228 réponses à ce sujet

[AkiKishi]

You can't nail them for fraud because review is an opinion. If however they use incorrect inoformation in the review, such as the escapist saying there was an auto attack when it was clear there was not. Then you can take action, which usually results in a retraction.

Corruption is hard to prove because it's trading "favours" rather than something that leaves a paper trail.
" You give us 90%+ and you get invited to the next hands on demo" sort of thing. Anyone with common sense will see the potential for corruption where such a system exists.

[v_ware]

Stegoceras wrote...

I wonder why that text was familiar, till I read the source. I have been reading the magazine for years and can only say they have always been honest.

On the other hand I do want to point out that this tactic is not only confined to EA/Bioware but alas they made themselves a pretty big target with Dragon Age 2.

I mentioned them below the quote.
And Gameplay is indeed an honest and imo the best dutch/belgian gaming-magazine.

[sammcl]

There's nothing wrong with this, the review isn't manipulated, the PR and marketing systems are manipulated. Reviewers don't have the "right" to review games early, the game belongs to the publisher/developer and they can do whatever they want to control information about the game before release. Of course, if they think someone will have a positive review, and that will help their marketing of the game, they can allow that review to go up early.

The only downside you can pull from this is that review outlets may write a biased review in order to be allowed to publish early and get higher traffic, who will then be exposed to the advertising that funds these sites, allowing them to charge more for the ad space. This speaks to the journalistic integrity of the reviewers however and is no fault of the publisher/developer.

[Finnigan McBonk]

Persephone wrote...

v_ware wrote...

Persephone wrote...

The title was so nice and melodramatic.

The article itself was not nearly as interesting. Lotsa theories, no hard evidence. Moving on.

And of course this thread would not exist if the so called "consensus" was to support the game. Oh no, then we'd be all defensive and angry about it.

No hard evidence? It was written by the editor in chief of a major gaming magazine.

But they don't have any insight in the workings of the press and dealing with publishers now do they.

No court of law convinces based on hearsay and other such nonsense. No matter who writes articles like this. Would you say it's hard evidence that Anne Boleyn had 6 fingers on one hand, was Henry VIII's DAUGHTER, had three breasts and the face of a monster because a HISTORIAN (They should know, right?) said so? A historian hostile to her who had an AGENDA to blacken her name? But hey, many people DID believe that fool. The six fingers legend has been particularly popular. And it's because of infighting, self-promotion etc. that reviews cannot be trusted either way and why I refuse to do so. Not because of conspiracies that may suit my agenda or not, but because critics are just people and vary in quality. Like historians. Easy as that.

Your analogy is weak. An historian is not connected to Anne Boleyn the way the editor of a gaming magazine is to a game publisher. However, this isn't the first time that I've heard Mike Laidlaw has three breasts.

[Miashi]

Oh but look, Persephone has this wide array of competences and knowledge, being the daughter of a lawyer and in the marketing/sales field. That sure makes an argument more relevant than anyone else's on the internet.

I can just lol at this law comment. It's a REVIEW. It's a commentary. There's nothing to sue about unless there's defamation.

Modifié par Miashi, 20 avril 2011 - 10:40 .

[Shadow of Light Dragon]

I'm not convinced. DA2 had plenty of positive reviews that didn't get published before release.

[Yrkoon]

BobSmith101 wrote...


Corruption is hard to prove because it's trading "favours" rather than something that leaves a paper trail.
" You give us 90%+ and you get invited to the next hands on demo" sort of thing. Anyone with common sense will see the potential for corruption where such a system exists.

Yeah.  It's called Payola.   It happens in radio  too (my profession) as a matter of course   And It's not even remotely illegal.  It's just disgusting and tends to ******  off the consumer when they realize its occuring.

Modifié par Yrkoon, 20 avril 2011 - 10:41 .

[MDarwin]

Persephone wrote...

Yrkoon wrote...
Courts convict all the time on witness testimony.  Which is exactly what this article is.

Read the rest of my post.

I'm the daughter of a lawyer. No, they do not rely on hearsay evidence without evidence to back it up. (Show me proof positive of Bioware FORBIDDING negative reviews being released.) Or would you say what that historian wrote to suit his hostile agenda is witness testimony too and portraying Anne Boleyn with normal hands, a normal face and two breasts is misleading and a betrayal of "true" history? It can be played either way. That's the bloody point.

Would be intresting if that would get in a court. Once my Lawyer told me he can get me my 260.000.00$ a builder owed me. It was a very complicated case. Anyway, I lost the case and was on top of that another 129 gran poorer.

My Lawyer still wanted to be paid, of course. So much for Lawyers.

On Topic: Doesn't surprises me at all.

