Support NeoGAF

[funkystudent]

speaking of blacklisting is 1up still on Ubisoft's list?

 

[Shake Appeal]

I was listening to a Giant Bomb podcast recently where Jonathan Blow was actively and aggressively challenging two Microsoft employees to defend the strict policies they apply to what games can actually get made for and released on the Xbox 360 platform, and the Giant Bomb guys shut the conversation down because it was apparently boring and they wanted to talk about more trailers they saw at E3.

I turned the podcast off and will not listen to another one.

 

[dwebo]

I was listening to a Giant Bomb podcast recently where Jonathan Blow was actively and aggressively challenging two Microsoft employees to defend the strict policies they apply to what games can actually get made for and released on the Xbox 360 platform, and the Giant Bomb guys shut the conversation down because it was apparently boring and they wanted to talk about more trailers they saw at E3.

I turned the podcast off and will not listen to another one.

I missed the section you're referring to, but the one the day after with Jaffe was all sorts of amazing. They end up talking a lot about game reviews, ironically.

 

[Special J]

To me at this point it seems the review community has their little hivemind

ya the review hivemind is sometimes quite obvious for example games like gta4/mgs4 both games which i liked alot but both games are also polarizing and its hard for me to believe that they would get universal praise like they did when they were reviewed.

 

[CamHostage]

does this happen in the movie industry as well?

To a degree. Movie companies will favor journalists and outlets that treat their stars well and give a cold shoulder to those that will take up time with little payoff in terms of ink. I know journalists whose screening ticket mailings suddenly stopped showing up in their mailbox. Comic book, anime, music, DVD and television critics also can find themselves on PR's bad side.

But it's a totally different timeline in movies, you're talking a 2-hour investment and a business where well-attended pre-screenings are an important part of the process. Movie reviews come out on Friday, like clockwork; hardly anybody goes early even if they are allowed to because readers don't take the daily paper, so there's little advantage that a news site or TV review show can hold over its competitors if they get special treatment. Also, star power (and scandal) are a huge part of that business, and PR is focused on that area as much or more than it is just the property. When Cameron Diaz goes around to hype up Bad Teacher, she spends 30 seconds talking about the movie and her character and 5 minutes talking about how odd it was dry-humping her former boyfriend Timberlake in a scene and how cool it is to be chosen a Maxim Hot 100 chick and what kinds of tricks she can offer for staying fit & flirty and how she's not afraid to not be married even though she's almost 40. Hopefully nobody is reading a videogame magazine/website to find out about Gabe Newell's beauty secrets.

 

[Riposte]

I was listening to a Giant Bomb podcast recently where Jonathan Blow was actively and aggressively challenging two Microsoft employees to defend the strict policies they apply to what games can actually get made for and released on the Xbox 360 platform, and the Giant Bomb guys shut the conversation down because it was apparently boring and they wanted to talk about more trailers they saw at E3.

I turned the podcast off and will not listen to another one.

Congrats, you saw one of the worst bits of Giant Bomb ever. Aside from Leigh Alexander appearances, its all up hill from here. Like it has been said, you probably want to watch/listen to the David Jaffe appearance.

 

[Curufinwe]

speaking of blacklisting is 1up still on Ubisoft's list?

I don't think so. That was four years ago.

On a recent Games, Dammit podcast they did mention that their Youtube channel got hit with a DMCA takedown from a publisher just because they were hosting a publicly available video of a game, but they bleeped out the name of the publisher.

I was listening to a Giant Bomb podcast recently where Jonathan Blow was actively and aggressively challenging two Microsoft employees to defend the strict policies they apply to what games can actually get made for and released on the Xbox 360 platform, and the Giant Bomb guys shut the conversation down because it was apparently boring and they wanted to talk about more trailers they saw at E3.

I turned the podcast off and will not listen to another one.

That isn't what happened. They shut the MS employees down because people's hero Gary Whitta let them know that the overwhelming feeling from the chat was that everyone was sick to death of hearing from the MS guys. People were a lot more interested in hearing what the Giant Bomb guys thought of the press conferences than listening to another hour of corporate shilling from e and Stepto.

