View Full Version : UBI demands HIGH review score from magazine (report)
Uber Gruber
03-01-10, 08:02 AM
Taken from http://www.destructoid.com/ubisoft-demands-high-assassin-s-creed-2-review-score--154456.phtml
""Our reviews are tough, but fair. We will not give up our independent scores for the sake of a timely review," explains the magazine (http://www.wearetheinternetz.com/2009/11/07/ubisoft-demanding-high-scores-for-early-assassins-creed-2-reviews/comment-page-1/) in its latest issue. "This holds true for Assassin’s Creed 2. The publisher asked us to guarantee the score 'sehr gut,' otherwise we would not receive a review copy, thus we will publish our review in next month’s issue. We’d be more than glad to give the game a ’sehr gut’, but only if it deserves it."
As UBI is also the publisher of the highly controversial SHV title, I thought this might be of interest to our rather impotent community.
:salute:
Safe-Keeper
03-01-10, 08:11 AM
Wow. I wonder how common this is, "bribing" reviewers by giving them an early shot at reviewing the game, in return for high ratings?
I've never experienced any distributor trying to bribe us for a good review. Not even Ubisoft. I'm not sure what to believe about this.
It's my understanding that it is fairly common, atleast when it comes to big and popular review sites/magazines. :hmmm: It might not be anything to do from the publisher's side, but more from the reviewer's side to keep the publisher happy by giving the game a good score and thus keep good relations to the big game houses.
You only need to go and read Halo 2 & 3 reviews to see which mags/sites are just brown-nosing and which aren't.
Of course, some of the reviews that have higher score than they should can be due to the huge hype some games have, which then affects the reviewer and instead of judging the game from neutral POV, he rides the hype and sees everything through glasses of awesomeness.
I've pretty much lost trust to any but one gaming magazine (well that and Yahtzee :O:).
EDIT: Ow and then there's of course the case where reviewer from Gamespot got supposedly fired because he gave Kane & Lynch a bad score. But I didn't follow that so closely, so no idea if that was just a rumour or not.
EDIT2: Here's a link to the gamespot thingy: http://kotaku.com/328244/gamespot-editor-fired-over-kane--lynch-review
Turbografx
03-01-10, 08:35 AM
This is not uncommon. I remember some hoopla about a similar situation with Fable, Oblivion, Kane & Lynch, Arkham Asylum and maybe Fallout 3.
Mostly they target the most popular/common magazines. Which has contributed to reviews from them becoming near worthless imo.
In edition to this, if a magazine gives a game a negative review, they can say goodbye to future review copies.
@Dowly, the K&L story is true, Gamespot sold out around the turn of the century.
mookiemookie
03-01-10, 08:40 AM
I thought this might be of interest to our rather impotent community.
Is this kind of garbage necessary?
Good for that German magazine!
HundertzehnGustav
03-01-10, 08:44 AM
I trust Neal...
fact that he gor a copy long after the others got one tells me he aint bought.
he has got an audience that is very demanding, giving hm an early copy, traded for a good score, would have made me supicious.
He got his one late, for what ever reason, and put it through its paces properly. no quick Job, nothing rushed, and also took a look at the more "difficult" subjects.
Game mags want to sell... its their business.
It aint Neal's.:shucks::yeah:
I trust Neal...
fact that he gor a copy long after the others got one tells me he aint bought.
he has got an audience that is very demanding, giving hm an early copy, traded for a good score, would have made me supicious.
He got his one late, for what ever reason, and put it through its paces properly. no quick Job, nothing rushed, and also took a look at the more "difficult" subjects.
Game mags want to sell... its their business.
It aint Neal's.:shucks::yeah:
I don't think anybody was thinking about Neal. Although now that you mention it... that is a pretty nice wide screen he's playing on... :hmmm: :O:
Onkel Neal
03-01-10, 08:59 AM
I thought this might be of interest to our rather impotent community.
Speak for yourself :haha:
Onkel Neal
03-01-10, 09:12 AM
I trust Neal...
fact that he gor a copy long after the others got one tells me he aint bought.
he has got an audience that is very demanding, giving hm an early copy, traded for a good score, would have made me supicious.
He got his one late, for what ever reason, and put it through its paces properly. no quick Job, nothing rushed, and also took a look at the more "difficult" subjects.
Game mags want to sell... its their business.
It aint Neal's.:shucks::yeah:
Thanks for the vote of confidence. Being "first" is great but believe me, I value my reputation a lot more than being first or keeping Ubi happy with our community. And since Ubisoft's marketing have been courting magazines like a sweaty teenager and giving us the cold shoulder, I think only the truly ignorant will say there is a relationship factor on any review I do. If they treat me like a king, or like crap, the game is the game, and I owe myself and you the most unvarnished, fair, and balanced truth I can muster. As always, I am a little more lenient than many coprporate game media, and I admit that openly and my explanation is: I review sub games with a slight bias as an enthusiast, as opposed to a militant consumerist.
