it's bigger than games reporting in general but whilst the rubbish that is passed off as "journalism" on a day to day basis is still prevalent in the gaming press questions will always be asked about their motivation.

 

[chickdigger802]

Anyone else have some pr press kit letters on hand? Now I'm curious.

 

[snap0212]

It's almost July 4. Time to fire up the grill, invite some friends over and celebrate our nation's birth.

But this July 4 all of us at Ubisoft will have another reason to celebrate. And that's the phenomenal success of our Assassin's Creed brand which couldn't have happened without your incredible support and partnerships. So I'm writing to say, quite simply, 'Thank you.'

Thank you for helping make Assassin's Creed one of the best selling franchises of all time.

Thank you for igniting unprecedented consumer interest in Assassin's Creed 3 which is sure to break plenty of sales records this holiday.

Thank you for helping Assassin's Creed 3 achieve stellar exposure long before launch. Plus a stunning array of honors at E3 that exceeded our wildest expectations. We scored over 40 nominations and took home a bounty of awards including Xplay's Best of Show, Game Informers's Game of Show, and Gamespot's Editor Choice.

So this Independence Day, no matter your nationality, we hope you'll fly this colonial style flag as we celebrate our critical success. And this holiday season, all of us will ignite yet another revolution.

Thanks again,

Tony Key
Sr. VP. Sales and Marketing
Ubisoft Entertainment

http://i.imgur.com/5Fuxc.png

 

[EternalGamer]

the truly offensive thing about that is that A) they clearly have pink goggles and B) they didn't work a bunch of hours on a dead-end job so they could play this supposedly 'awesome' game. And THEN they have the nerve to call people entitled.

As much as I'm willing to defend certain things and realities that come with the field, I find name calling of the audience you are supposed to serve utterly unacceptable.

As a regular listener to a lot of podcasts (about a dozen a week) I can say the attitude was pretty wide spread at least on the podcasts I listened to whenever those reactions would come up. It made me pretty angry. Even though I didn't hate any of those games, I certainly recognized that they were flawed. I was irritated by the fact that they were unable to recognize that the backlash was largely because much of the media's coverage caused gamers to expect brain orgasms.

I mean, when someone tells you that Diablo 3 is going to make Diablo 2 "a footnote in history" and that it "sets a new bar for the entire action-RPG genre" which nobody is likely to come close to in a long time, what the fuck do you think people's reaction is going to be when they actually play the game?

They caused the problem. Then they want to call their audience entitled because their bullshit rhetoric doesn't match the reality of the experience when people go and pay $60 for it.

 

[Cerebral Assassin]

To be fair, the same can be said of people who think that the gaming industry is worth covering like someone would goings on at the White House.

How much time do you spend complaining to TMZ about their lack of effort promoting social justice via progressive celeb bonafide journalism?

Do you honestly think that only political journalists should have a code of ethics( Also I can think of a few film critics who would agree that critics should hold PR at arms-length).

 

[Gomu Gomu]

Listened to Weekend Confirmed 136 since they talk about this (starting around 63 minutes in). Blocked out some quotes and added comments. Legend: GL = Garnett Lee; JC = Jeff Cananata; AR = Andrea Rene.



I think the size of this thread, its number of views and the subsequent articles and editorials on the topic prove otherwise. People want to talk about this and have always wanted a better level and quality of reporting from those in the games press. Saying, "But, I'm not a journalist, so it's not fair to demand that of me," is a cop out.

For one, folks like Geoff Keighley still refer to themselves as game journalists. Go to his Twitter profile. It's the first line in his bio.



Except ethics are violated all the time, as I detailed in my editorial. The only things like personalities Andrea have to go on is trust and they severe that with the way they conduct themselves -- whether it's accepting free games, free travel, networking opportunities for business, etc.



Nice. Jeff admits they're cogs in a machine, meaning they're very malleable when it comes to what they'll do, but then says, "You're just jealous of folks like Geoff Keighley." Nope. Has nothing to do with that.



It's silly that you think it's silly. You shouldn't have a personal relationship. You should have a professional one -- big difference.



Again, she doesn't see this is a problem, but it inherently is.



Cognitive dissonance. You can say, "It doesn't affect me all you want." According to proven psychology, it does. Plus, the perception of it does not look good to your readers.



People are tired with the way the video game press has been operating for so many years. They want it to operate under standard journalistic principles. They want you to be transparent, even if all you think you are is a personality and nothing more.

Same Jeff?



http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=33536812&postcount=1436

Very Disappointing. Especially From Garnett, whom I respect had respect for.