 

[Salsa]

as i've always said, this is the reason why games journalism is in shambles. Most game journalists are too afraid to be honest and frank with their assessment of a game because they fear what will happen from the company who gives them the games for review. It's worse the bigger the company is.

They stick their head out to slam a legitimately awful game like DNF, and they get their hands bit.

I could agree with that if the reviews werent so unprofessional and pretty much just insulted anyone who liked the game.

This is beyond fucking stupid though, agreed.

 

[ClosingADoor]

It's pretty clear you can't, actually, given that these spats even happen and people make a big deal of them. The industry isn't tiny anymore, and critics need to step up their professionalism as well.

Why is that pretty clear? Because there are a few cases like these? You can criticize someones work, but still be friendly with them and have a good working relationship. I'm sure somewhere in your life you have said to someone: "This stuff you came up with isn't good and here is why..." and continued working together with them.

Yes, but usually the marketing materials are enough to get an idea of that. And if I still can't rely on that, I can wait for a demo or I can wait for a review by a reliable critic (of which there are few in this industry... never mind finding one that I actually tend to agree with).

Yes, you can get a bit of an idea what the game will be (well, with all those sequels there, you pretty much already know what you'll get with most games, but that aside). But for people looking forward to those games and wanting more information, they want to know how it plays, how the game feels and read about that. The marketing materials won't show you that.

And I don't see anything wrong with that. The point is you have the company itself do that, and then independent publications offset that with reviews after release. Not before, and not during previews by making snide unprofessional comments about a game, or half-informed analysis. The only issue comes in, I suppose, when game makers deliberately try to swindle or deceive people by putting out stuff that isn't in-game footage and passing it off as being otherwise. I think the industry is mostly past that at least, thankfully. Really, I am looking forward to some games, but I think I can wait for most of them. I don't feel the need to obsessively consume coverage about them. I am probably being real foolish by admitting this opinion here, since a large portion of the raison d'etre of neogaf is game news and coverage, not analysis and opinion.

And I don't mean to say that I've NEVER been like that, but after seeing live coverage of several E3s, I can say pretty confidently that I'm "over" most forms of games coverage.

Of course, every company has the right to promote their games in the best way possible. And if they think not showing it to the press is the way to go, go ahead. But I don't really like publishers taking over the role of the press and posting these 'interviews' and such which always start with "wasn't that game just great" or a variation of that and continue with the PR-bullshit. I rather have someone from outside asking the questions. Of course, it is then up to the interviewer if he asks good questions that give me more then "what is new in this game and explain feature X". I too like the analysis and opinion parts, but also the visions of the developers and the things they want to achieve with their games. These fake interviews and previews by Sony (or another company) about their own games, don't offer me that.

No, they aren't, because as far as I'm concerned, it comes with the territory of covering games with integrity. Shit, they should tell people with pride that they've been blacklisted... not that I think critics and journalists should be kotaku-like shit stirrers (there is a fine line), but I think a real critic would find it impressive that their honest opinion gathered that kind of response

Isn't that the exact thing Eurogamer is doing here? They don't really complain and make a big thing out of it. We wouldn't even know about it if it wasn't for that earlier DNF incident. They just say "well, we'll just buy them ourselves then."

I'm okay with that, I think.

But how would that be better? You say the ideal situation is when every reviewer buys the game themselves. But how is that ideal? Why would that result in better reviews? Because they have payed for it themselves, so they can tell better if the game is worth the money? That isn't it, since the boss is paying, not the reviewer.

 

[CamHostage]

Wait so they were already blacklisted and they complained about it again? Or are they complaining about the fact that they're STILL blacklisted?

I think Eurogamer is just glomping onto the issue. Their review was low-scoring but fair in writing, and I don't think Take-2 would be stupid enough to call somebody and tell them they're blackballed in the midst of this shitstorm.

It almost never happens that way anyway, usually the journalist isn't "blacklist" to their face, they just start to notice that they're their competitors are having things that they didn't know about. It's not in PR's best interest to blacklist. The smart way of dealing with a situation is A] focus on the outlets that are treating you well or fairly, and B] communicate with the outlet that's pissed you off to see if you can get back into their pages without feeling burned. They refocus their attention, rather than just closing off whole avenues. It's never smart to outright refuse free coverage of your products.

