Games companies refuse to support EGM magazine - bit-tech.net Forums

CardJoe · 9th Jan 2008, 11:01

http://www.bit-tech.net/news/2008/01...egm_magazine/1

Advertiser pressure on journalists becomes more of an issue after EGM reveals three publishers who no longer back the mag after negative reviews.

LeMaltor · 9th Jan 2008, 11:42

Make better products, then they won't get awful reviews.

Signed *whoever*

Would (are) bit-tech ever be in a position where advertisers can effect the score of a review (except not sending a product for review lol)? Anyone married to the maker of Bioshock? and the like

Bindibadgi · 9th Jan 2008, 12:03

Never. C'mon you know that. Joe shoots straight from the hip.

We'd just review something else - there's plenty out there. Or we'd just wait until it's out and go buy it. Unlike these guys we don't rely on gaming as a sole source of content, although it is a big part of the site.

mmorgue · 9th Jan 2008, 12:23

S'pose the next step is to start suing when a bad review is published. Companies might accuse reviewers of slander, defamation, bias and so on when one of their polished turds comes to market.

So much for unbiased, objective reviews...

PQuiff · 9th Jan 2008, 12:24

LMAO..tool companies...do they think were not going to find out about their nefarious doings? Look what happened to gamespot. Like LeMaltor said, If they made better games( with a bit more originality..not fifa boodyXXXX) wed all be more happy.

CardJoe · 9th Jan 2008, 12:28

True, dat. I give the truth of the matter no matter what - just yesterday I had to tell my parents that one of the books they got me for christmas was rubbish after the book round-up. Then I found out that the author is a head of a very big PR company too and could create trouble - but it didn't change the review, I just re-read it and made sure that my points were extra-clear and valid.

I tell the truth whenever I can and I'm very happy to enter into dialogues with readers about my review methods and scores. PMs or emails are always welcome.

Whalemeister · 9th Jan 2008, 12:50

Talk about throwing your toys out of the parm!!

That's worse that 5 year olds in the playground "You said bad things about my game so you can't come to my party", if they released decent games then they would get decent reviews, is that concept just a little too complex for them?

As a side note it's funny that Sony sports division are part of the list as Stan Glasgow, Sony's COO, came out the other day saying "Our approach wasn't good. It failed and alienated many of you. We're sorry for that, and we spent most of 2007 taking a new approach - listening. We hope our 2008 product line shows that, but we aren't going to stop, either. If we didn't get it right, keep telling us. And if we did, tell us how we can make it even better." <-- Corporate BS for our sales are down please buy our stuff .

'nuff said!

Whalemeister · 9th Jan 2008, 12:51

Oops, should say "toys out of the pram" was getting all excited dissing Sony

Phil Rhodes · 9th Jan 2008, 13:14

You will listen to the music we tell you to listen to.

You will play the games we tell you to play.

You will fight the wars we tell you to fight.

And we will brook no criticism.

- Yours, the Military-Industrial Complex...

(Yes, OK, I'm losing my sense of proportion, but for cluck's sake.)

munim · 9th Jan 2008, 13:42

What the hell, man. How are we supposed to get unbiased reviews of games?

Drexial · 9th Jan 2008, 14:36

Quote:

Originally Posted by munim

What the hell, man. How are we supposed to get unbiased reviews of games?

pay for a game play it and then throw it away like they want you to. doesn't matter how horrid a game is once they have your money.

besides i think most reviews of games are always biased in one way or another. there are a ton of games that got rave reviews that most people liked and a few didn't, and some that have received horrible reviews that some people like. even if there sint some behind the scenes corporate bias, the review it self is done by someone that needs to form an opinion.

TreeDude · 9th Jan 2008, 14:54

The difference is though, a corporate bias means the games gets a good review every time. At least if it's someone's opinion they can love or hate it and give good reason why.

This reminds me of a pool game I had on the Dreamcast that I loved. But DC magazine gave it a 1 out of 10. I never understood why.

