Games Journalism! Wainwright/Florence/Tomb Raider/Eurogamer/Libel Threats/Doritos

Status
Not open for further replies.

TheSeks

Blinded by the luminous glory that is David Bowie's physical manifestation.
Feb 14, 2009
56,116
0
800
If the choice is between having a meetup at the local Burger King or not having a GB World Tour, I'll take the World Tour every time. :eek:
I think the balancing act of that is that Jeff/GB should stipulate that they're going to say things that the PR people may/may not like but that's the nature of their site and readers enjoy that. If the PR people are willing to go along with that, then they may benefit more than stiffling Jeff by not letting him trash the product as a joke/serious bit in those aspects.

But that won't really ever happen because PR is scared to death of letting reviewers speak openly about what they think of something.
 
Dec 31, 2005
17,646
0
0
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=342868

Barrington Harvey are the firm that represented eidos in a scandal of forcing reviewers to give tomb raider good reviews

edit: damn gaf, shoulda refreshed while researching my post I guess
While the Lauren Wainwright rabbit hole of intrigue is entertaining, I almost feel like it should have its own thread at this point, as most of the discussion here seems to have moved past her foibles.
 
Oct 27, 2011
2,788
0
0
If a press preview is a carefully cut build made specifically for that event, polished and given additional QA, with a very specifically chosen section of the game that shows of the key features of that title in the best possible light, it's (gently, softly, carefully) misrepresenting both the current state of the game, and potentially, the trajectory of the game for release.

A glowing preview generates hype. A buggy broken build that crashes every ten minutes and doesn't show off the

  • Key
  • Features

less so, and can start negative buzz instead.

Not that every dev has the resources or time to do it to quite that extent, nor are the people attending these events so dumb they can't draw obvious conclusions based on what they're playing (doctored or no), but still, point stands - controlled access is just that.
I can see this, but Schreirer saying the reason being it may be different in the released game sounds odd. Because the way you describe, final game would probably be worse than previews, so shouldn't you actually be hesitant to praise (also read: restate) the previews?
 
Jan 16, 2009
16,846
0
0
Since the Skyrim PS3 issue was brought up, I think it's worth saying that critics did absolutely nothing wrong in that case. The better ones played and finished the game on multiple platforms and didn't find a single game breaking issue. Let's not forget you could have played Skyrim for 40, 50 or even 100 hours on the PS3 and not run into any of the issues yourself.

That situation asked for a journalist to look into it and report the issues people were having, but a critic's job is to experience the product and relay their opinion on it and that's it. A lot of people turned their anger to reviewers.
 
Dec 30, 2011
9,164
0
0
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=342868

Barrington Harvey are the firm that represented eidos in a scandal of forcing reviewers to give tomb raider good reviews

edit: damn gaf, shoulda refreshed while researching my post I guess
To which am guessing they then realised the better way to influence scores would be shills...
Shills who actively get to know and be friendly with press from all companies; shills who review games for national newspapers on behalf of their 'hidden employers'.

A shill then saw they were in trouble of being revealed and stupidly decided to sue Eurogamer hoping to clear their name from google search, not realising the internet was watching as she did so. Shes not a journalist (her use of libel laws is on the side of a corporation trying to control journalists and ensure they control their PR sides of things) - shes a Shill, either employed by Square Enix or by this Barrington Harvey; or on behalf of herself realised she could play both sides to her benefit.
 
Jun 17, 2008
16,480
5
835
I think the balancing act of that is that Jeff/GB should stipulate that they're going to say things that the PR people may/may not like but that's the nature of their site and readers enjoy that. If the PR people are willing to go along with that, then they may benefit more than stiffling Jeff by not letting him trash the product as a joke/serious bit in those aspects.

But that won't really ever happen because PR is scared to death of letting reviewers speak openly about what they think of something.
If the sponsors were not game companies, I don't think there would be so many issues with that. If anything a company like Burger King sponsoring would probably just result in a joke trashing of Wendy's/McD.
 