[AkiKishi]

Yrkoon wrote...

BobSmith101 wrote...


Corruption is hard to prove because it's trading "favours" rather than something that leaves a paper trail.
" You give us 90%+ and you get invited to the next hands on demo" sort of thing. Anyone with common sense will see the potential for corruption where such a system exists.

Yeah.  It's called Payola.   It happens in radio  too (my profession) as a matter of course   And It's not even remotely illegal.  It's just disgusting and tends to ******  off the consumer when they realize its occuring.

I don't take reviews particularly seriously as a buying tool anymore. But I have some sympathy for those that do and get stung like this.

Modifié par BobSmith101, 20 avril 2011 - 10:43 .

[Beovuk]

Persephone wrote...

Read the rest of my post.

I'm the daughter of a lawyer.

I did. You sound crazy...

Comparing an editor in chief with a 450 year old fictional "historian" and something about three breasts. I don't know who you are but I do hope trolling makes you feel better.

[Persephone]

Miashi wrote...

Oh but look, Persephone has this wide array of competences and knowledge, being the daughter of a lawyer and in the marketing/sales field. That sure makes an argument more relevant than anyone else's on the internet.

I can just lol at this law comment. It's a REVIEW. It's a commentary. There's nothing to sue about unless there's defamation.

I never claimed a wide array of competence other than in the field I work in. As for the internet, no argument there is relevant at all.

Manipulation, misleading etc. is very related to fraud. And that I won't believe without proof implicating the wrong-doer. Innocent till proven guilty.

Does that mean I trust the media? Hell no, I work in it, it's more of a snakepit than this forum is.

[Persephone]

Beovuk wrote...

Persephone wrote...

Read the rest of my post.

I'm the daughter of a lawyer.

I did. You sound crazy...

Comparing an editor in chief with a 450 year old fictional "historian" and something about three breasts. I don't know who you are but I do hope trolling makes you feel better.

Nicholas Sander, the historian in question, is neither fictional nor unknown among historians. Esp. regarding Tudor England. So all you caught was historian and breasts? So not surprised.

And awwwwww, I am trolling because I'm not buying into the outrage? Cute.

[v_ware]

Stop with the ad hominem arguments people.

[Miashi]

Persephone, you often bring up your supposedly amazing skillsets to support your argument. You could be Paris Hilton, or the daughter of Mike Laidlaw, this is the internet. No one cares until you bring articles, proof to your claims.

Bribes are done EVERYWHERE. Ever hear of pharmaceutical companies giving out trips/gifts to people in the medical field? If there are people here that think video gaming industry is protected then they're very very naive.

Modifié par Miashi, 20 avril 2011 - 10:49 .

[Esbatty]

The title makes it sound like Bioware was the Exception and not just an example of this industry-wide practice.

[Persephone]

Miashi wrote...

Persephone, you often bring up your supposedly amazing skillsets to support your argument. You could be Paris Hilton, or the daughter of Mike Laidlaw, this is the internet. No one cares until you bring articles, proof to your claims.

Supposedly amazing skillsets? I've got to tell my boss that, he owes me a promtion.

But seriously, when it is about Sales and Marketing, I'll speak up because that's my field. It doesn't make what I have to say any more important than anything else. And I'd like proof for many claims people make here, sadly I too must remain disappointed.

[Miashi]

Esbatty wrote...

The title makes it sound like Bioware was the Exception and not just an example of this industry-wide practice.

I guess it feels more blatant when there's such a huge disparity between user reviews and professional critics reviews.

[Zeratul20]

v_ware wrote...

I recently read this article in my regular gaming magazine and I just wanted to share this.

If you look at the working methods of some publishers, you can only conclude that they see the press as a danger that should be banned instead of being used as an information channel towards the consumers. Until recently all publishers (apart from some exceptions) did their best to make sure that the press could release
a review of their new game before or  at least at the same time of it’s release, so the consumers had a unbiased opinion of the game.

Lately however, things have changed.

Most publishers will do anything to stop a review from appearing before the release. At first they did this quite subtly by saying the reviewcode wasn’t available yet. But these last months they impose a review-embargo, on nearly all games, that prevents reviews being published before the game is released.

It gets really aggravating when it seems some of these review-embargos are all of a sudden flexible, as long as you make sure you publish a positive review.

Another proven strategy is to force the press to come and play the game for a couple of hours in the publishers offices, to which off course only a limited number of journalists are invited, because of a limited budget. Apart from the fact that it’s impossible to write a good review  when you’ve only played a game one day while the publisher/developer is breathing down your neck, we ask ourselves who will be invited: the annoying journalist who regularly critiques the flaws of a game, or the journalist who finds everything fantastic?

