• Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!

Exclusive first reviews that actually scored lower then a 9?

I AM JOHN! said:
What about when the promotional page has almost the exact content and layout of an official site. You have to admit it's a shocking amount of professional-looking work for a promotional page for a game being covered whose main focus is supposed to be pointing you into the direction of some of IGN's inFamous content. It's the kind of things I get "Tomb Radar" vibes from.
Click to expand...
So like Halo and Gears? This isn't about Infamous as OJG said, but some are really trying their hardest as if this is the first time. Big difference between a minisite and sending free alcohol and gifts equal the price of a launch PS3 ($599) to reviewers, nobody was upset when MS did that. And that is much worse.
 
I AM JOHN! said:
What about when the promotional page has almost the exact content and layout of an official site. You have to admit it's a shocking amount of professional-looking work for a promotional page for a game being covered whose main focus is supposed to be pointing you into the direction of some of IGN's inFamous content. It's the kind of things I get "Tomb Radar" vibes from.
Click to expand...

And this from the guy who runs screaming to the defensive positions every time someone suggests that there might be some shady stuff going on between Microsoft and MGS Community Manager Boot Camp, er, 1up.
 
AltogetherAndrews said:
And this from the guy who runs screaming to the defensive positions every time someone suggests that there might be some shady stuff going on between Microsoft and MGS Community Manager Boot Camp, er, 1up.
Click to expand...
I like, but you don't need an "er" cause you did the strikethrough. Still, I feel the stinging.
 
iceatcs said:
Blew.gif
Click to expand...
that kid's hair is truly awful
 
CrushDance said:
So like Halo and Gears?
Click to expand...
Pleading ignorance, but if IGN or any other site did something like that, then yes, just like that.
AltogetherAndrews said:
And this from the guy who runs screaming to the defensive positions every time someone suggests that there might be some shady stuff going on between Microsoft and MGS Community Manager Boot Camp, er, 1up.
Click to expand...
Right, because this is exactly the same as this.

One looks like a way to deliver a group of content, the other looks like someone was told to make an official game site to be hosted on another site, the problem being that said site is supposed to be covering the game with the same open mind they give to any other game. My former proclivity towards the Ziff game group aside (former because 80% of the people whose work I've grown up idolizing no longer work there), if 1UP, Giant Bomb, GAF, or any other site I read on a regular basis did something along those lines my reaction would be the same.

I smiled, though.
 
Huh. So what you're saying is that reviews, reviewers, and game media sites have an agenda, and I can't take reviews to heart since they're biased/slanted/out to make a buck? Wow, when did this happen? There was never evidence of this stuff before. I'm just an empty shell anymore.

Glad to see it was a Sony exclusive that set off the old light bulb. Because there's no way in hell any game from them would be legitimately worth a 9 or above amirite? Those H3 and ultra-hyped "big game" GTA4 scores didn't set off any red flags though? :lol
 
IGN clearly has an agenda.

SOCOM Confrontation: 4.5

Heavenly Sword: 7.0

Lair: 4.9

Haze: 4.5

vs.

LBP: 9.5

Uncharted: 9.1

Killzone 2: 9.4

inFAMOUS: 9.2


Their agenda is that they tend to give bad games bad scores, and good games good scores. Shocking, I know.
 
GameGamer said:
Yes, they allow themselves to be dragged around by others in order to keep a good future relationship for their own benefit.

I think the OPs point keeps standing.
Click to expand...

No, they do it because they need to get a review up in a timely fashion.

And I wasn't replying directly to the original poster's statements, which were about exclusive first reviews that actually scored lower [sic] then a 9.
 
J-Rzez said:
Those H3 and ultra-hyped "big game" GTA4 scores didn't set off any red flags though? :lol
Click to expand...
Uh... I distinctly remember there being a large thread about IGN promising advertising space in return for the exclusive review, which was filled with similar levels of anger and "LOL IGN"s before devolving into yet another GTA-hate thread.
 
The Haze thing makes for a good counter-point. It was given more attention from IGN than most other sites, there was exclusive footage, and FRD used IGN as their official blog space regarding everything about the game.
 
JoJo13 said:
IGN clearly has an agenda.

SOCOM Confrontation: 4.5
Heavenly Sword: 7.0
Lair: 4.9
Haze: 4.5
vs.
LBP: 9.5
Uncharted: 9.1
Killzone 2: 9.4
inFAMOUS: 9.2

Their agenda is that they tend to give bad games bad scores, and good games good scores. Shocking, I know.
Click to expand...

Ok, now for this post to be on topic... which of these games did IGN have the exclusive first review for?

CrushDance said:
So like Halo and Gears? This isn't about Infamous as OJG said, but some are really trying their hardest as if this is the first time. Big difference between a minisite and sending free alcohol and gifts equal the price of a launch PS3 ($599) to reviewers, nobody was upset when MS did that. And that is much worse.
Click to expand...

