So, "review events" for Tony Hawk Ride are a big no no, but when Halo, Call of Duty or other big games do them everybody attends and NOBODY complains...
Sure those events are longer and you get to play the game to the end, and try out the multiplayer extensively - but nobody can tell me those are ideal circumstances for a review. #theysaiditonapodcast
@El-Suave:
Either your post is too sarcastic to be recognised as sarcasm on the internet or you're seriously equating what this was, a chance to play Ride for a couple of hours (highly unlikely)/playing it for twenty minutes to being allowed a full playthrough of the game and test the multiplay fully?
Whether those events are "ideal" review conditions or not they're still perfectly adequate.
Did anyone actually read "the only review" on metacritic? I dont normally post comments but I absolutely had to for this.. The review sounds like it was written by someone at activision and "Gamezone" or whatever theyre called were paid to put it up.. Seriously the way the reviewer talks about the game he shouldve given it 100/100, there is not one bad remark about the game. Something stinks.
Jeff Gerstmann, one of the most respectedand tenured reviewers in the gaming press
(snicker) I do give him credit for avoiding this trap, but I don't see anyone biting on it. General consensus seems to be that Ride will fail, and I'd wager if say, God of War III's team pulled the same stunt, him and lots of others would be all over it.
Maybe Activision's intent was to curb some of the negative feelings the game has been receiving by having a team on hand to help guide apprehensive players through the new control method, but the company is definitely doing that wrong by expecting people to make a good, thorough judgment in a short span of time. This doesn't bode well for Ride when the company actions always seem to indicate a lack faith in its product. #theysaiditonapodcast
Show of hands, who actually wants to buy this game? There's a point where peripherals are completely pointless. And Activision has found that point. #theysaiditonapodcast
Such bullshit. You only do that if you're positive your game sucks.
No respectable journalist would take this bait, but there are enough sleazy small-time gaming writers desperate to get "exclusive" first reviews that this will work in their favor.
Edit: And, looking at the one review on Metacritic, it seems I'm exactly right. The review is poorly written, reads like a faked Activision press release, and scores the game high enough that people will notice, but not so high that it becomes suspicious.
In other words, a perfect shill for the game.
It doesn't help that I've never heard of "GameZone", and their awful, awful site format, either.
@Ad-hominem: Meh. I try and look at this from the perspective of a small-time, struggling gaming journalist; my integrity might suffer, but since I'm so tiny I really don't have any.
Thus I refuse to call those people "sleazy". Just "desperate". #theysaiditonapodcast
Amen brother! When movie studios know their movie sucks, they don't screen it. Nor do they buy airtime for advertising. Game publishers engage in the same tactics. #theysaiditonapodcast
@OctaneHugo: No, they're sleazy. I know the writers of OneLastContinue, a small-time gaming blog that's been featured here on Kotaku a few times.
They're not huge, famous or incredibly successful. If they wanted to, they could create all sorts of bullshit, and agree to nonsensical offers from publishers, but they don't.
You know why? Because that's not how journalism works, especially not review journalism. You do not take bribes, and you do not act shamelessly, regardless of how small and unknown you are. #theysaiditonapodcast
@Ad-hominem: Might just be my interpretation of the word "sleazy" compared to yours.
I save it for situations that could be extreme; calling some small-time guy willing to sacrifice some honor for an advantage? Ehh. #theysaiditonapodcast
You know I didn't know stranglehold had multiplayer when I 1st bought it.I only played online once with some guy I later added because no1 would ever be on to play against. And it was pretty cool swinging from chandeliers shooting down at my opponent. But just like army of two no1 plays the damn thing ever. So It should have never came with multiplayer. I mean people still play call of duty 3! And the $7.99 add on level packs? yea goodluck getting me to buy that Midway. Maybe I'm just bitter that I bought it for $50 and without the movie ;/
@Bouchart: I'm not quite sure that's the case.... You could make an argument for it, I'm sure (if you look at the releases around that title I'm sure there are plenty of big multiplayer-centric games), but Nintendo seems to have let Retro Studios do what they want with those games, especially considering Prime 1 and Prime 3 didn't have multiplayer and no one cared. #theysaiditonapodcast
11/18/09
11/18/09
Sure those events are longer and you get to play the game to the end, and try out the multiplayer extensively - but nobody can tell me those are ideal circumstances for a review. #theysaiditonapodcast
11/18/09
Either your post is too sarcastic to be recognised as sarcasm on the internet or you're seriously equating what this was, a chance to play Ride for a couple of hours (highly unlikely)/playing it for twenty minutes to being allowed a full playthrough of the game and test the multiplay fully?
Whether those events are "ideal" review conditions or not they're still perfectly adequate.
11/17/09
11/17/09
11/17/09
11/17/09
*girlish squeel*
Any others you guys would recommend?
11/17/09
IGN's Erik Brudvig had to buy it too. #theysaiditonapodcast
11/17/09
And given how the thing is coming out with little to no hype, and nobody I've talked to has any clue how it will actually work...yeah.
Just rename it Skate Hero and see if you can steal any extra sales that way. #theysaiditonapodcast
11/17/09
(snicker) I do give him credit for avoiding this trap, but I don't see anyone biting on it. General consensus seems to be that Ride will fail, and I'd wager if say, God of War III's team pulled the same stunt, him and lots of others would be all over it.
Maybe Activision's intent was to curb some of the negative feelings the game has been receiving by having a team on hand to help guide apprehensive players through the new control method, but the company is definitely doing that wrong by expecting people to make a good, thorough judgment in a short span of time. This doesn't bode well for Ride when the company actions always seem to indicate a lack faith in its product. #theysaiditonapodcast
11/17/09
11/17/09
11/17/09
11/17/09
No respectable journalist would take this bait, but there are enough sleazy small-time gaming writers desperate to get "exclusive" first reviews that this will work in their favor.
Edit: And, looking at the one review on Metacritic, it seems I'm exactly right. The review is poorly written, reads like a faked Activision press release, and scores the game high enough that people will notice, but not so high that it becomes suspicious.
In other words, a perfect shill for the game.
It doesn't help that I've never heard of "GameZone", and their awful, awful site format, either.
11/17/09
Thus I refuse to call those people "sleazy". Just "desperate". #theysaiditonapodcast
11/17/09
Amen brother! When movie studios know their movie sucks, they don't screen it. Nor do they buy airtime for advertising. Game publishers engage in the same tactics. #theysaiditonapodcast
11/17/09
They're not huge, famous or incredibly successful. If they wanted to, they could create all sorts of bullshit, and agree to nonsensical offers from publishers, but they don't.
You know why? Because that's not how journalism works, especially not review journalism. You do not take bribes, and you do not act shamelessly, regardless of how small and unknown you are. #theysaiditonapodcast
11/17/09
I save it for situations that could be extreme; calling some small-time guy willing to sacrifice some honor for an advantage? Ehh. #theysaiditonapodcast
11/17/09
11/17/09
11/17/09
11/03/09
11/03/09
11/03/09
11/03/09