CardJoe · 9th Jan 2008, 15:13

It's all opinion - but the point is that its not a corporate opinion and that the opinion is one of somebody with a massive background knowledge, understanding of the medium and the ability to express themselves. Some games I like too get bad reviews - like Sin Episodes. I love that game and I play it a lot. On the other hand though, I wouldn't give it a great score just because a company told me to and I would try as much as possible to detatch myself from opinion to form a review which is as objective as possible. Even if I then **** that up, I can fall back on the fact that I'm pretty close to the target audience and my opinions are very likely to mesh with the majority of them.

Tyinsar · 9th Jan 2008, 15:51

A few things I always look for in games reviews are:
1) what the reviewer was looking for (graphics / sound / plot / complexity / interface / theme / play style / ...),
2) how those factored into their rating (& maybe what parts of the game didn't factor in their rating),
3) things I might be looking for that they didn't mention.

Usually I look at those and come up with my own rating. If a review doesn't cover at least the first two well it's a rubbish review.

Back to the original topic:
I'd like to have the companies make an official statement (as long as it's not %100 spin) before I make up my mind but if the claims are true these companies deserve the bad press - or no press at all.

Amon · 9th Jan 2008, 16:48

Here's a question: Would Bit-tech bend a review to save their relationship with Asus and future reviews of their products? (This is a hypothetical scenario, but your answer should be genuine)

E.E.L. Ambiense · 9th Jan 2008, 16:49

Yeah, I can recall a few reviews read here that the product was torn a new one, to put it scientifically. I didn't detect a slant to anything, aside from an enthusiast ego which is expected and welcomed

!

I have nothing against EGM at all, having read it a few times. I prefer PC Gamer, but still. Dropped advertising for slamming a crappy product? That is ass.

MilkMan5 · 9th Jan 2008, 16:56

Well, we all think that we would never do anything bad until it happens.
And when it does happen, we still believe that what we did was not bad.

Why, because you did it, so it must be Okay then.

CardJoe · 9th Jan 2008, 17:28

Quote:

Originally Posted by Amon

Here's a question: Would Bit-tech bend a review to save their relationship with Asus and future reviews of their products? (This is a hypothetical scenario, but your answer should be genuine)

Nope. The whole issue is a hell of a lot more clean cut with hardware than with games because we always have benchmarks and hard data to back us up. PRs ring us every day to complain about stuff and we just explain, point to the results and leave it at that. If they can cast doubt on the reliability of our testing or our results then we'll work to get the most accurate data, but if the data is on our side then nothing more needs to be said.

TGImages · 9th Jan 2008, 18:41

Does anyone rely on 1 review anyway? Until I have found a number of reviews written by different people and also some feedback areas where anyone can post their opinion I don't believe what I read. Now if most of that feedback corelates to the reviews then I will put more faith into the review.

This list of comments is a perfect example. A BT writer can put down whatever they want. Read what they wrote, then read these comments. If they seem to agree then the review was probably pretty close. If, on the other hand, the comments are pointing out all the inaccuracies, mistakes and other problems then the review is not worth paying attention to.

TGImages · 9th Jan 2008, 18:42

.... and if the review does not provide for comments then it probably isn't worth reading.

9th Jan 2008, 11:01	#1
CardJoe Player Character bit-tech Staff Join Date: Apr 2007 Posts: 8,011	Games companies refuse to support EGM magazine http://www.bit-tech.net/news/2008/01...egm_magazine/1 Advertiser pressure on journalists becomes more of an issue after EGM reveals three publishers who no longer back the mag after negative reviews. __________________ this is joe's non-bit-tech blog

9th Jan 2008, 11:42	#2
LeMaltor >^_^< Join Date: Oct 2003 Location: No. Posts: 1,397	Make better products, then they won't get awful reviews. Signed whoever Would (are) bit-tech ever be in a position where advertisers can effect the score of a review (except not sending a product for review lol)? Anyone married to the maker of Bioshock? and the like __________________ Welcoming the riff-raff since February 2009.

9th Jan 2008, 12:03	#3
Bindibadgi Richard Swinburne bit-tech Staff Join Date: Mar 2001 Location: Omnipwntent Posts: 28,294	Never. C'mon you know that. Joe shoots straight from the hip. We'd just review something else - there's plenty out there. Or we'd just wait until it's out and go buy it. Unlike these guys we don't rely on gaming as a sole source of content, although it is a big part of the site. __________________ Made you look, made you stare, made you clicked this in your underwear! Den of Geek!