Even so, if the game comes up really short, well, then it gets skewered. And a skewering by me... I think most people will agree, that's bad. :o
cheers
Neal
(quietly working on SH5 review)
codmander
03-01-10, 09:21 AM
[QUOTE=Neal Stevens;1285625]Thanks for the vote of confidence. Being "first" is great but believe me, I value my reputation a lot ...
that ship sailed years ago:rotfl2:
609_Avatar
03-01-10, 09:38 AM
One of the reasons I always come here to check out a review from Neal before considering buying is because of how he does do his reviews. I find them fair and balanced and I share his "enthusiast" attitude so I rarely find myself in disagreement with his opinion on the overall value of a game.
Neal, I expect that check in the mail as usual, or at the very least, make sure I don't' get that Medic avatar any more! :D
Onkel Neal
03-01-10, 09:40 AM
[QUOTE=Neal Stevens;1285625]Thanks for the vote of confidence. Being "first" is great but believe me, I value my reputation a lot ...
that ship sailed years ago:rotfl2:
Excuse me? I don't understand what you're trying to say.
EAF274 Johan
03-01-10, 09:41 AM
That's an eye-opener :o If it's true, I'm truly shocked about the lack of business ethos some companies appear to have.
Some 10 years ago I worked for an IT magazine, and back then there was indeed an unspoken rule that you avoid extremely critical product reviews. This was especially true for the big manufacturers/publishers, since you want them to send you their future products for review too. Still, practices like this would have been unheard of. Then again, I was only the final editor... I don't know what went on above my head. :03:
Uber Gruber
03-01-10, 09:58 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Uber Gruber http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/smartdark/viewpost.gif (http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?p=1285527#post1285527)
I thought this might be of interest to our rather impotent community.
Is this kind of garbage necessary?
Very.
mookiemookie
03-01-10, 10:06 AM
Very.
Good. Another for the ignore list.
Steeltrap
03-01-10, 10:45 AM
[QUOTE=codmander;1285641]
Excuse me? I don't understand what you're trying to say.
He's suggesting you lost your reputation, or any worth preserving at least, some time ago.
I'm assuming it's humour.
SteamWake
03-01-10, 10:58 AM
As UBI is also the publisher of the highly controversial SHV title, I thought this might be of interest to our rather impotent community.:salute:
Hrm not sure if that was intentional or not :haha:
codmander
03-01-10, 11:35 AM
just a joke ya kinda left your self open there for a ..pun
Uber Gruber
03-01-10, 01:29 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Uber Gruber http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/smartdark/viewpost.gif (http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?p=1285695#post1285695)
Very.
Good. Another for the ignore list.
As you wish mate, its your life.
Onkel Neal
03-01-10, 02:09 PM
just a joke ya kinda left your self open there for a ..pun
:shucks: You saw the shot and you took it.
Boyarpunk
03-01-10, 05:07 PM
Interesting!
This is exactly why I ignore almost all "professional" gaming "journalism" when looking for honest reviews and opinions. Thanks to Uber Gruber for the link. :salute:
Shakermaker
03-01-10, 05:23 PM
How is this news? The story in the OP is from last year, it is not about Silent Hunter 5, and publishers buying good reviews is rampant and well documented. Plus reviews on sites like Gamespot or IGN are rubbish anyway. I prefer RockPaperShotgun and Kotaku because they don't hand out scores. Eurogamer isn't bad either, although they aren't giving the PC as much love as they used to do.
Move to off-topic please.
Leandros
03-01-10, 06:27 PM
That's an eye-opener :o If it's true, I'm truly shocked about the lack of business ethos some companies appear to have.
Some 10 years ago I worked for an IT magazine, and back then there was indeed an unspoken rule that you avoid extremely critical product reviews. This was especially true for the big manufacturers/publishers, since you want them to send you their future products for review too. Still, practices like this would have been unheard of. Then again, I was only the final editor... I don't know what went on above my head. :03:
What I have experienced from another branch is for a magzine not to print a review they find particularly critical. Simply because they see no reason to use space on it, but rather on something which can be recommended to its readers. It is also rather common to give the product supplier an opportunity to comment on eventual critique.
JScones
03-02-10, 02:25 AM
Even so, if the game comes up really short, well, then it gets skewered. And a skewering by me... I think most people will agree, that's bad. :o
Yes, that means a score of only 98% instead of 100%. :O:
BigBANGtheory
03-02-10, 03:01 AM
I enjoyed reading the SubSim preview and I have no intention of buying SH5 until I read the follow on review and make up my own mind as to how its strengths and weaknesses are likely to effect my choice of gaming.
Capt. Friedhoffer
03-03-10, 09:43 PM
At least in my opinion. Generally they almost exclusively produce reviews about Xbox and PS3 titles but they do have a section of their site dedicated to PC games. Silent Hunter 5 is listed on that page and I believe a video review is pending. From my experience with the site, I can tell you when they don't like something, they point it out in a big way. Often, they show the bug, glitch or bad game design in the review video. Big game studios or not, they all can become cannon fodder at review time if their product is sub par. I think reviewers should be honest and true. The gaming industry is worth billions of dollars and they should be developing great games with those kinds of financial assets behind them. Each title is roughly $60 whether it be for PC or a console. Replay value is a big factor with games and it should be. The awesome thing about these simulators is that you could very likely play for years. True, you could get burned out but overall, the game is still fresh no matter how much time you spend apart from it. This is especially true of Silent Hunter 3.
vBulletin® v3.8.11, Copyright ©2000-2025, vBulletin Solutions Inc.