I know that Halo3 sent out those huge bags of goodies and Gears2 and GTA4 forced the reviewers to go to their companies to do the reviews there and Konami hand picked select press and flew them over to Japan and put them up in a hotel and fed them for MGS4 first previews. Again though, this is for another thread since I would love to hear of instances and circumstances under what these guys have to do for reviews.
 
I AM JOHN! said:
Pleading ignorance, but if IGN or any other site did something like that, then yes, just like that.

Right, because this is exactly the same as this.
Click to expand...

I'm not making direct comparisons between 1up and IGN (although I seem to recall some awfully PRish Gears of War features from 1up), just saying... you of all people should probably not be shouting too much about people trying to cushion the sordid truth(?) of gaming sites and developer relations.
 
OldJadedGamer said:
Ok, now for this post to be on topic... which of these games did IGN have the exclusive first review for?
Click to expand...

I don't think any of those games were reviewed by IGN first. Not even the ones with the good scores.
 
OldJadedGamer said:
Ok, now for this post to be on topic... which of these games did IGN have the exclusive first review for?



I know that Halo3 sent out those huge bags of goodies and Gears2 and GTA4 forced the reviewers to go to their companies to do the reviews there and Konami hand picked select press and flew them over to Japan and put them up in a hotel and fed them for MGS4 first previews. Again though, this is for another thread since I would love to hear of instances and circumstances under what these guys have to do for reviews.
Click to expand...

Alternatively, you could open the thread up to a broader discussion. Or how about a possible counter-point to the high scoring exclusive? Knowing that the common critic is a petty, thin-skinned and easily jilted nerd with a power complex, might there be something to the theory that a number of them tend to issue unfavorable reviews of games that have been given the exclusive treatment?

Are initial review scores actually inflated, or is the review curve distorted by the work of jilted dorks? GAF investigates.
 
AltogetherAndrews said:
The Haze thing makes for a good counter-point. It was given more attention from IGN than most other sites, there was exclusive footage, and FRD used IGN as their official blog space regarding everything about the game.
Click to expand...

Good point. It'll be ignored.
 
The most recent example that comes to mind of an exclusive first review that scored lower than a 9 was Nintendo Power's exclusive first review of PunchOut!! in the most recent issue, and they gave it an 8.5. Actually, a lot of the games they reviewed this issue were first reviews for the games, and none of them (besides PunchOut!!) scored very high.
 
AltogetherAndrews said:
I'm not making direct comparisons between 1up and IGN (although I seem to recall some awfully PRish Gears of War features from 1up), just saying... you of all people should probably not be shouting too much about people trying to cushion the sordid truth(?) of gaming sites and developer relations.
Click to expand...
This is where I would normally counter-argue that anyone who actually read EGM between 2002 and 2005 would know that they were constantly accused of being too generous to Sony and way harsher on Nintendo and Microsoft, but
okay whatever you say, dood!
emot-fuckyou.gif

AltogetherAndrews said:
The Haze thing makes for a good counter-point. It was given more attention from IGN than most other sites, there was exclusive footage, and FRD used IGN as their official blog space regarding everything about the game.
Click to expand...
Actually, I was completely unaware of this. Interesting.
 
OldJadedGamer said:
Ok, now for this post to be on topic... which of these games did IGN have the exclusive first review for?
Click to expand...

LBP, Uncharted and Heavenly Sword and of course inFamous.
 
I AM JOHN! said:
This is where I would normally counter-argue that anyone who actually read EGM between 2002 and 2005 would know that they were constantly accused of being too generous to Sony and way harsher on Nintendo and Microsoft, but
okay whatever you say, dood!
emot-fuckyou.gif


Actually, I was completely unaware of this. Interesting.
Click to expand...
Were you also unaware of this? I'm sure Microsoft were the ones who sent the PS3 as well. If that's not influence I don't know what is!

34hxx6c.jpg

309r2vq.jpg


Lets also not forget "XBOAT LOVES YOU <3" and "What you could be doing while waiting for GTA4 to install on your PS3" et al. A freaking minisite is nothing in comparison to any of these things, how many people are even going to see it? Only those interested in the game to begin with mostly.

Guess we should wait for TeamXbox's review to be sure of "teh bias" Just stop and think about it. How many people at IGN are going to benefit from the infamous minisite? How many of them will give a shit? Now imagine you work at IGN or some other company and you get free beer, goodie bags and more that you can actually partake in. That is way more liekly to influence opinions than a minisite that's tucked away in a corner.
 