TheSeks

Blinded by the luminous glory that is David Bowie's physical manifestation.
Feb 14, 2009
56,116
0
800
Since the Skyrim PS3 issue was brought up, I think it's worth saying that critics did absolutely nothing wrong in that case. The better ones played and finished the game on multiple platforms and didn't find a single game breaking issue. Let's not forget you could have played Skyrim for 40, 50 or even 100 hours on the PS3 and not run into any of the issues yourself.
Yes, and no. The issue was moving things around/increasing file size. You could do that in about 20 hours if you simply moved a lot of shit around/picked things up and dropped them elsewhere.

But again: That was a major issue in performance and it isn't mentioned in a single review/added to a review as an 11th hour caution, why?

It's the same thing as Jeff and Kotaku going "well this isn't a big deal for people/my readers in the US so we aren't going to write about it" like this issue. If a size-able portion of people are talking about it, it's "news" wither you the writer or the site like it or not you should at least mention and reflect on it a little.
 
May 20, 2009
12,684
1
0
43
Faroe Islands
www.joypad.dk
Any source for that?
more than one..

http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/113707-EA-Accused-of-Gaming-Battlefield-3-Review-Scores

http://www.gamedynamo.com/article/s...ield_3_review_questionnaire_is_a_pr_nightmare

http://www.thesixthaxis.com/2011/10/19/ea-norway-limits-battlefield-3-review-code/

and many more...

another interesting piece.. that is just over a year old. It actually describes the Battlefield 3 scenario (just with a random game name instead)

http://www.gamereactor.dk/blog/lee+west/72673/

It´s a blog by the editor at Gamereactor.dk. Here are some (translated) quotes.

Now that Denmark is showing on the game world map, we get an insight into the foreign review methods. And they are not pretty. Honestly stop for a minute and think.

Metacritic. How often do you think that there is an uncertain guy reviewing a game, and how often do you not think he jumps past Metacritic to check the score. If the first three scores gives 91%, and he vacillates between 4 and 5, do not you think he ends up at 5 as a minimum? Sure.

Therefore, there is an (un) healthy interest from PR people to check whether the notifier can actually live up to the requirements, if he must have code ahead of time. Before time. If you want to be 100% fair (which it is), you can choose to buy the title itself. What would you say to wait a week for all reviews? We already know the answer. They will be saying that we are slower than IKM and SameSpot that already has reviews up.
As a PR man once said to me. Why the hell can gamers not just drop their conspiracy theories and use the energy to make the world a better place? The only thing they want is to sit behind a screen and complain about trivia.

I can easily see where the question fails, yet I am inclined to agree with him. We are here to play. And Gamereactor is here to tell you what we think. Not what a PR man hopes what we think about the game.

In return, the dear PR people also begin to remember that we are not their extended billboard, but critics who take our work seriously. And is there anything that will annoy a critic is when someone tells him what he should think
 
Mar 6, 2011
829
0
0


This is your last chance. After this, there is no turning back.

You take the blue pill. The story ends. You wake up in your bed and believe…whatever you want to believe.

You take the red pill. You stay in Wonderland and I show you how deep the rabbit hole goes.
 
Oct 6, 2006
9,556
0
0
Chicagoland


This is your last chance. After this, there is no turning back.

You take the blue pill. The story ends. You wake up in your bed and believe…whatever you want to believe.

You take the red pill. You stay in Wonderland and I show you how deep the rabbit hole goes.
The PR-enthusiast-critic-journalist-press (I give up) has been snorting, swallowing, and injecting that blue pill for far too long. Time for rehab.
 
Dec 30, 2011
9,164
0
0
Yep. There's a wider issue that stems from the original article, but I find the idea that one journalist would attempt to silence (and thus indirectly cause the resignation of) another through legal threats with no credible basis very unpleasant.
Any news source she works for from now on are tainted imo as being anti-freedom of speech. Hell she sued someone over quoting a tweet she made. Whether the press want to protect their 'right to be manipulated' - her actions are indefensible.
 