Keep in mind too that PR is a department, not the entire company. When you're blacklisted by a publisher, sometimes that really is the head-honchos saying, "This site isn't treating us how we want to be treated, let's not bother with them". More often, however, it's just Carol from PR and Stu from Advertising getting their panties in a wad after cursing out the sites that shit on them when they got loaded and hung out at the launch party, and deciding that they're going to give all their priority treatment to somebody else. Editors get in bad with one rep at a company that they're cool with everybody else all the time (and sometimes it's not the writing, sometimes the dudes just stink or text while the demo is running or come in with an agenda,) and the bad blood usually dries up by the time the rep has a new property to shop. In any case, it's very, very rarely the game developers (and almost never the game designers) or a whole company that's "blacklisted" an outlet, usually it's just a few people with excess power in an office of otherwise decent, hard-working people.

One final thing to note: journalists LOVE being the heroes, and stories of blacklisted play well into that underdog image. There have of course been cases of heavy damage done by soured relations and power-tripping publishers, but I know for fact that some of the stories of "blackballing" that get out to places like GAF have another side to the story that isn't quite so salacious. Sometimes readers are being played like fiddles too.

 

[vodka-bull]

So they can be honest to their readers about every Take 2 game in the future. Looks like they won something.

 

[FranXico]

I mean, if you don't like DNF you don't like it, but 2K did themselves no favours making the 360 the default version of the game.

They were just doing what is nowadays expected as the standard.

I think this whole things is stupid though. If devs/pubs don't want bad reviews then make sure the game you ship is good for fucks sake. Don't blacklist sites/mags for being honest about the state of your game.
The only time I could understand this is if a place was unfair in the review. Like, didn't really play it or reviewed like a leaked version with bugs and missing features and claimed it to be the retail release or just straight up lied about stuff.

Sony tried to counter the negative reviews of Lair with (admittedly poorly executed) PR, and got ridiculed for that as well as the game itself.
Looking back in retrospective, it seems that DNF manages to be a lot worse in comparison.

 

[Snapshot King]

I was listening to a Giant Bomb podcast recently where Jonathan Blow was actively and aggressively challenging two Microsoft employees to defend the strict policies they apply to what games can actually get made for and released on the Xbox 360 platform, and the Giant Bomb guys shut the conversation down because it was apparently boring and they wanted to talk about more trailers they saw at E3.

I turned the podcast off and will not listen to another one.

I love how people can listen to the same thing I do, and yet completely misunderstand everything going on and jump to totally erroneous conclusions. It's kinda magical.

 

[Ebenezer]

I havent read the whole thing but we're talking about 2K games, as in NBA 2K11, right?

NBA 2K11 as in the best sports game ALL TIME, and easily one of the best games EVER, right?

NBA 2K11 which is STILL appearing near the top of sales charts?

NBA 2K11 which Eurogamer gave the SAME RATING as Dragon Age 2?

Yeah, fuck Eurogamer. If I'm 2K I'm not giving them a fucking thing, ever. And it's because of shit like EA buying off reviewers to give their games a higher score than any sane person would give it. Sure 2K has plenty of other franchises, but their biggest competition obviously comes from EA and EA is a bunch of bitches. I can't find that Dragon Age 2 .gif, the one with "This is what RPGs are meant to be" bullshit 10/10 paid off reviews on it but if I'm 2K or ANY other company I'm blacklisting every piece of shit reviewer who appears on it.

That's the only way journalism is going to get it's act together, by calling out the frauds.

Only 8/10 for NBA 2K11? Fuck you, Eurogamer.

 

[Brandon F]

I love how people can listen to the same thing I do, and yet completely misunderstand everything going on and jump to totally erroneous conclusions. It's kinda magical.

My thoughts too. Did a double take at that post.

Also funny given how often "shill" became a hot joke the moment the MS guys were excused. Dude shoulda kept listening.