CrushDance said:
Were you also unaware of this? I'm sure Microsoft were the ones who sent the PS3 as well. If that's not influence I don't know what is!

http://i41.tinypic.com/34hxx6c.jpg[IMG]
[IMG]http://i44.tinypic.com/309r2vq.jpg[IMG]

Lets also not forget "XBOAT LOVES YOU <3" and "What you could be doing while waiting for GTA4 to install on your PS3" et al.[/QUOTE]
:lol

I don't envy these guys; Microsoft kind of seems like the annoying kid in class who really wants you to like him and tries to bribe you with stuff, but the only reason you hang out with him is because his mom buys him some cool games.
Click to expand...
 
cooljeanius said:
The most recent example that comes to mind of an exclusive first review that scored lower than a 9 was Nintendo Power's exclusive first review of PunchOut!! in the most recent issue, and they gave it an 8.5. Actually, a lot of the games they reviewed this issue were first reviews for the games, and none of them (besides PunchOut!!) scored very high.
Click to expand...

If this is true this that is super crazy considering it's not only an exclusive first review but an official magazine for the company making the console and the game!

That combo almost always guarantees a 9.5 at least and 10 on average.
 
CrushDance said:
Lets also not forget "XBOAT LOVES YOU <3" and "What you could be doing while waiting for GTA4 to install on your PS3" et al. A freaking minisite is nothing in comparison to any of these things, how many people are even going to see it? Only those interested in the game to begin with mostly.
Click to expand...

I think you're missing the point. The Xboat was a publicity stunt by Microsoft. If it had been designed and produced by IGN, then sure, it would be a great counter-point. But it wasn't.

Now, the 1up Halo 3 deal is a hell of a lot better.
 
AltogetherAndrews said:
I think you're missing the point. The Xboat was a publicity stunt by Microsoft. If it had been designed and produced by IGN, then sure, it would be a great counter-point. But it wasn't.
Click to expand...
No I get the point, what I'm trying to say though is that Microsoft has done similar(Gears and Halo) and even more with the gifts they send. Nothing influences opinion than being able to partake. If only a few are being treated royally then you get jealous and rat them out. But if you're included then you feel privileged and are way less likely to stray or blow the whistle on your own "group". That's the way in life and the way it works in these cases as well.
 
AltogetherAndrews said:
I think you're missing the point. The Xboat was a publicity stunt by Microsoft. If it had been designed and produced by IGN, then sure, it would be a great counter-point. But it wasn't.
Click to expand...

Yeah, that's just random PR shit from the console makers. I'm talking about exclusive first reviews from magazines and websites unless you feel stuff like that influences reviews.
 
Didn't the 1up dudes talk about how the reason they focused on Microsoft games was because they were simply given greater access to those games, and that Sony was sort of a closed entity? Something of that sort. Apparently, IGN gets along well with Sony.
 
OldJadedGamer said:
Yeah, that's just random PR shit from the console makers. I'm talking about exclusive first reviews from magazines and websites unless you feel stuff like that influences reviews.
Click to expand...
I know you guys are referring to the original point. All I'm saying is that these things are way more likely to sway opinions than mini sites or exclusive reviews. We always ignore the first reviews here on Gaf for the most part because of the very reason whereby PlayStation the official mag or Official Xbox mag review games and everyone says: "I'll wait for the real reviews" Nobody takes these seriously.
 
AltogetherAndrews said:
Didn't the 1up dudes talk about how the reason they focused on Microsoft games was because they were simply given greater access to those games, and that Sony was sort of a closed entity? Something of that sort. Apparently, IGN gets along well with Sony.
Click to expand...

Yeah, Sony and Nintendo actually. They said that Microsoft gave them all kinds of access to games while Sony and Nintendo were held behind Japanese corporate red tape and they weren't as fourth coming with info on their games.

But if I remember, that was while crazy Ken was still in control and I think once he left and Kaz took over, he took that to heart and opened up a lot since you don't really hear those complaints anymore. Makes sense since Kaz ran SCEA for so long.
 
OldJadedGamer said:
Ok, now for this post to be on topic... which of these games did IGN have the exclusive first review for?
Click to expand...

so you think they are giving good scores to games that they get exclusive review at but at the same time, they can trash other games from the same publisher all day long?

how does that make sense?


I think exclusive reviews are only done for good games, and i have to yet someone who wasnt impressed by infamous demo.

What mags would have cover story about game that is mediocre or really bad?
 
OldJadedGamer said:
If this is true this that is super crazy considering it's not only an exclusive first review but an official magazine for the company making the console and the game!

That combo almost always guarantees a 9.5 at least and 10 on average.
Click to expand...

From what I can remember, Nintendo Power has gotten better about that. They're not afraid to give a Nintendo-developed game a lower score if it's deserved.
 
