Rich Stanton on Future's dodgy dealings - GTA4's [10] bought

StayDead wrote:

Dblock wrote:What is this /v/ stuff ?

Seriously?

/v/ is the 4ch*n board for talking about games. vidya.

strawberry float 4ch*n.

Maybe we should just go back to the idea of using reviews as a form of research into whether a games worth buying or not and then just playing the games and deciding for ourselves if it's any good or not?
One guy's rant should not destroy the reputation of an entire industry though and I'm sure the reviewers who post here would welcome the right to reply.

Rik wrote:

Prototype wrote:Too easy, Rik.

Edge Innovation award hits weak point for massive damage

Welcome back buddy

Rik wrote:

Prototype wrote:Too easy, Rik.

Edge Innovation award hits weak point for massive damage

He is back!

Peter Crisp wrote:Maybe we should just go back to the idea of using reviews as a form of research into whether a games worth buying or not and then just playing the games and deciding for ourselves if it's any good or not?
One guy's rant should not destroy the reputation of an entire industry though and I'm sure the reviewers who post here would welcome the right to reply.

Bent reviews actually mattered more 10/15 years ago, when it was harder to get a wide source of information, & you had to pay to read them. These days you can see what everyone has said about a game at a glance, both professional and otherwise, & watch footage yourself instantly whenever you want.


Over on the OXM:360 website...

OXM.co.uk wrote:Fable: The Journey Review - 8/10

[Unknown Freelancer]

Edwin Evans-Thirlwell, Online Editor wrote:It was given to a freelancer because we didn't have time to do it in-house (I'd have loved to review it, but I've got other fish to fry). Things are pretty busy right now, with Mike's post still unfilled and all these gosh-darned open world titles to review.

I'll let you know how I get on with this, but I think the key thing - as ever - is to try the demo. Kinect gaming is such an ambiguous beast - some people fly off the handle at the slightest hint of misrecognition, others are happy to overlook such flaws providing the overall experience is an entertaining one. I do think some people (naming no names, etc) need to rethink their assessment criteria, though. It doesn't seem to occur to them that having to control their gestures, posture and so forth might be part of the challenge, rather than an imposition.

Kind of makes the whole point of a review pointless if that's the new motto.

You also have to look at the fact quite a few games don't even have a demo or if they do the demo is released after the game has been out for a month or two.

Embargoes on reviews are a joke too.

Xeno wrote:

KKLEIN wrote:Kind of makes the whole point of a review pointless if that's the new motto.

You also have to look at the fact quite a few games don't even have a demo or if they do the demo is released after the game has been out for a month or two.

Or demos that are removed as soon as the full game is out.

TheTurnipKing wrote:Or demos that are removed as soon as the full game is out.

Now this really does annoy me. Three times I've downloaded a demo only to finally sit down and find out it's "expired".

$ilva $hadow wrote:Embargoes on reviews are a joke too.

Doubly so if the embargo date is on or after release.

As a downside of removing review embargos, can you imagine the mad scramble and added pressure to get reviews up if sites could put them up as soon as they have the games? The quality of reviews would no doubt get worse.

Garth wrote:The quality of reviews would no doubt get worse.

How, exactly?

Winckle wrote:

$ilva $hadow wrote:Embargoes on reviews are a joke too.

Doubly so if the embargo date is on or after release.

Only 9/10 and 10/10 reviews allowed to break the embargo

Talk about gearing an entire industry to lie for profit.

$ilva, where has Dishonored got 10/10 from?

Cuttooth wrote:$ilva, where has Dishonored got 10/10 from?

The Telegraph, The Guardian.

Garth wrote:As a downside of removing review embargos, can you imagine the mad scramble and added pressure to get reviews up if sites could put them up as soon as they have the games? The quality of reviews would no doubt get worse.

This is a great read http://techcrunch.com/2008/12/17/death-to-the-embargo/ as well as http://techcrunch.com/2008/12/18/meet-l ... g-with-pr/

Basically TechCrunch got fed up with PR and said "strawberry float it" to embargos and published stuff when they wanted resulting in other sites in the tech media following suit.

I'd like to see that happen in the gaming press as well but it seems like PR and publishers have way too much control, plus I don't think anyone would have the balls to do it for fear of being blacklisted.

Winckle wrote:

Cuttooth wrote:$ilva, where has Dishonored got 10/10 from?

The Telegraph, The Guardian.

While Cutty was trying to be pedantic, I should clarify that I don't for a second believe not only the 10/10 reviews, but also the 9/10 reviews.

My mind and opinion is open to change pending more reviews from blogs, reading more anonymous reviews on /v/, reading the credible reviewers on this site (people who can and have recognised greatness in the videogame medium) and my own playthrough of the game.

Did you know that upon my first play of Deus Ex, I abandoned it on the first level thinking it was weird garbage? I was only a young teen and didn't have a loot of experience in that kind of game or material that it's based on. It took another attempt to play for me to realise how great it truly was. Why do I mention it? So you can realise that my opinion can and IS open to change. At this current moment, all the factors that affect game reviews, the hype machine and people on this forum posting their first impressions of the game is enough for me to be convinced that I still need more time and information if I'm going to believe the reviews for this game.

KKLEIN wrote:Over on the OXM:360 website...

OXM.co.uk wrote:Fable: The Journey Review - 8/10

[Unknown Freelancer]

Edwin Evans-Thirlwell, Online Editor wrote:It was given to a freelancer because we didn't have time to do it in-house (I'd have loved to review it, but I've got other fish to fry). Things are pretty busy right now, with Mike's post still unfilled and all these gosh-darned open world titles to review.

I'll let you know how I get on with this, but I think the key thing - as ever - is to try the demo. Kinect gaming is such an ambiguous beast - some people fly off the handle at the slightest hint of misrecognition, others are happy to overlook such flaws providing the overall experience is an entertaining one. I do think some people (naming no names, etc) need to rethink their assessment criteria, though. It doesn't seem to occur to them that having to control their gestures, posture and so forth might be part of the challenge, rather than an imposition.

Kind of makes the whole point of a review pointless if that's the new motto.

Why? Kinect's a capricious beast and people's mileage with it varies more than with a traditional controller. A review is a person's opinion. If people are complaining about it - which I assume they are given Edwin's comments - then is it not sensible advice to suggest people try a demo that is available?

Surely YMMV is applicable to every review ever and thus the idea of reviews is rendered moot?

Why would you write a review and close it with 'make your own mind up lol'?

Falsey wrote:Surely YMMV is applicable to every review ever and thus the idea of reviews is rendered moot?

What, so you shouldn't review anything because people might disagree with you? Good one.

Why would you write a review and close it with 'make your own mind up lol'?

You wouldn't, and that review doesn't. Edwin is just suggesting that those who might have issues with Kinect see how they get on with the demo first. It's an entirely reasonable request.

Oh, and re your earlier 'Canton' post - I've written hundreds of times as many reviews as you and you've still written one more corrupt appraisal than I have. Gloating over a drunken Twitter rant from an ex-employee with an axe to grind as 'proof' of your flimsy argument when my case - as stated - was based on my own personal experiences is pretty pathetic, even for you.