 

[HK-47]

I havent read the whole thing but we're talking about 2K games, as in NBA 2K11, right?

NBA 2K11 as in the best sports game ALL TIME, and easily one of the best games EVER, right?

NBA 2K11 which is STILL appearing near the top of sales charts?

NBA 2K11 which Eurogamer gave the SAME RATING as Dragon Age 2?

Yeah, fuck Eurogamer. If I'm 2K I'm not giving them a fucking thing, ever. And it's because of shit like EA buying off reviewers to give their shit a higher score than any sane person would give it. Sure 2K has plenty of other franchises, but their biggest competition obviously comes from EA and EA is a bunch of bitches. I can't find that Dragon Age 2 .gif, the one with "This is what RPGs are meant to be bullshit 10/10 paid off reviews on it but if I'm 2K or ANY other company I'm blacklisting every piece of shit reviewer who appears on it.

That's the only way journalism is going to get it's act together, by calling out the frauds.

Only 8/10 for NBA 2K11? Fuck you, Eurogamer.

Tell us how you really feel.

 

[SturokBGD]

They're all fucking wrong, the publishers, the reviewers, the PR companies, the blogs, every single fucking one of them, completely wrong.

The only person in the whole world that knows anything about videogames is me.

 

[Neuromancer]

I havent read the whole thing but we're talking about 2K games, as in NBA 2K11, right?

NBA 2K11 as in the best sports game ALL TIME, and easily one of the best games EVER, right?

NBA 2K11 which is STILL appearing near the top of sales charts?

NBA 2K11 which Eurogamer gave the SAME RATING as Dragon Age 2?

Yeah, fuck Eurogamer. If I'm 2K I'm not giving them a fucking thing, ever. And it's because of shit like EA buying off reviewers to give their games a higher score than any sane person would give it. Sure 2K has plenty of other franchises, but their biggest competition obviously comes from EA and EA is a bunch of bitches. I can't find that Dragon Age 2 .gif, the one with "This is what RPGs are meant to be" bullshit 10/10 paid off reviews on it but if I'm 2K or ANY other company I'm blacklisting every piece of shit reviewer who appears on it.

That's the only way journalism is going to get it's act together, by calling out the frauds.

Only 8/10 for NBA 2K11? Fuck you, Eurogamer.

Settle down, Beavis

 

[Plasmid]

I haven't gave a shit about journalist reviews in the entirety of my gaming life, i've never been turned away because a reviewer said it was bad or anything like that. I play games i know i'm going to like, i don't think i've ever been dissapointed (to the point where i wish i never bought it) in a video game.

 

[The Bookerman]

Same shit happened to 1up and their review of Assasins creed in 2007.

What else is new?

 

[XANDER CAGE]

Tell us how you really feel.

I think he likes basketball. Maybe.

I've written for a smallish games site for a while now, and we've certainly gotten some nasty emails and obvious butter-ups from publishers and PR folk. Nothing this extreme though. It's probably because we're small fries compared to someone like Eurogamer, but for as much ire as I've received in my inbox for some reviews and whatnot, no one has ever explicitly cut us off from press materials. I've always seen review copies coming in from PR guys I've had fairly curt conversations with after the publication of an article.

Maybe one day we'll be relevant enough to receive tougher treatment from PR, but honestly, this whole 2K blackballing thing has me really quite surprised as an insider.

 

[Mama Robotnik]

The only person in the whole world that knows anything about videogames is me.

In the parallel universe in which the Saturn won, how much better are things?

 

[HK-47]

They're all fucking wrong, the publishers, the reviewers, the PR companies, the blogs, every single fucking one of them, completely wrong.

The only person in the whole world that knows anything about videogames is me.

Not if you like DNF, you dont.

 

[Brandon F]

I havent read the whole thing but we're talking about 2K games, as in NBA 2K11, right?

NBA 2K11 as in the best sports game ALL TIME, and easily one of the best games EVER, right?

NBA 2K11 which is STILL appearing near the top of sales charts?

NBA 2K11 which Eurogamer gave the SAME RATING as Dragon Age 2?