Dec 5, 2008
14,974
0
0
www.neogaf.com
I can't be the only one fascinated by all this that started to read threads here on GAF with different eyes. I have complete trust on the administration and moderationship here, but they can only act directly on the blatant scenarios. I don't want to be reduced to a jaded old man screaming at the clouds stereotype.
 
Mar 6, 2011
829
0
0
I can't be the only one fascinated by all this that started to read threads here on GAF with different eyes. I have complete trust on the administration and moderationship here, but they can only act directly on the blatant scenarios. I don't want to be reduced to a jaded old man screaming at the clouds stereotype.

This post by Arthur Gies is intereresting, makes me want to know what he's seen. But most likely, he'll hide behind the "I have absolute proof but can't show you because I need access to do my job" bit.
 
Dec 23, 2007
11,687
0
0
Austin
Man, this thread indeed.

I have listened to Garnett since Podcast #1 at 1up, but he's out as long as he continues to include Andrea Renee on the show. Sorry girl, you're a shill for the dark side with no moral compass and just another tool of the system. I never thought you brought any substantial opinions to the show in the first place and am left questioning why she is there at all? Does shacknews have some kind of promotional deal with machinima? Do they pay Shacknews so she can be on the show to pimp their site? Is he just friends with her? This doubt is what it's all about. I think in many ways we've allowed the system to manipulate us unknowingly. Which, whatever, yes we're taking this a little too seriously perhaps, but I'm tired of feeling the strings attached to my shoulders. 0 tolerance for this shit anymore.

Glad we can move the discussion past Libial Grrl. Her and her ilk need to be flushed out of the industry yesterday.
 
Aug 20, 2006
4,386
0
0
It's a weird fascination that I have with all of this...

On the one hand, I can't stop reading and clicking the interesting links to twitter feeds, cognitive psychology youtube bits, and whatnot.

And on the other hand, I can't help but feel a bit like all of this is coming to a head several years after it should have, and that the enthusiast press as a whole is not in a place sufficient to do anything positive with anything positive that may result from all of it.
 
Feb 22, 2009
8,053
3
0
This post by Arthur Gies is intereresting, makes me want to know what he's seen. But most likely, he'll hide behind the "I have absolute proof but can't show you because I need access to do my job" bit.
He was wrong saying that people who promote games on GAF are immune because they have been caught out in the past. If Gies knows for certain who is a guerilla marketer on GAF then it isn't GAF that is stopping him from spilling the beans.

But it's true that we have made fun of writers like Justin McElroy. If anyone wants to follow that drama then they can judge for themselves.
 
Just wondering if any here possibly plan on boycotting any podcasts or sites based on their reactions to this? Or at least will this effect how much you visit/listen to them? It's pretty amazing that some folks like Klepek and Totilo (well lots of people here already dislike Kotaku obviously, GB is another story) to name just a few are trying so hard to ignore this and paint it as "yawn gamerz complayning c0nspiraceez!" Someone from the gaming press cost one of their colleagues their job by threatening legal action, what's not to get here? Folks defending Wainwright or slamming those covering it or discussing it come off looking really bad in my opinion. Someone here keeping a list?
 
May 25, 2007
25,537
0
0
Lol I was just watching that video of her and Korina Abbott in bed from that world of stuart link and she mentions consolemonster.



http://telly.com/9A622

I know this story is bigger than her now but she was the one who threw gasoline on what would have been a one day story at most.

I would find it amazing if at this point she doesn't just move into PR full time now as the idea of her as a games writer is just contaminated now.
 
Just wondering if any here possibly plan on boycotting any podcasts or sites based on their reactions to this? It's pretty amazing that some folks like Klepek and Totilo (well lots of people here already dislike Kotaku obviously, GB is another story) to name just a few are trying so hard to ignore this and paint it as "yawn gamerz complayning c0nspiraceez!" Someone from the gaming press cost one of their colleagues their job by threatening legal action, what's not to get here? Folks defending Wainwright or slamming those covering it or discussing it come off looking really bad in my opinion.
Klepek did nothing of the sort. They are people doing what you're saying but they're at CAG and Weekend Confirmed. Ledsen's great posts gathering together all the statements people have made will set you straight.
 