For the online press this ‘no review until release date, unless with special treatment’ is no pleasant way to work, but they can put an unbiased review online a day after the game is published. For the printed press, who usually works with a lead time of minimum 2 weeks, this way of working prevents the magazine from operating correctly.  This month’s edition you’re now reading appeared on 1 march, but because of a review-embargo on Dragon Age 2, a game that releases on 11 march, we can only publish our review in the april edition, which is three weeks after the release of the game.

The strategy behind this is clear. Preorder and week-1-sales revenue makes up a large chunk of the total sales of a game. By preventing negative or lukewarm reviews from being published before or at the time of release a big part of the sales is secured.

It seems the press stands for a choiche: Early fake positive reviews or late honest ones. Guess which one we prefer.

Translated from: Gameplay: Het ultieme spelmagazine. 
NR 179 march 2011


There you go... I don't really know what to say or how to comment on this. I guess what we feared and suspected is true.
And for those interested: these were all the other games they mentioned that used this strategy:
Bulletstorm, Dragon Age 2…: EA
Black Ops, The Force Unleashed 2, Blood stone…: Activision

PS: Their review of Dragon Age 2: Belgian Gameplay Review: Weakest Bioware game in a very long time. (70pct)
http://social.bioware.com/forum/1/topic/141/index/6867686

Interesting. I might have to pick up PC Gameplay again, just to read it.
Thanks for the link.

(On a completely unrelated note: FELLOW BELGIANS!)

[Persephone]

Miashi wrote...

Esbatty wrote...

The title makes it sound like Bioware was the Exception and not just an example of this industry-wide practice.

I guess it feels more blatant when there's such a huge disparity between user reviews and professional critics reviews.

People disagree. It happens. Never mind the hysteria and campaigns even before it was released. Neither rating means anything.

[abaris]

Sabriana wrote...

It is quite a shame, because I'm sure there are honest reviewers around. Personally, I have never put much stock in public reviews, and I never, ever decided about purchases on those alone. I've passed this healthy skepticism on to my kids. That's about all the consumer can do about this, until the next public scandal erupts.

In the best of cases reviews are opinionated. And most of the times, these folks don't stand a chance. Special interest publications are at the mercy of the corporations. Its not just big bad EA, its all of them, regardless if they sell toilet paper or games.

The holding back issue has been discussed all around the world for quite some time now. A few years back a German game magazine featured a big piece about it and claimed they would never review under these kinds of circumstances. Well, now they do it anyway. The pressure grew, since the readers didn't give a rats about the way the review came to be, they just wanted the review.

[Shadow of Light Dragon]

Esbatty wrote...

The title makes it sound like Bioware was the Exception and not just an example of this industry-wide practice.

What you say?!

Clearly this is happening EVERYWHERE! If Bioware has fallen, THE WORLD WILL FOLLOW!

Woe unto the game reviewers, magazines and internet sites, for your cunning ploy for extra traffic and sales hath been revealed to all!

[byzantine horse]

If true - is anyone really surprised? Really? And to continue on with that: Are only EA and Bioware the only ones doing this? Does this only happen in the gaming industry? Nope, it happens everywhere all the time. Every product out there that you can possibly think of that has been developed by a big shot of a company utilizes ways to tilt the reception of their product in their favour, if that goes from pressuring reviewers to stay positive to spending billions on a PR-campaign, does it matter? It's all the same thing, everything goes in the hunt to convince potential customers that their product is the best.

Jabbing at EA and Bioware for doing this when everyone else does the same (and nothing says that EA is somehow the worst, either) feels unnecesary. If you are going to boycot one single gaming company for doing X, you might as well bocot the entire industry because it's all the same.

Modifié par byzantine horse, 20 avril 2011 - 11:00 .

[delikanli]

persephone stop trolling please

[Persephone]

Shadow of Light Dragon wrote...

Esbatty wrote...

The title makes it sound like Bioware was the Exception and not just an example of this industry-wide practice.

What you say?!

Clearly this is happening EVERYWHERE! If Bioware has fallen, THE WORLD WILL FOLLOW!

Woe unto the game reviewers, magazines and internet sites, for your cunning ploy for extra traffic and sales hath been revealed to all!

QFTW. This made me LOL way too much!

[Esbatty]

Miashi wrote...

Esbatty wrote...

The title makes it sound like Bioware was the Exception and not just an example of this industry-wide practice.

I guess it feels more blatant when there's such a huge disparity between user reviews and professional critics reviews.

What bothers me are Users who don't even play the full game and post a review score. Thats as fishy as the "manipulated pro reviews" with cherry picked reviewers or controlled conditions.