 

[spirity]

Cogs in a machine. Well, we're finding that out now.

 

[stephentotilo]

What's more worrying is the fact that it's just the tip of the iceberg. I do not believe for one second that this is an isolated incident, nor do I believe that it's even the worst example. This has been going on for a long, long time.

If you're referring to PR people treating games reporters like they're part of marketing and have earned their thanks, yes. It has. There was a publicist who used to rep for Activision who would send a holiday gift every year. Really ridiculous things like a fancy picnic set or big popcorn maker. Those were some of the only they're-not-even-pretending-this-is-for-some-game mailings I've received. Usually they're more closely tied into a game. But, yeah, it's crappy. It was at least four or five years ago, and I think I complained about it, but I can't recall. I didn't open the gifts, didn't take them home, didn't use them. I don't recall burning them, so maybe I left them out for other people at MTV to take. I can't remember.

The presence of an attempt by PR to influence the press isn't proof that the press is cowed by the PR influence. In some cases, I'm sure it is. In any case, human nature comes into play as well. As I've said previously in this thread my own outlet is big enough and independent enough to be able to literally afford to piss off publishers, post leaks and news that they don't like, without worrying that it'll put us out of business. So we thicken our skin, clear our eyes to understand what various industry players' agendas may be and try to do good work.

 

[lednerg]

Clear distinctions should always be made between critics, investigative reporters (interviews, trade stories), and entertainment reporters (events, previews). Those who mix these roles are enthusiasts, and are effectively making personal blogs. That isn't a sleight against them, as the 'enthusiast press' is often very entertaining and informative to read, but lets call a spade a spade.

That's also not to say that outlets aren't already making these distinctions, just that when we talk about them, we too should understand these different roles. Since they are different, different standards should be applied to each. For example, when a critic is also serving as an entertainment reporter, then they cease to be a critic. You don't see Leonard Maltin going to opening night red carpet events to schmooze with filmmakers - for a very good reason.

 

[Dennis]

That Ubisoft Assassins Creed Letter of Shame is cracking me up.

Its like a signed confession for god's sake!

 

[Ikuu]

If you're referring to PR people treating games reporters like they're part of marketing and have earned their thanks, yes. It has. There was a publicist who used to rep for Activision who would send a holiday gift every year. Really ridiculous things like a fancy picnic set or big popcorn maker. Those were some of the only they're-not-even-pretending-this-is-for-some-game mailings I've received. Usually they're more closely tied into a game. But, yeah, it's crappy. It was at least four or five years ago, and I think I complained about it, but I can't recall. I didn't open the gifts, didn't take them home, didn't use them. I don't recall burning them, so maybe I left them out for other people at MTV to take. I can't remember.

If only they had slapped a CoD logo on it, could have made a video about it.

 

[I'm an expert]

I'm not a fan of that podcast or those people but I hope you guys who do listen to them write them comments so they know.

 

[Victrix]

"GL: "I'm always avoiding using the word 'journalist.' There's some space for journalism in the video game world but it's not really what the audience really wants."

JC: "Exactly ... 95 percent of what people online are referring to games journalism is not. If you're approaching it as a reader expecting that from it, that's a mistake."

GL: "It's entertainment reporting.""

I'm going to piss off some people who do actual interesting articles, but I'll bite on this line.

If you do entertainment reporting, I don't need you! It's not what I really want!

I can get all the entertainment 'news' I need from publisher PR. Literally all of it.

And to stave off any 'then just don't read it' replies, I don't! And that's one of the big reasons why. I read what amounts to rss aggregators for release news.

Here's the fun subtext however: There are probably more than enough people who are perfectly happy to continue to go to those sites, read, comment, and provide ad revenue for them to continue doing exactly what they're doing. More power to em if so, I don't hate anyone involved, this is not end of the world stuff we're talking about, it's games press.

 

[EternalGamer]

Very Disappointing. Especially From Garnett, whom I respect had respect for.

The problem with this kind of statement and name calling is that it really isn't going to do anything to address the problem. All it will cause them to do is to write off the criticism as being people who irrationally despise them.

I don't think dismissing particular websites or individuals is really helpful. Criticizing behavior and atittudes and scrutinizing the system of influences is.

Earlier in this thread I said that I don't particularly think this media culture matters that much to me because I depend a lot of "non-professional podcasts" and forums like Neogaf to get my information. But as the conversation has developed, I realized that I actually do consume alot of this info. I listen to a dozen gaming podcasts a week. I subscribe to Giant Bomb and watch features on their site daily. And I read occasional articles like the one on Silicon Knights written on Kotaku linked to earlier.