9th Jan 2008, 12:28	#6
CardJoe Player Character bit-tech Staff Join Date: Apr 2007 Posts: 8,011	True, dat. I give the truth of the matter no matter what - just yesterday I had to tell my parents that one of the books they got me for christmas was rubbish after the book round-up. Then I found out that the author is a head of a very big PR company too and could create trouble - but it didn't change the review, I just re-read it and made sure that my points were extra-clear and valid. I tell the truth whenever I can and I'm very happy to enter into dialogues with readers about my review methods and scores. PMs or emails are always welcome. __________________ this is joe's non-bit-tech blog

9th Jan 2008, 12:50	#7
Whalemeister Fo' Rizzle Bizzle Join Date: Nov 2007 Location: The Shire of the Berk Posts: 215	Talk about throwing your toys out of the parm!! That's worse that 5 year olds in the playground "You said bad things about my game so you can't come to my party", if they released decent games then they would get decent reviews, is that concept just a little too complex for them? As a side note it's funny that Sony sports division are part of the list as Stan Glasgow, Sony's COO, came out the other day saying "Our approach wasn't good. It failed and alienated many of you. We're sorry for that, and we spent most of 2007 taking a new approach - listening. We hope our 2008 product line shows that, but we aren't going to stop, either. If we didn't get it right, keep telling us. And if we did, tell us how we can make it even better." <-- Corporate BS for our sales are down please buy our stuff . 'nuff said! __________________ Intel Q6600 @ 3.2 GHz - eVGA nForce 680i MoBo - BFG GTX280 OC - 4GB XMS2 800 MHz DDR2, Enermax Infinity 720w PSU - Antec P182

9th Jan 2008, 12:23	#4
mmorgue Supermodder Join Date: Feb 2005 Location: Mos Eisley, in the bar... Posts: 378	S'pose the next step is to start suing when a bad review is published. Companies might accuse reviewers of slander, defamation, bias and so on when one of their polished turds comes to market. So much for unbiased, objective reviews...

9th Jan 2008, 12:24	#5
PQuiff Supermodder Join Date: Sep 2001 Location: Glasgow, Scotland Posts: 347	LMAO..tool companies...do they think were not going to find out about their nefarious doings? Look what happened to gamespot. Like LeMaltor said, If they made better games( with a bit more originality..not fifa boodyXXXX) wed all be more happy.

9th Jan 2008, 12:51	#8
Whalemeister Fo' Rizzle Bizzle Join Date: Nov 2007 Location: The Shire of the Berk Posts: 215	Oops, should say "toys out of the pram" was getting all excited dissing Sony __________________ Intel Q6600 @ 3.2 GHz - eVGA nForce 680i MoBo - BFG GTX280 OC - 4GB XMS2 800 MHz DDR2, Enermax Infinity 720w PSU - Antec P182

9th Jan 2008, 13:14	#9
Phil Rhodes Supermodder Join Date: Jul 2006 Posts: 583	You will listen to the music we tell you to listen to. You will play the games we tell you to play. You will fight the wars we tell you to fight. And we will brook no criticism. - Yours, the Military-Industrial Complex... (Yes, OK, I'm losing my sense of proportion, but for cluck's sake.)

9th Jan 2008, 13:42	#10
munim What's a Dremel? Join Date: Oct 2006 Posts: 15	What the hell, man. How are we supposed to get unbiased reviews of games?

9th Jan 2008, 14:54	#12
TreeDude Multimodder Join Date: May 2007 Posts: 239	The difference is though, a corporate bias means the games gets a good review every time. At least if it's someone's opinion they can love or hate it and give good reason why. This reminds me of a pool game I had on the Dreamcast that I loved. But DC magazine gave it a 1 out of 10. I never understood why.

