144 réponses à ce sujet

[FlamingBoy]

David7204 wrote...

That's a fair point. But that kind of implies that fans are at fault for drawing conclusions that aren't true.

Fans are never at fault when they percieve a conflict of interest, the conflict of interest should have never have happened in the first place.

[David7204]

Some people have tried to argue that the mere existence of reviewers is a conflict of interest since reviewers are dependent on an interest in games (and therefore games to be high-quality) for their business to function. What would you say to that?

Modifié par David7204, 17 mai 2013 - 04:06 .

[FlamingBoy]

David7204 wrote...

Some people have tried to argue that the mere existence of reviewers is a conflict of interest since reviewers are dependent on an interest in games (and therefore games to be high-quality) for their business to function. What would you say to that?

Well yeah it is a conflict of interest, and yes I question the integrity of the review system and believe there is a significant amount of corruption in it.

To review a game from a company that gives you money to advertise the exact same product, well its unethical. Reforms are definetly need, perhaps in the future there will be legal implications.
,
The most important problem that these "journalist" are not held to the same standard as mainstream news reporting, there is no regulation on what they write (as seen in the constant posting of "rumours"), there is no accountability to tell the truth and as a result we have a consumer base that just does not trust reviewers regardless of there actual integrity

but bringing that around to jessica chobots inclusion in me3, that took conflict of interest and questions of corruption to a whole new level. In particular when the reviewer Colin Moriarty made a mission to beat critics opinions into the pavement. To use a metaphor "it smelled bad", regardless of the truth it reeked of backroom dealings.

IGN was not the only guilty party the television channel (honestly I have no idea what they do) g4tv had chobot as an employee and created video content that bashed the "entitled gamer", I saw one which actually had the gall to call people in the movement "emotionally unhealthy". Even if he actually thought that his opinion is tarnished by the fact an employee actually was in the bloody game.

This is not acceptable business practice.

[Jafroboy]

I dont really think that matters, it doesnt affect her character ingame, and no one seriously pays attention to IGN scores do they?

Modifié par Jafroboy, 17 mai 2013 - 04:34 .

[David7204]

Apart from slander, there's no laws in place forbidding mainsteam news reporting from reporting false information or rumors. It doesn't happen often on television or in the papers because it takes time to put those things together, during which the publication can get clearer information and correct things. But online news agencies put together sloppy reports fairly frequently in a rush to be the first to get the news out. And video games aren't a part of television or newspaper news, so they have a much bigger percentage online. 

That being said, there are plenty of crappy websites that perpetuate garbage. I remember when Omega was a few days away, multiple websites were reporting that you would play as Aria. I've never bothered with IGN. But I do check GameInformer and PC Gamer occansionally, and I've never had a problem with them.

Modifié par David7204, 17 mai 2013 - 04:42 .

[HiddenInWar]

Somehow I feel that if no one knew that the voice actor was an IGN journalist, we wouldn't be having this conversation.

[IanPolaris]

David7204 wrote...

That's a fair point. But that kind of implies that fans are at fault for drawing conclusions that aren't true.

Not really.  Even the appearence of corruption needs to be avoided.  I note that if ME3 were any other medium (Literature, TV, ect) Chobot's appearence in ME3 while working for IGN would be illegal under the Payola Laws (at least in the US).

-Polaris

[IanPolaris]

David7204 wrote...

Apart from slander, there's no laws in place forbidding mainsteam news reporting from reporting false information or rumors. It doesn't happen often on television or in the papers because it takes time to put those things together, during which the publication can get clearer information and correct things. But online news agencies put together sloppy reports fairly frequently in a rush to be the first to get the news out. And video games aren't a part of television or newspaper news, so they have a much bigger percentage online. 

That being said, there are plenty of crappy websites that perpetuate garbage. I remember when Omega was a few days away, multiple websites were reporting that you would play as Aria. I've never bothered with IGN. But I do check GameInformer and PC Gamer occansionally, and I've never had a problem with them.

David, there is a law in place at least for TV, Radio, and print journalism, that makes it illegal to take part in and/or financially benefit from something you are reporting/reviewing.  It's called the Payola Law.

-Polaris

[IanPolaris]

HiddenInWar wrote...

Somehow I feel that if no one knew that the voice actor was an IGN journalist, we wouldn't be having this conversation.

We wouldn't at least to this degree.  There would be dissapointment over Wong's "death by twitter" since this would have been a perfect role for Wong (esp if you promised her an exclusive in ME1).

However, as I just said, if ME3 were a different medium (TV, Radio, Print) this conflict of interest would actually be illegal.  In any event it is unethical.

-Polaris

[FlamingBoy]

David7204 wrote...

Apart from slander, there's no laws in place forbidding mainsteam news reporting from reporting false information or rumors. It doesn't happen often on television or in the papers because it takes time to put those things together, during which the publication can get clearer information and correct things. But online news agencies put together sloppy reports fairly frequently in a rush to be the first to get the news out. And video games aren't a part of television or newspaper news, so they have a much bigger percentage online. 

That being, there are plenty of crappy websites that perpetuate garbage. I remember when Omega was a few days away, multiple websites were reporting that you would play as Aria. I've never bothered with IGN.

http://en.wikipedia....s_and_standards
This here, is basically a summary of what is expected of journalists, however video game reviewers are not held to such standards. under the section common elements for specific details


libel, which is a slander in the written form (well known incident the robert florence case)

also if your interested, ign was once owned by news corporation (rupert murdoch empire, a telling fact of the integrity of ign)

[Indy_S]

IanPolaris wrote...