So I do actually care about how this stuff develops and I would like them to take a harder look at the culture they are being influenced by and the culture they are influencing.

 

[Dennis]

I did not have a lot of respect for media that covers games before this event and thread, and now I have even less.

It does really cut the acceptable sites down to a very few. The rest can go to hell and take their bribe swag and integrity deficiency with them.

 

[HoosTrax]

This thread is moving super fast. Question: what happens to review copies of games? Are they normally kept by the reviewers? Sent back? Given away to readers/viewers in contests?

I tend to follow computer hardware more in this regard, and the answer in that sector seems to be a mix of all three -- it really depends on the review site and the type of product they receive. Engineering samples (I guess the gaming equivalent of closed beta?) are usually sent back to the company it seems like, although some unscrupulous reviewers have put them on eBay in the past. Whereas boxed products are often given away to readers of the site.

On a sidenote, I feel like hardware component reviewers tend to take this issue of impartiality and credibility more seriously than game reviewers for some reason. And they're more open about disclosing what companies like Intel, Nvidia, and AMD are giving them as far as "perks" (paid travel, exclusive access, etc). Also, if a company like AMD puts out an underperforming part, then sites like hardocp will be absolutely scathing, especially if PR shenanigans and bullshit are evident. The concept of value for money plays a major role for the hardware sites, and their readership.

So why the disparity between them and the gaming reviewers?

 

[spirity]

If you're referring to PR people treating games reporters like they're part of marketing and have earned their thanks, yes. It has. There was a publicist who used to rep for Activision who would send a holiday gift every year. Really ridiculous things like a fancy picnic set or big popcorn maker. Those were some of the only they're-not-even-pretending-this-is-for-some-game mailings I've received. Usually they're more closely tied into a game. But, yeah, it's crappy. It was at least four or five years ago, and I think I complained about it, but I can't recall. I didn't open the gifts, didn't take them home, didn't use them. I don't recall burning them, so maybe I left them out for other people at MTV to take. I can't remember.

The presence of an attempt by PR to influence the press isn't proof that the press is cowed by the PR influence. In some cases, I'm sure it is. In any case, human nature comes into play as well. As I've said previously in this thread my own outlet is big enough and independent enough to be able to literally afford to piss off publishers, post leaks and news that they don't like, without worrying that it'll put us out of business. So we thicken our skin, clear our eyes to understand what various industry players' agendas may be and try to do good work.

How do you explain why your site, and all of the big gaming sites, are ignoring this incident? You've said why you aren't bothered with it. But how come all of you feel the same way? That's a bit of a weird coincidence isn't it? That none of you find it news-worthy. Look at the size of this thread, look at the small amount of people who are reporting on it outside of Neogaf, and look at how everyone is so passionate or outraged by it. If it was a non-story, then why are people pissed off.

 

[Nintaiyo]

I do wish that some of you weren't so quick to attack and dismiss Kotaku at every opportunity, and I do wish that folks hadn't boiled down a complicated issue to an out-of-context meme image (note that the Halo video was days before any of this happened!), but I'm reading and appreciating a lot of these thoughts even when I don't necessarily agree with them. Even when I disagree with some of your hardline stances -- like the idea that we shouldn't be taking review copies from publishers -- I do think it'd be good for more reporters to embrace their inner idealist.

I haven't been following this thread closely. I just popped in and saw your post, but why would this (when the Halo 4 unboxing video was posted) matter? There's no expiration date on journalistic ethics; it's either right or it's wrong. True enough, the meme image simplifies the issue a bit, but whether the video was posted before or after this "scandalous" chain of events is irrelevant.

 

[Sojgat]

This thread is hilarious.

 

[Gomu Gomu]

The problem with this kind of statement and name calling is that it really isn't going to do anything to address the problem. All it will cause them to do is to write off the criticism as being people who irrationally despise them.

I don't think dismissing particular websites or individuals is really helpful. Criticizing behavior and atittudes and scrutinizing the system of influences is.

Earlier in this thread I said that I don't particularly think this media culture matters that much to me because I depend a lot of "non-professional podcasts" and forums like Neogaf to get my information. But as the conversation has developed, I realized that I actually do consume alot of this info. I listen to a dozen gaming podcasts a week. I subscribe to Giant Bomb and watch features on their site daily. And I read occasional articles like the one on Silicon Knights written on Kotaku linked to earlier.