9th Jan 2008, 15:13	#13
CardJoe Player Character bit-tech Staff Join Date: Apr 2007 Posts: 8,011	It's all opinion - but the point is that its not a corporate opinion and that the opinion is one of somebody with a massive background knowledge, understanding of the medium and the ability to express themselves. Some games I like too get bad reviews - like Sin Episodes. I love that game and I play it a lot. On the other hand though, I wouldn't give it a great score just because a company told me to and I would try as much as possible to detatch myself from opinion to form a review which is as objective as possible. Even if I then **** that up, I can fall back on the fact that I'm pretty close to the target audience and my opinions are very likely to mesh with the majority of them. __________________ this is joe's non-bit-tech blog

9th Jan 2008, 15:51	#14
Tyinsar 6 screens / 1 card Join Date: Jul 2006 Location: AB.CA Posts: 2,005	A few things I always look for in games reviews are: 1) what the reviewer was looking for (graphics / sound / plot / complexity / interface / theme / play style / ...), 2) how those factored into their rating (& maybe what parts of the game didn't factor in their rating), 3) things I might be looking for that they didn't mention. Usually I look at those and come up with my own rating. If a review doesn't cover at least the first two well it's a rubbish review. Back to the original topic: I'd like to have the companies make an official statement (as long as it's not %100 spin) before I make up my mind but if the claims are true these companies deserve the bad press - or no press at all. __________________ It's not about how life treats you, it's about how you treat life.

9th Jan 2008, 16:48	#15
Amon inch-perfect Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: cannoning into the reds, Toronto, Canada Posts: 2,456	Here's a question: Would Bit-tech bend a review to save their relationship with Asus and future reviews of their products? (This is a hypothetical scenario, but your answer should be genuine) __________________ Defunct Socket 939 San Diego 4000+::2GB PC3200::Radeon 9600 SE 128MB::200GB HDD::24" Dell 2407WFP-HC::WinXP x64/x86 dual boot Dell Vostro 1500 laptop::Socket P Merom T7100::2GB PC5400::Go 8600m GT 256MB::660GB HDD::15.4" WXGA+, 24" Dell 2407WFP-HC::WinXP::Fanatec 911 Wheel+Pedals

9th Jan 2008, 16:49	#16
E.E.L. Ambiense Acrylic Heretic Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: Malabar, FL Posts: 2,730	Yeah, I can recall a few reviews read here that the product was torn a new one, to put it scientifically. I didn't detect a slant to anything, aside from an enthusiast ego which is expected and welcomed ! I have nothing against EGM at all, having read it a few times. I prefer PC Gamer, but still. Dropped advertising for slamming a crappy product? That is ass. __________________ Latest Builds: "Movie Sign!" • CheckMate - MotM May '09 ~~Nominee~~ Loser! • BluBawx I • Lumière Noire - MotM Apr. '08 ~~Nominee~~ Loser! • Razzle Dazzle • CMC Field Server • "Building Better Worlds" - MotM Feb. '08 ~~Nominee~~ Loser! • Biohazard • MicroSuperFly

9th Jan 2008, 16:56	#17
MilkMan5 Yeah man... Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: On earth Posts: 183	Well, we all think that we would never do anything bad until it happens. And when it does happen, we still believe that what we did was not bad. Why, because you did it, so it must be Okay then. __________________ Gigabyte Poseidon Case - GA-M59SLI-S5 - AMD Athlon64 4000+ - nVIDIA 8600GT 512MB - 4Gig DDR-II - Logitech Lazer Mouse I say "There are no problems, only solutions"

9th Jan 2008, 18:41	#19
TGImages Grandpa Join Date: Aug 2004 Location: Illinois, US Posts: 160	Does anyone rely on 1 review anyway? Until I have found a number of reviews written by different people and also some feedback areas where anyone can post their opinion I don't believe what I read. Now if most of that feedback corelates to the reviews then I will put more faith into the review. This list of comments is a perfect example. A BT writer can put down whatever they want. Read what they wrote, then read these comments. If they seem to agree then the review was probably pretty close. If, on the other hand, the comments are pointing out all the inaccuracies, mistakes and other problems then the review is not worth paying attention to.

9th Jan 2008, 18:42	#20
TGImages Grandpa Join Date: Aug 2004 Location: Illinois, US Posts: 160	.... and if the review does not provide for comments then it probably isn't worth reading.