Yeah, fuck Eurogamer. If I'm 2K I'm not giving them a fucking thing, ever. And it's because of shit like EA buying off reviewers to give their games a higher score than any sane person would give it. Sure 2K has plenty of other franchises, but their biggest competition obviously comes from EA and EA is a bunch of bitches. I can't find that Dragon Age 2 .gif, the one with "This is what RPGs are meant to be" bullshit 10/10 paid off reviews on it but if I'm 2K or ANY other company I'm blacklisting every piece of shit reviewer who appears on it.

That's the only way journalism is going to get it's act together, by calling out the frauds.

Only 8/10 for NBA 2K11? Fuck you, Eurogamer.

Sounds like nba2k is doing fine regardless of any reviews, so what is the problem again señor Scrooge?

 

[EternalGamer]

I don't think so. That was four years ago.


That isn't what happened. They shut the MS employees down because people's hero Gary Whitta let them know that the overwhelming feeling from the chat was that everyone was sick to death of hearing from the MS guys. People were a lot more interested in hearing what the Giant Bomb guys thought of the press conferences than listening to another hour of corporate shilling from e and Stepto.

This is exactly what happened. If you notice there was a moment of ackward silence after the Xbox guys said something about Kinnect being the future and people looking back and seeing it. And they abruptly cut to "we'll return with a new segment."

Overall I thought E and Stepto were fairly reasonable, but they did get pretty darn shill like at the end, which is when the conversation was cut off.

 

[Riposte]

8/10 for 2k11 is pretty bullshit, I agree. However I am pretty sure people would give them shit for giving a 10/10 for a "sports game".

 

[Ulairi]

I havent read the whole thing but we're talking about 2K games, as in NBA 2K11, right?

NBA 2K11 as in the best sports game ALL TIME, and easily one of the best games EVER, right?

NBA 2K11 which is STILL appearing near the top of sales charts?

NBA 2K11 which Eurogamer gave the SAME RATING as Dragon Age 2?

Yeah, fuck Eurogamer. If I'm 2K I'm not giving them a fucking thing, ever. And it's because of shit like EA buying off reviewers to give their games a higher score than any sane person would give it. Sure 2K has plenty of other franchises, but their biggest competition obviously comes from EA and EA is a bunch of bitches. I can't find that Dragon Age 2 .gif, the one with "This is what RPGs are meant to be" bullshit 10/10 paid off reviews on it but if I'm 2K or ANY other company I'm blacklisting every piece of shit reviewer who appears on it.

That's the only way journalism is going to get it's act together, by calling out the frauds.

Only 8/10 for NBA 2K11? Fuck you, Eurogamer.

I don't think the consumers of NBA 2K11 looked at reviews, especially since it was the only basketball game released this year.

 

[Neuromancer]

8/10 for 2k11 is pretty bullshit, I agree. However I am pretty sure people would give them shit for giving a 10/10 for a "sports game".

That whole rant was because the game got an 8/10?

:lol

 

[SturokBGD]

In the parallel universe in which the Saturn won, how much better are things?

Very two-dimensional.

Which is better depending on your point of view!

 

[Mama Robotnik]

Very two-dimensional.

Which is better depending on your point of view!

GLORIOUS

 

[Cday]

QQ

Yes, these two different games from two different genres likely reviewed by two different people are totally comparable in review score form and furthermore I agree your personal preference should be the main factor when determining how good a game is from every reviewer.

 

[Vlightray]

The Neogaf user reviews certainly need more attention some real good reviews in there.

 

[vodka-bull]

They're all fucking wrong, the publishers, the reviewers, the PR companies, the blogs, every single fucking one of them, completely wrong.

The only person in the whole world that knows anything about videogames is me.

stuminus3
Never buying another games console. Ever.
(Today, 11:07 PM)
Reply | Quote

 

[Amir0x]

Man, I don't mind good criticism at all. But then you have just straight out SHIT reviews -- where the reviewer never gave the game a fair shake to properly assess it. See the Warriors series of games. Why should the publishers bother sending out free copies to sites like those?