Shurs said:
What's worse an exclusive review that's pretty much in line with other reviews or gaining preview exclusivity in exchange for hyping the shit out of a game?
Click to expand...
I'd say reviews. While there's some especially extreme examples of hyping the shit out of games (and Christ, I fucking blocked out that Halo thing because of how annoying it was), preview stuff like that happens all the time. IGN has a huge month-long blowout on all the minute details of San Andreas before it came out; Giant Bomb gets the kind of preferential treatment from Capcom USA that is enough to raise eyebrows (I mean, they did this, for crying out loud). But so long as I don't feel like this is encroaching on what is supposed to be a critical look at the game and only the game, I'm not too deterred by it.
 
Nafai1123 said:
I don't really understand the anger at high exclusive reviews. If the game is good, then the game will maintain a high average rating. If it sucks, the review average will drop like a rock. Sure, some reviewers might be influenced if they read a high exclusive review, but aren't reviewers supposed to stay away from other peoples scores until they post their own?
Click to expand...

Anger, I don't understand either. That said, questions of journalistic ethics should be asked. It's fair grounds to debate, it makes them aware that these issues are present in readers' minds, and it might possibly spur change (if need be made) either in a site doing exclusive reviews or in an intrepid journalist looking to make their own outlet. And I agree with I AM JOHN!, there's some stuff that I can see as signs of the PR game being played out but I really don't care where I get my info, the only concern is if it affects the editorial objectivity.

Myself, I think the whole thing about questioning ads and accusing "moneyhats" is way, way into conspiracy freak territory. These guys make relatively little money and don't see a dollar more if traffic spikes, so I'm not sure why every net kid thinks journalists are on the take. Get to know one for two minutes and you'd know that they're rarely driven by money - all they want to do is get their day's work done so they can go home and beat off, and the biggest reason they care about traffic is so they can buck up their confidence to imagine themselves as bigger when they're beating off. Am I wrong, anybody?
 
OldJadedGamer said:
If this is true this that is super crazy considering it's not only an exclusive first review but an official magazine for the company making the console and the game!

That combo almost always guarantees a 9.5 at least and 10 on average.
Click to expand...
OPM gave Motorstorm: PR a 3/5. I can't remember if it was an exclusive first review though.
 
I AM JOHN! said:
I'd say reviews. While there's some especially extreme examples of hyping the shit out of games (and Christ, I fucking blocked out that Halo thing because of how annoying it was), preview stuff like that happens all the time. IGN has a huge month-long blowout on all the minute details of San Andreas before it came out; Giant Bomb gets the kind of preferential treatment from Capcom USA that is enough to raise eyebrows. But so long as I don't feel like this is encroaching on what is supposed to be a critical look at the game and only the game, I'm not too deterred by it.
Click to expand...

We've heard journalists say that when it comes to Triple A games, people have mostly made up their minds by the time the review comes out. Feeding the hype machine which leads people to make up their minds before the reviews are released in exchange for first looks feels worse to me.
 
Shurs said:
We've heard journalists say that when it comes to reviews of Triple A games, people have mostly made up their minds by the time the review comes out. Feeding the hype machine feels worse to me.
Click to expand...
I can see where you're coming from with that. I think we can all agree that the industry would probably be better served with some more distance between the game makers and the people who write about them. I guess the question is: how much distance?
 
I AM JOHN! said:
I can see where you're coming from with that. I think we can all agree that the industry would probably be better served with some more distance between the game makers and the people who write about them. I guess the question is: how much distance?
Click to expand...

The ideal situation would be web sites/magazines not having to rely on game publishers for the majority of their advertising.
 
JoJo13 said:
IGN clearly has an agenda.

SOCOM Confrontation: 4.5

Heavenly Sword: 7.0

Lair: 4.9

Haze: 4.5

vs.

LBP: 9.5

Uncharted: 9.1

Killzone 2: 9.4

inFAMOUS: 9.2


Their agenda is that they tend to give bad games bad scores, and good games good scores. Shocking, I know.
Click to expand...


Only one of those I'd disagree with thus far (without playing InFamous) is that I think Heavenly Sword was scored a tad too low. But other than that, seems pretty on point.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Is there a game that actually nails proper 80s and 90s nostalgia?
2 3
107
388
Dacvak replied
  • Locked
[The Gamer] PlayStation's First Exclusive Of 2026 Looks To Be A Massive Flop
Clickbait Review  2
69
1K
Sleepwalker replied
Skull and Bones: Kraken Exclusive First Look
Trailer 
23
466
IbizaPocholo replied
Famitsu Review Scores: Issue 1915 - Silent Hill f gets a 9/9/9/9 [36/40] // Gematsu
2
95
2K
Danny22 replied
Ryzen 9 9950X3D2 Dual Edition - Review Thread
Review Hardware  2
63
636
winjer replied
Top Bottom