Video Game Review Embargoes: The Subtle Straitjacket

H

HardOCP News

[H] News
Joined
Dec 31, 1969
Messages
0
This article is supposed to be about review embargoes but it seems to complain more about publishers trying to dictate content, which is something different altogether. What do you think?

Perennially unpopular, yet rarely commented on publicly, I've yet to find anyone who can adequately explain what the benefit of these archaic chokeholds is. Certainly, there's absolutely no benefit to the media outlets that abide by them. Publishers get all their coverage in a neatly timed package, maximising the profile of their game on the date they want, while websites end up splitting their audience as the biggest feature of the day becomes the one literally everyone else is running at the same time. It's madness.
Click to expand...
 
I think the "subtle straightjacket" is a result of the petty vindictivenes we've seen all too often by both publishers and reviewers. It's not likely to change until the publishers become more businesslike and the editors more professional. In short, it aint goin' to happen.
 
I don't see a problem with review embargoes. If you buy a shit game day one without waiting for reviews you deserve what you get.
 
Embargoes and publisher interference with what a reviewer is allowed to print is absurd.

IGN having the sole right to publish their review of Bioshock Infinite several days in advance of other sites is simply appalling.

As far as what a reviewer should be allowed to print, everything that gives the reviewers opinion credibility should be fair game. The end user who visits a website to read a review knows that inevitably there will be some form of a spoiler. The only way around that is to say the game is either good, bad or inbetween.

Reputable review sites know what boundaries that they can and cannot cross. Sometimes they may skirt the red line, but rarely cross it. They know that revealing too much about something will only alienate their readers and doom themselves in the process.
 
I've yet to find anyone who can adequately explain what the benefit of these archaic chokeholds is.
Click to expand...

It should be obvious. The benefit is to the publisher. If a game is crap, and it gets labeled as crap two weeks before release, it crushes sales numbers. If it gets called crap after release, well, if marketing has done it's job, they'll make a killing on the game, despite it being garbage because all the suckers who "couldn't wait for game X" bought it.
 
D_Bo said:
Embargoes and publisher interference with what a reviewer is allowed to print is absurd.

IGN having the sole right to publish their review of Bioshock Infinite several days in advance of other sites is simply appalling.

As far as what a reviewer should be allowed to print, everything that gives the reviewers opinion credibility should be fair game. The end user who visits a website to read a review knows that inevitably there will be some form of a spoiler. The only way around that is to say the game is either good, bad or inbetween.

Reputable review sites know what boundaries that they can and cannot cross. Sometimes they may skirt the red line, but rarely cross it. They know that revealing too much about something will only alienate their readers and doom themselves in the process.
Click to expand...
I think part of the point is that embargoes have become a way to silence media outlets. Once you've agreed, you can't say anything at all really or you risk breaking the embargo. So even early rumor that starts when advance copies start going around and even the guy stocking inventory at the Best Buy warehouse snags a copy. None of that feedback can be discussed.
 
You could always just fake it for the press and release Aliens: Colonial Marines for the public. :p
 
I have no problem with a game publisher banning reviews untill after the release date, as long as that goes for every review site.
 
Embargo's are bullshit I make it a point to not buy games they do this with until there dirt cheap if at all. The total lack of journalistic integrity by game reviewers makes me so pissed. The worst are reviewers that are blatant fanboys , I'm looking at you Greg Miller at IGN.
 
fdiaz78 said:
I don't see a problem with review embargoes. If you buy a shit game day one without waiting for reviews you deserve what you get.
Click to expand...

It isn't that simple.

Some fans on a franchise are willing to get a game day 1 just to get exclusive DLC or whatever pre-order bonuses if the game is good. Only problem is no one knows if it will be good.

Without embargo, it will be beneficial to all (potential) customers.
 
Here's the surprising truth: we know how to do our jobs. The popular image of the games critic is still one of nerdy amateurs, slick with fanboy flopsweat and palpitating at the thought of getting paid to play games, spurting their half-baked thoughts across whatever blog or content aggregator will have them. And, okay, fair enough, that does happen.
Click to expand...
Those angry amateurs tend to be more accurate then anything from professionals. It's laughable that anyone in the past 15 years has ever listened to game reviews. It's a joke.

If James would review new games, I'd freakin listen. Even though his reviews are comedy and more about theater then an actual review. In the end though, much more accurate then anything profession reviews have.

James-Rolfe.jpg


But the vast majority of the specialist press is made up of mature, experienced professionals who take our jobs - frivolous though they may be in the grand scheme of things - seriously enough to think and care about what we write.
Click to expand...
The vast majority of game reviews use a scale of 1 - 10, 10 being the highest. Yet rarely do any games see less then 7, if ever. So essentially the way everyone else sees it, 7 is bad and 10 is good. Eight is ok and 9 is above average. Even then, it depends on how much dick sucking the reviewer is doing. It's a toally biased and conflict of interest review.

Nobody cares about game reviews anymore. They either go by word of mouth, or they watch a video of the game and come to their own conclusion. Game reviewers need to learn to grow some balls and start telling it how it is.
 
"I've yet to find anyone who can adequately explain what the benefit..."

Seriously? It's pretty clear what the benefit is and who is benifiting from embargoes. Publishers who are putting out a crap product is the beneficiary (and to some extent immoral reviewers who are selling themselves for early high reviews).
 
I don't have a problem with people in the industry having a code or agreement to follow. What I do take issue with is consumer reviews being suppressed under embargo. I saw this with my own eyes while looking for a Bioshock Infinite review on youtube. Over the course of two days I was able to locate one video with non IGN content and it was "copyright violation" and expunged withing a few hours.

If you bought the game because Best Buy was stupid or Fedex delivered your 360/PS3 disc early you should be able to exercise free speech without the youtube/IGN gestapo kicking you in the face.
 
Embargoes are definitely stupid, but I can't equate them to movies and music. Movies and music don't really suffer from problems that video games do. That is, when was the last time you heard a review that many people couldn't play the music they purchased, or the movie stopped during the action sequence?

Everything about a game should be fair game. That said, if I didn't want to know the ending to a game, and your review posted the ending, I probably wouldn't be coming back to read your review.
 
Hornet said:
It isn't that simple.

Some fans on a franchise are willing to get a game day 1 just to get exclusive DLC or whatever pre-order bonuses if the game is good. Only problem is no one knows if it will be good.

Without embargo, it will be beneficial to all (potential) customers.
Click to expand...

how does that make it any less simple? While yes its lame you can't trust reviews anymore, that doesn't change the fact that many people lack any amount of consumer awareness and blindly buy shit. Its really their fault if they get burned. Especially when the writing is on the wall... Like with SIM shitty.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top