I think the Warriors series gets exactly what it deserves - what fans of the series refuse to acknowledge is that the series has been grinding its wheels for ages. And I even like a lot of those games. But it's stale in many ways and doesn't reflect many advances that games have made, imo. It's archaic in other words.


But even IF you like them so much and disagree with what I said there, it's just a personal opinion that it's not getting a fair shake. Imo, there's no evidence reviewers aren't giving that specific game a fair shake. While there are plenty of examples of certain games from certain publishers getting waaaaay over the top reviews simply because of who it is. Rockstar games and, for example, Phantom Hourglass are clear cut examples of this.

 

[Amir0x]

But there were people on GAF who defended a game like Lair. Fan-boy goggles would still be present. I would rather take what we have and just automatically assume sub 80% scoring games are bad, then try to decipher if I'm getting an objective review on GAF.

There will always be that. The point of the review thread is merely to collect reviews and allow the reader to determine whose reviews they enjoy reading and whose they don't. It's not about every reviewer being one you agree with or even one that is of particularly high quality. It's about having a wide selection of potential perspectives and, eventually, maybe signalling in on one or two you specifically enjoy and following him/her whenever he/her decides to review a game in the neoGAF review thread.

The thread was an unequivocal success in terms of the people who contributed and the structure - it just needed people to participate.

Thanks for the link. Could this get a "sticky"?

It was stickied for a while but people determined more people notice when it's not sticky. Or something

 

[Trojita]

Ouch....

 

[ColonelColon]

Are there any cases where other high profile websites inexplicably refuse to review a game?

If this was going on I had no idea.

Giantbomb still hasn't reviewed Dragon Age II.

 

[saunderez]

When most reviews of DNF went out of their way to insult readers who didn't agree with their opinion I don't blame 2K. There were fair reviews that gave bad scores to the game, the best written one I read was Game Informer. If you're going to insult your reader base by calling them things like "mentally unstable", "uneducated", "misogynistic", "sadistic" all because they like a game you're not a reviewer, you're just trolling for hits.

People saying we should have review thread on GAF.....well people who liked DNF tried to give their opinion in the OT to have it shouted down by the "reviews say its shit" brigade. So like that's going to help.

 

[Fallout-NL]

That's why neoGAFers need to say fuck the po-lice and contriubte to the neoGAF review thread to bring it back to life.

Well, I'd review DNF, but you probably don't want me reviewing the demo. And I'm not spending a single dime on that game.

 

[commedieu]

Fuck Eurogamer. I'm with 2k on this.

Reviewers are children for the most part. They pan work in a 100% unprofessional manner. You can tell when they have a bias right out the gates. I would have nothing to say if there weren't clear double standards in review styles. COD anything will get 100/100 for being the same damn game over and over, yet others will get panned for being 'more of the same.' 3/10.

I think most publishers treat too many journalists as professionals, when they just plain aren't. There is some courtesy that goes both ways, and most net-journalists are stuck with their heads up their cynical -internet persona- asses. Talk shit about a game, thats fine. But talk shit about the headliner GTA's and COD's of the world with the same vile tone. It never happens.

I'd just like to see game journalism show way less favortism, perhaps it will never happen. They all try to pretend as if people need to loosen up, and that a score is just a #, which doesn't reflect/nor should be compared to others. Yet metascores are what these companies all look at.

Yawn, Too bad for EG, but at the end of the day they are going to be stuck with giving glowing reviews for mega AAA, bigger advertising budgets than actual game development, and proving how big their net pens are.

The good ole days, Gamers had a pretty univeral mind/respect. Hell I didn't like FF7, but I knew if you were into that, you'd like it. Now FF7 is reviewed by the Forza guy who claims it sucks because it doesn't have enough driving.

This gen is garbage.

 

[Ebenezer]

Yes, these two different games from two different genres likely reviewed by two different people are totally comparable in review score form and furthermore I agree your personal preference should be the main factor when determining how good a game is from every reviewer.

It's not personal preference though. It's a problem with reviewers. On what scale does Dragon Age 2 deserve something like an 8? On a 1-100 scale maybe. I'm not even a basketball fan, or at least I really wasn't much of one until 2k11 was released. NBA 2k11, to me as a gamer, is what The Witcher 2 is to RPGs, what Ocarina of Time is to adventure games. It's that good. The controls are so tight that in some ways it's a better fighting game than fighting games are. I've never played a sports game that controlled that well, looked that good, and had that level of presentation.