However, as I just said, if ME3 were a different medium (TV, Radio, Print) this conflict of interest would actually be illegal.  In any event it is unethical.

Those laws only apply to journalism. Under no law is a review considered journalism. 

[David7204]

According to Wikipedia, Payola is 'any secret payment made to cast a product in a favorable light (such as obtaining positive reviews)"

First of all, what the hell does that have to do with reporters publishing false information completely unrelated to reviews of any kind, which I what I was talking about? Nothing. Do you just look up a random term for your arguments and claim it means whatever you want it to mean? Yesterday it's 'post hoc,' now this rubbish?

Secondly, this isn't a payment, it isn't secret, and it would be perfect legal in another medium.

Modifié par David7204, 17 mai 2013 - 04:50 .

[FlamingBoy]

HiddenInWar wrote...

Somehow I feel that if no one knew that the voice actor was an IGN journalist, we wouldn't be having this conversation.

Well if the voice was not an ign journalist there would not be a conflict of interest. Hence there would be no discussion required.

this is not the case.

[IanPolaris]

Indy_S wrote...

IanPolaris wrote...

However, as I just said, if ME3 were a different medium (TV, Radio, Print) this conflict of interest would actually be illegal.  In any event it is unethical.

Those laws only apply to journalism. Under no law is a review considered journalism. 

Um, I did say if it was a different medium.  In computer games, the reviews are not considered journalism.  In print, TV, and radio they are.  It is illegal to financially benefit as a journalist from a product you are writing about (and that means reviews too).

-Polaris

[IanPolaris]

David7204 wrote...

According to Wikipedia, Payola is 'any secret payment made to cast a product in a favorable light (such as obtaining positive reviews)"

First of all, what the hell does that have to do with reporters publishing false information completely unrelated to reviews of any kind, which I what I was talking about? Nothing. Do you just look up a random term for your arguments and claim it means whatever you want it to mean? Yesterday it's 'post hoc,' now this rubbish?

Secondly, this isn't a payment, it isn't secret, and it would be perfect legal in another medium.

Is IGN and an IGN employee being payed to play Dianna Allers?  Yes.

Did IGN give an unchareristically high review of ME3 and defended it tooth and nail even more than other professional reviewers?  Yes

We have the appearence of a conflict of interest, and if this were TV, Radio, or Print, Payola Law would be at least investigated.

-Polaris

Edit PS:

http://www.fcc.gov/guides/payola-rules

The reason ME3 and IGN get away with it, is the FCC has no jurisdiction over the internet.

Modifié par IanPolaris, 17 mai 2013 - 04:57 .

[David7204]

'Uncharacteristically high'? Complete nonsense. Plenty of reviewers game ME 3 scores of 9.5, and often higher. IGN's score is at most, a few points higher than the metacritic score.

Do you any evidence or reasoning at all to suggest that IGN got so much as a nickle from BioWare just because one of their employees took a role elsewhere?

Modifié par David7204, 17 mai 2013 - 04:58 .

[IanPolaris]

David7204 wrote...

'Uncharacteristically high'? Complete nonsense. Plenty of reviewers game ME 3 scores of 9.5, and often higher. IGN's score is at most, a few points higher than the metacritic score.

Do you any evidence or reasoning at all to suggest that IGN got so much as a nickle from BioWare just because one of their employees took a role elsewhere?

Doesn't matter.  An IGN employee was paid in a game covered by IGN and reviewed by them.  This is classic conflict of interest.  See my FCC link. 

-Polaris

[FlamingBoy]

David7204 wrote...

'Uncharacteristically high'? Complete nonsense. Plenty of reviewers game ME 3 scores of 9.5, and often higher. IGN's score is at most, a few points higher than the metacritic score.

Do you any evidence or reasoning at all to suggest that IGN got so much as a nickle from BioWare just because one of their employees took a role elsewhere?

Please stop cherrypicking our arguments, attack it as a whole and don't pick the bits you feel like

[IntelligentME3Fanboy]

I'm sure if it was naomi kyle people would love it xD

[David7204]

Did you even read the page you sent me? It sure as hell doesn't look like it, because according to it, the law only requires disclosure, which of course was in place. Both IGN and BioWare were fully open about an IGN employee having a role in the game.

[David7204]

FlamingBoy wrote...

Please stop cherrypicking our arguments, attack it as a whole and don't pick the bits you feel like

Please learn what cherry-picking is. Even the dumbest arguments have some legitimate points to them. I have every right to attack whatever part of the argument I please.

Modifié par David7204, 17 mai 2013 - 05:04 .

[NeonFlux117]

cause IGN sucks and so does chobot.

[IntelligentME3Fanboy]

NeonFlux117 wrote...

cause IGN sucks and so does chobot.

IGN IS AWESOME WHAT ARE YOU TALKING BRO.Chobot sucks....PSP

[knightnblu]

I didn't hate the character, but I didn't like the VA. Ms. Chobot is a good and decent person I am sure, but she never should have been given that character to voice. She just wasn't qualified. The dialog sounded forced, particularly when you first met Allers, and that was immersion breaking. You can do a lot of things with editing, animation, etc, but you cannot have someone who is not experienced with voicing a character do the job. I don't see Chobot's lack of acting skills as the problem, I see BioWare's decision to use her for that role as the problem.