Dec 23, 2007
11,687
0
0
Austin
He was wrong saying that people who promote games on GAF are immune because they have been caught out in the past. If Gies knows for certain who is a guerilla marketer on GAF then it isn't GAF that is stopping him from spilling the beans.

But it's true that we have made fun of writers like Justin McElroy. If anyone wants to follow that drama then they can judge for themselves.
My biggest fear is how this all leads back to GAF. I know the Amazon guy crossed a line, but he didn't see it that why because to him many of the OT's are just extensions of PR. How many of them are? How many known/unknown viral marketers are in our midst? Is this something that is just accepted, or is it something GAF benefits from on the back end?

If they traced the droids here, they may have learned who they sold them to and that would lead them back...home!
 
Dec 6, 2008
29,041
2
0
London
The only ''gaming'' site I follow is Giantbomb anyway, and they have stated where they stand in all this. Other Websites could die in hell fire, for all I care. Although I am intrested where Rob Florence is gonna land next.
 
Jul 7, 2009
46,557
0
0
About Stu Campbells accusation against Colin Campell, grotsnik (the guy that wrote the excellent editorial in RPGCodex) have this to say:


grotsnik said:
Another scrap of detail - I asked Stu Campbell about his Colin Campbell/IGN accusation.


Stu Campbell said:
I imagine nobody’s followed it up because it was a long time ago and it’s my word against his, with no evidence either way. But Colin is the only person in my career who’s ever tried to get me to review a game on the understanding that it had to receive a certain minimum score to keep the publisher happy and taking out adverts. It was Domark’s skanky conversion of Super Space Invaders for the C64. I refused, and Commodore Format, which Colin was editor of at the time, ended up giving it 92%.
(I think Colin was also publisher of Amiga Action when it reviewed Rise Of The Robots, but I can’t say for sure – the issue it was in hasn’t been scanned on AMR yet.)
http://www.rpgcodex.net/forums/inde...torial-games-journalism-scandal.77426/page-15
 
Just wondering if any here possibly plan on boycotting any podcasts or sites based on their reactions to this? Or at least will this effect how much you visit/listen to them? It's pretty amazing that some folks like Klepek and Totilo (well lots of people here already dislike Kotaku obviously, GB is another story) to name just a few are trying so hard to ignore this and paint it as "yawn gamerz complayning c0nspiraceez!" Someone from the gaming press cost one of their colleagues their job by threatening legal action, what's not to get here? Folks defending Wainwright or slamming those covering it or discussing it come off looking really bad in my opinion. Someone here keeping a list?
Believe everything. Trust no one.
 
Aug 18, 2009
558
0
0
San Francisco
Clarification on this: PS3 debugs (all I know about) run retail code just fine. That is, retail Blu-rays. They don't run retail PSN games. They can't use retail patches.
Although we do use PS3 debugs to play non-retail, pre-release versions of PSN games. They come as .pkg files on discs or USB sticks thru mail or email. Latest example was Okami HD, publicly available today, incidentally.
 
Nov 6, 2006
4,455
0
0
I think the balancing act of that is that Jeff/GB should stipulate that they're going to say things that the PR people may/may not like but that's the nature of their site and readers enjoy that. If the PR people are willing to go along with that, then they may benefit more than stiffling Jeff by not letting him trash the product as a joke/serious bit in those aspects.

But that won't really ever happen because PR is scared to death of letting reviewers speak openly about what they think of something.
What the hell would a Giant Bomb World Tour be?!

I agree somewhat that this would be an ok solution, but what would be wrong with just the old school solution of "Today we are sponored by Burger King who is hosting this event" followed by reading their ad copy. Out and done.

It's clear to everybody that when you are reading that, you are reading an ad. No need to make the entire show this weird game where they talk about sponsorship in and out in blurry ways or kid or joke. Make it clear that the ad is an ad and be done with it.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.