At E3 2K made it very clear they were pissed about not sweeping every reward this year, and I understand why because as far as sports games go nothing else comes close. So I'm just saying from 2K's perspective I can completely understand why they'd start blacklisting EA shills, and I wish more companies would do the same.

 

[Neuromancer]

I think the Warriors series gets exactly what it deserves - what fans of the series refuse to acknowledge is that the series has been grinding its wheels for ages. And I even like a lot of those games. But it's stale in many ways and doesn't reflect many advances that games have made, imo. It's archaic in other words.


But even IF you like them so much and disagree with what I said there, it's just a personal opinion that it's not getting a fair shake. Imo, there's no evidence reviewers aren't giving that specific game a fair shake. While there are plenty of examples of certain games from certain publishers getting waaaaay over the top reviews simply because of who it is. Rockstar games and, for example, Phantom Hourglass are clear cut examples of this.

I think this is true, but I also think it's true that Duke Nukem Forever got shit on more ferociously than it would have otherwise, because of the circumstances surrounding it.

 

[HK-47]

Fuck Eurogamer. I'm with 2k on this.

Reviewers are children for the most part. They pan work in a 100% unprofessional manner. You can tell when they have a bias right out the gates. I would have nothing to say if there weren't clear double standards in review styles. COD anything will get 100/100 for being the same damn game over and over, yet others will get panned for being 'more of the same.' 3/10.

I think most publishers treat too many journalists as professionals, when they just plain aren't. There is some courtesy that goes both ways, and most net-journalists are stuck with their heads up their cynical -internet persona- asses. Talk shit about a game, thats fine. But talk shit about the headliner GTA's and COD's of the world with the same vile tone. It never happens.

I'd just like to see game journalism show way less favortism, perhaps it will never happen. They all try to pretend as if people need to loosen up, and that a score is just a #, which doesn't reflect/nor should be compared to others. Yet metascores are what these companies all look at.

Yawn, Too bad for EG, but at the end of the day they are going to be stuck with giving glowing reviews for mega AAA, bigger advertising budgets than actual game development, and proving how big their net pens are.

The good ole days, Gamers had a pretty univeral mind/respect. Hell I didn't like FF7, but I knew if you were into that, you'd like it. Now FF7 is reviewed by the Forza guy who claims it sucks because it doesn't have enough driving.

This gen is garbage.

Tell us how you really feel.

 

[Amir0x]

I think this is true, but I also think it's true that Duke Nukem Forever got shit on more ferociously than it would have otherwise, because of the circumstances surrounding it.

I dunno from virtually everyone I trust who played the game, it sounds exactly as bad as it was reviewed. It just sounds like a relic from the 90s, with a bizarrely awful mishmash of gameplay that neither lives up to modern standards OR old-school standards, and becomes a soup of shit.

That's just what I heard though... from all those I trust. I won't throw my money into a furnace to test it.

Fuck Eurogamer. I'm with 2k on this.

Reviewers are children for the most part. They pan work in a 100% unprofessional manner. You can tell when they have a bias right out the gates. I would have nothing to say if there weren't clear double standards in review styles. COD anything will get 100/100 for being the same damn game over and over, yet others will get panned for being 'more of the same.' 3/10.

I think most publishers treat too many journalists as professionals, when they just plain aren't. There is some courtesy that goes both ways, and most net-journalists are stuck with their heads up their cynical -internet persona- asses. Talk shit about a game, thats fine. But talk shit about the headliner GTA's and COD's of the world with the same vile tone. It never happens.

I'd just like to see game journalism show way less favortism, perhaps it will never happen. They all try to pretend as if people need to loosen up, and that a score is just a #, which doesn't reflect/nor should be compared to others. Yet metascores are what these companies all look at.

Yawn, Too bad for EG, but at the end of the day they are going to be stuck with giving glowing reviews for mega AAA, bigger advertising budgets than actual game development, and proving how big their net pens are.