So I do actually care about how this stuff develops and I would like them to take a harder look at the culture they are being influenced by and the culture they are influencing.

While I agree in general, I would hope that Garnett, or anyone for that matter, realize that my post was not me irrationally despise him. I think I made it pretty clear that I respected the man for the longest time. I listened to his shows for a long time, as well. But reading those two posts made me reconsider my opinion of him. It's like a irrationally hating on him all of a sudden. There is a rational reason for that, and it's in quoted in my post.

It would too bad to think someone would write me off as an irrational hater based on that post.

 

[ripastraea]

This thread is eye-opening.

 

[EternalGamer]

I haven't been following this thread closely. I just popped in and saw your post, but why would this (when the Halo 4 unboxing video was posted) matter? There's no expiration date on journalistic ethics; it's either right or it's wrong. True enough, the meme image simplifies the issue a bit, but whether the video was posted before or after this "scandalous" chain of events is irrelevant.

Since Totilo has said this several times, I would also genuinely like to know why the day the unboxing video was posted mattered. Is he implying that they would not have done that type of video after this event? If not, why not? Especially given that he seems to sincerely think there is no real story of substance to be found, I am confused as to why he would imply that date that unboxing was posted matters.

 

[Neuromancer]

This thread is moving super fast. Question: what happens to review copies of games? Are they normally kept by the reviewers? Sent back? Given away to readers/viewers in contests?

I think it depends on the site but generally I imagine review copies get passed around internally for anyone who wants to play them, before ending up with someone who works there for their personal collection. Some sites give the copies away to their readers (I think Joystiq used to do this, not sure if they still do.)

 

[Mama Robotnik]

This is one of my favourite threads on GAF. From the initial story, the discoveries about Wainwright, the broader discussion, and some shocking responses (or deafening lack thereof) from established figures... Its really something.

Hoping Monday brings Eurogamer's response (they can't ignore it), and further revelations. After its all done, an epic ordered write-up of events is needed with screenshots, quotes, the best comments from gaffers, a list of shamed sites that are cowering away from the story, further revelations (such as the Assassins Creed message), so that the shame of supposed journalists can be preserved for all to see. It might help potential readers separate the more and least trustworthy figures of the industry.

 

[blazeuk]

In terms of being given stuff, there is no reason why game critics should be getting sent anything more than advanced review copies of games - it's the only thing I wouldn't begrudge them getting free, although it's far from ideal, most budgets just wouldn't be able to accommodate the cost of buying every game they want to create an article/review on. It should however specifically be a review copy made to have as little value as possible... A disc placed inside a plastic case would suffice, if that's too extreme then an early retail printing of the game.

The rest of the stuff, there has been comments here about how "it's rubbish we don't want, it either gets thrown out or given away", then those sites should take a stance on it, actually tell these people you won't accept it, if they continue sending it, call them out on it on your websites and/or refuse to write an article on the product they're trying to get you to talk positively about. The other stuff like being given holidays, or expensive dinners should be obvious that it shouldn't be accepted.

Again, it all comes back to the original article which this all came about from, it's not that people are saying there is definitely something sinister going on to deceive gamers, but it's the perception that it can look very strange that these independent journalists/critics are receiving gifts from the companies that are producing the games they're writing about. If you don't see how odd that can look to people, then all I can think is that you're far too close to the whole thing.

 

[Dr Dogg]

This thread is moving super fast. Question: what happens to review copies of games? Are they normally kept by the reviewers? Sent back? Given away to readers/viewers in contests?

Here I'd say

 

[Phoenixazure]

This has been a thread that I've been following for quite a while. One of the things that I would love to hear some information and maybe a side of is from the Game Developers. I wonder if they are more receptive to this issue (since Developers have issues with PR and Journalists in similar/different ways from lack of coverage of their games or their paychecks (and their overall livelihood) being dictated by such a large amount of these reviewers). Do they want more transparency by the reviewers of their products? Do they rather have PR go straight to the consumer instead of through an outlet such as gamespot or 1UP?

I'm not sure how much they could contribute to the conversation, but as a Designer myself, I'd love to hear their perspective on the issue, as I do feel its important enough to be addressed by the industry at large.

 

[8bit]

This thread is moving super fast. Question: what happens to review copies of games? Are they normally kept by the reviewers? Sent back? Given away to readers/viewers in contests?

ebay, I've bought ex-review copies a few times.

 

[SpinningBirdKick]

Those comments by Garnett and the rest on his podcast are incredibly disapointing.

But not surprising.