if you don't believe me, look up "Forsaken's" centerfold ad. It was in magazines I owned back then
No need, fellow old. I was there
I remember renting that game and thinking... Wtf is this? Lol
Yeah. Here we are worrying about ethics in war correspondence, but then there are these titans of truth.
I refuse to read any movie critic reviews unless I can watch them react to the entire movie MST3K-style
In addition to the other nonsense, she says "authentic reactions" as though acting isn't a thing and hasn't been used on TV, both pre-recorded and even live, to shill for various products for decades now
True. There are so many trash reaction channels that exaggerate or “get in character” to fake expressions
For more information, watch any Ubisoft E3 conference (actually don't do this to yourself)
I don't think gamers/tourists know how much of anything works to be honest
I often hear gamers talk about paid reviews, but from having communicated with countless publishers and their reps for review codes over a few years, I've never come across even a single attempt at influencing the upcoming review. You get an embargo and a press kit sometimes containing the known bugs that are expected to be fixed by the global release. Occasionally the press kit also contains a guide to the game.
major gaming mags were seemingly afraid to mark down major games from major studios because they didn't want to be denied review codes in the future
Wasn't it more/also they were worried about ongoing advertising deals? Like it wasn't even necessarily the review staff themselves being in on it so much as the execs leaning on them to not threaten the revenue stream.
Yeah, I remember Kane and Lynch 2, a huge stinker, had a full banner ad on
IGNGameSpot that caused a lot of controversy with it's review.Edit: corrected publication, thanks to comrade AernaLingus
Wasn't it Jeff Gerstmann's review on GameSpot which led to him being fired and creating Giant Bomb
There's a lot you can do to influence the review that's not literally paying for it. You can do everything paid trips to your studio for a preview, you can review embargo it until the release date, you can dictate what screenshots and videos they can use and at the worst you can just not send a review code to a publication that didn't cooperate last time.
Or maybe you just have a rabid fanbase that thinks everything you shit out is gold so they harass reviewers that give a "low" score.
How do the screenshots and videos influence the score or impression from playing the actual game? How does the embargo affect anything about the review content? At worst, the players would just see the same review on the release day.
Even if everybody pre-orders, platforms like Steam do not count the pre-order period towards their two weeks policy, so you still get two weeks or two gameplay hours to decide.
Everything I've listed is a non-exhaustive list of things CD Project did to get raving reviews for Cyberpunk on release. People may have forgotten about it but they did not allow gameplay videos, only allowed screenshots from promotional material and also promised reviewers that all the bugs and performance problems would be fixed by a day one patch.
So yes, they can and do influence reviews, even if not by literally sending money.
This has to be the one of the stupidest things I've ever heard. Streaming a playthrough of an entire game online misses the whole point of a review. Nevermind spoiling the entire story and gameplay, no publisher on earth is going to let a reviewer with early access put the final boss battle in a review for instance. As someone else said, this is like saying the only way to review movies is to watch a stream of the reviewer reacting to the whole movie.
Also the only way this would be used is for chids to make a supercut of eberytime a journalists they do t like dies in a game and then post that as evidence the review is meaningless and the author isn't a Real Gamer.
I recognise this lady's mug from YT recommendations, she's right-wing nerd outrage merchant #45213
Imagine thinking that games journalists have time to completely finish every game they review
I must see you cry in the 80th hour of Kingdom Hearts: 2/7rd Reverie of Pig Poop Balls when a 10 year old's anime OC sacrifices himself to save one of Donald Duck's nephews from an energy beam summoned by the racist crows from Dumbo or else your review isn't valid
Is it too late for me to ask what's this about calling dipshits tourists?
It's a nerd insult that originated with reactionary right-wing nerds. They think that if you're a fan of video games, anime, WH40k or whatever and want more diversity or oppose lolicon you're not a real fan but a mere tourist that's appropriating nerd culture
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/hyperbole
She (?) has a point, the point is "reviews are written by people that clearly did not play the game to a meaningful extent", not "we need vods".
The person answering is not engaging with the issue, maybe he's stupid, maybe he's unwilling to engage with the matter at hand.
If you're still treating literally anything the "ethics in gaming journalism" crowd says with good faith I don't know what to tell you.
This is just setting up more hoops to jump through so chuds can say "this person didn't even play the entire game so their assertion that I just don't like this game because there's minorities in it isn't valid"
I don't really follow any of that, don't know of any crowd.
Gaming is a huge deal and I'm 300% sure there's a huge push for marketing AKA journalism to sell. I don't even need to read a single line from a single article to know that must be true.
Make of this what you will :)
I and everybody else who reads that will "make of that" that you make up your mind ahead of time, relevant information or context be damned.
Because capital G Gamers are irredeemable dumbfucks :)
Sure, have fun throwing insults around. I'm not a gamer I just have the most simple grasp of reality and the awareness a bunch of virtually free to duplicate assets are going for 60$ a pop and people gobble them up as if money growed on trees.
Capital G, out.
Sadly enough, I've had the privilege not to get bullied much in school. I find your remark rather distasteful either way.
Your point? Any attack on gaming journalism comes from a place of rejecting inclusion and queerness in videogames and the perception that there's a conspiracy going on to push the "woke agenda"?
Why is this being tied to an attack that can be summarized as "A lot of journalists are not being genuine in their reviews"?
Am I missing some context? Are the people in the screenshot known figures?
Sadly enough, I've had the privilege not to get bullied much in school. I find your remark rather distasteful either way.
Caring about the sank titty of muh game reviews more than anything else in this busted ass society