The good ole days, Gamers had a pretty univeral mind/respect. Hell I didn't like FF7, but I knew if you were into that, you'd like it. Now FF7 is reviewed by the Forza guy who claims it sucks because it doesn't have enough driving.

This gen is garbage.

You're with 2K for shitlisting reviewers?

I'm calling it - this is the third worst post I've ever seen on GAF.

Officially confirms all future posts from you must be ignored on principle and that anything you say must be dismissed as the ravings of a delusional individual

 

[Neuromancer]

Tell us how you really feel.

You're getting a lot of mileage out of that today :lol

 

[elrechazado]

Fuck Eurogamer. I'm with 2k on this.

Reviewers are children for the most part. They pan work in a 100% unprofessional manner. You can tell when they have a bias right out the gates. I would have nothing to say if there weren't clear double standards in review styles. COD anything will get 100/100 for being the same damn game over and over, yet others will get panned for being 'more of the same.' 3/10.

I think most publishers treat too many journalists as professionals, when they just plain aren't. There is some courtesy that goes both ways, and most net-journalists are stuck with their heads up their cynical -internet persona- asses. Talk shit about a game, thats fine. But talk shit about the headliner GTA's and COD's of the world with the same vile tone. It never happens.

I'd just like to see game journalism show way less favortism, perhaps it will never happen. They all try to pretend as if people need to loosen up, and that a score is just a #, which doesn't reflect/nor should be compared to others. Yet metascores are what these companies all look at.

Yawn, Too bad for EG, but at the end of the day they are going to be stuck with giving glowing reviews for mega AAA, bigger advertising budgets than actual game development, and proving how big their net pens are.

The good ole days, Gamers had a pretty univeral mind/respect. Hell I didn't like FF7, but I knew if you were into that, you'd like it. Now FF7 is reviewed by the Forza guy who claims it sucks because it doesn't have enough driving.

This gen is garbage.

wtfisthisshit.gif

Lamenting that reviewers don't toe the line with a hive mind mentality? Freaking out that someone dares criticize things?

shaking

my

head

 

[xelios]

Fuck Eurogamer. I'm with 2k on this.

Reviewers are children for the most part. They pan work in a 100% unprofessional manner. You can tell when they have a bias right out the gates. I would have nothing to say if there weren't clear double standards in review styles. COD anything will get 100/100 for being the same damn game over and over, yet others will get panned for being 'more of the same.' 3/10.

I'm gonna assume after everything you're like the new 2k PR guy.

 

[Neuromancer]

I dunno from virtually everyone I trust who played the game, it sounds exactly as bad as it was reviewed. It just sounds like a relic from the 90s, with a bizarrely awful mishmash of gameplay that neither lives up to modern standards OR old-school standards, and becomes a soup of shit.

That's just what I heard though... from all those I trust. I won't throw my money into a furnace to test it.

Eh. It is what it is I guess. It's not great, it's not even that good, but I think a 50 on Metacritic generally represents a horrible or unplayable game, and it's neither. Personally I don't think it got a fair shake but of course it's impossible for me to prove that.

 

[Amir0x]

Eh. It is what it is I guess. It's not great, it's not even that good, but I think a 50 on Metacritic generally represents a horrible or unplayable game, and it's neither. Personally I don't think it got a fair shake but of course it's impossible for me to prove that.

A 50 is exactly what it sounds like. I really think there are some people who are just defensive about it because they wasted their money on it. From the visuals to the awful gameplay to the barely functional sideshit, it just sounds like its long, awful development history destroyed it as a game.

I mean it's fine to disagree but I think that's different from trying to claim people aren't giving it a fair shake. They gave it a fair shake and almost everyone unanimously agreed it blew, including most gamers

 

[Mark-Bozon]

lol....game journalism. how can you be blacklisted from reviewing something? even Armond White is still offered prescreenings.

games industry is a joke in this regard.

If they were blacklisted then they should find one of MANY retail places that sell early, and not pay attention to embargo dates. Everything's an exclusive if you aren't relying on publishers and their hold dates and such.