Send News. Want a reply? Read this. More in the FAQ.   News Forum - All Forums - Mobile - PDA - RSS Headlines  RSS Headlines   Twitter  Twitter
Customize
User Settings
Styles:
LAN Parties
Upcoming one-time events:

Regularly scheduled events

Op Ed

Wired.com - My Side of the Duke Nukem Twitter ‘Brain Fart’. By Jim Redner.
My tweet did not name names or point specific fingers. I made a blanket statement. My anger was directed at one story that had gone too far in my opinion, to which I am entitled. That story and the writer will remain nameless. I am not interested in shouting matches and I cannot compete with a large site with tens of thousands of followers. TheRednerGroup is only me, and that writer could bring another onslaught upon me with the click of the enter key on his computer. In hindsight, what I should have done was contact that writer directly and had an adult conversation about the issue, as I have done in the past.

View
11 Replies. 1 pages. Viewing page 1.
< Newer [ 1 ] Older >

11. Re: Op Ed Jun 21, 2011, 22:39 Sepharo
 
Beamer wrote on Jun 21, 2011, 21:32:
We don't want reviews that are simply ads for the game.

And the $40 it costs to buy a game not sent to you has no impact on that. The thousands in advertising far outweighs any impact getting or not getting a game has.

Isn't it more about pre-release coverage?
Isn't that where the money's at in terms of site hits and magazine sales?
 
Avatar 17249
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
10. Re: Op Ed Jun 21, 2011, 21:32 Beamer
 
We don't want reviews that are simply ads for the game.

And the $40 it costs to buy a game not sent to you has no impact on that. The thousands in advertising far outweighs any impact getting or not getting a game has.
 
-------------
Music for the discerning:
http://www.deathwishinc.com
http://www.hydrahead.com
http://www.painkillerrecords.com
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
9. Re: Op Ed Jun 21, 2011, 20:46 Bhruic
 
Why not?
They're under no obligation to give the product away for free. In fact, they do so because they feel that the product is good and the review will generate publicity.

That's fine from the company's point of view. But we aren't companies, we are consumers. From our point of view, we want fair, impartial reviews. We don't want reviews that are simply ads for the game.

From a company's point of view, I'm sure they would love it if they could force everyone that reviews a game to give it a 10/10 and write a glowing review. For them, a review is simply a 3rd party advertisement for their game. So of course they aren't going to want negative reviews. Of course they will go out of their way to make sure they don't get negative reviews.

And that is why a lot of people don't trust reviewers anymore. That's why you'll often see people on sites like this one talking about how they don't trust "professional" reviews. They are seen as part of the advertising machinery. That's not a good thing. Nor is it a desirable thing for gamers.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
8. Re: Op Ed Jun 21, 2011, 19:49 Beamer
 
I think the point is that a company, or someone hired by a company, that makes a game is not in an unbiased position to determine what a "fair" review is.

Why not?
They're under no obligation to give the product away for free. In fact, they do so because they feel that the product is good and the review will generate publicity.

So why should they give it when they know someone will give a bad review? That person can just go out and buy their own damn copy.


Hollywood does this all the time. All the time! Bad movies don't get critics screenings, or get very limited screenings aimed at very select reviewers (look at any horror movie and odds are the only advance reviews are from horror-specific websites.) No one cries foul, it's just the way things are done.
Other industries do this, too, as they tend to be selective about who they give products to.

I find it offensive solely if there's an implicit agreement that the product is given for a good review, or if it's only given to reviewers they feel certain will review it positively. When it's withheld from those they feel will review it unfairly I see no problem. It's a thin line, whatever, but it's all about being fair.



Ebert has written on subject similar to this all the time, right down to recommending reviewers not eat food given free at screenings so that a reviewer has absolutely no financial obligation to the company. As Bhruic points out, and as I always say, our industry has reviewers that make money solely from the products they review. This is an issue. A $40 copy of some shitty game is far less of a concern than decreased revenues. Let's be honest, too, bad reviews will result in decreased revenues. In part this is to be expected, why would you advertise your product on a site you know will just bash it? Makes zero sense from a financial standpoint. In part this is also understandable - emotionally why would you want to do business with someone you feel screws you over? People here get annoyed when publishers act like robots or zombies but expect them to be it when it serves their purposes. If you're in charge of ad budgets and keep buying space on a website that keeps calling your company worthless money-hungry boobs and keeps comparing your CEO to Hitler don't you think you'd be less willing to spend more money there?
 
-------------
Music for the discerning:
http://www.deathwishinc.com
http://www.hydrahead.com
http://www.painkillerrecords.com
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
7. Re: Op Ed Jun 21, 2011, 19:26 [VG]Reagle
 
Jim Redner is a piece of crap.  
Avatar 8515
 
I am MUCH MUCH MUCH better now.
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
6. Re: Op Ed Jun 21, 2011, 18:11 Cutter
 
And this jackass still doesn't get why what he did was wrong, and I don't mean getting caught. And of course 2K would be involved in this sort immoral manipulation and lies. This why you can never take seriously any "news" outlet who's reporting is tied into revenue from the company they're reporting about.


 
Avatar 25394
 
"The South will boogie again!" - Disco Stu
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
5. Re: Op Ed Jun 21, 2011, 18:02 Bhruic
 
Why should a publisher or PR firm hand over free preview copies of a game if they're not going to be used to make a fair review.

I think the point is that a company, or someone hired by a company, that makes a game is not in an unbiased position to determine what a "fair" review is. Furthermore, if reviewers or their publishers start feeling like they can't be critical of a game without losing out on the potential for future reviews, they aren't going to give us those "fair" reviews - they'll just slant the other way.

Which is what we have today in general, although that's compounded by the fact that most of the places that review games also make most of their money from ad money from the same companies who make the games they review.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
4. Re: Op Ed Jun 21, 2011, 13:51 Ruffiana
 
You know what...I agree with him. You can't tell me there aren't reviewers who figured out long ago that being critical and venomous is much more entertaining than fair and accurate. That there aren't reviewers who, for whatever reason, have a personal axe to grind against this particular game, Broussard/3DR, Pitchford/Gearbox, or whatever. I've read a couple of reviews that are clearly...clearly...not attempts at fair and accurate reviews.

Why should a publisher or PR firm hand over free preview copies of a game if they're not going to be used to make a fair review.

Make no mistake, this game is no gem. It was way ahead of it's time and then slipped a decade. But it's hardly the worst thing out there, even now. There's a metric fuck-ton of shit on the market and DNF is a solid mediocre at worst.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
3. Re: Op Ed Jun 21, 2011, 12:16 Dev
 
He's been fired and he's still running his mouth:

what I should have done was contact that writer directly [...] as I have done in the past.

As many suspected its been going on before.

Interestingly, in TFA it says that 2k actually pointed out the review to him in an email:

I was working late and received an e-mail from my former client, 2K, asking if I had seen one particularly negative review of Duke Nukem.

So 2k was involved in this lol

He also says he's a 1 man business which makes it obvious why 2k hired redner group, because they were cheap.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
2. Re: Op Ed Jun 21, 2011, 11:07 Bhruic
 
I'd go with "threaten them in private" first, but I'm sure yours would have come right after it.  
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
1. Re: Op Ed Jun 21, 2011, 10:44 Creston
 
In hindsight, what I should have done was contact that writer directly and had an adult conversation about the issue whine like a pussy to Take2, and then blacklist the site straight away, as I have done in the past.

Fixed!

Creston
 
Avatar 15604
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
11 Replies. 1 pages. Viewing page 1.
< Newer [ 1 ] Older >


footer

Blue's News logo