the hype train and game reviews ?

rajchakrabarti

rajchakrabarti

CAGiversary!
Feedback
4 (100%)
Are companies paying off video game reviewers ? It seems any game with a lot of hype will get a killer review...

metriod.. bioshock... halo 3...

Not to say they are bad games, but the reviews are making them like the best thing since sliced bread.

Its like any game with a lot of backing and marketing is guarenteed a 9.5


eh just my 2 cents.
 
If any game with alot of marketing and backing is gonna get a 9.5 then what happened to Lair and Heavenly Sword? Lost Planet? That game had a 20 million dollar marketing budget.

Those games get hype for a reason.

Your hypothesis was disproven.
 
[quote name='Scorch']Driv3r? Two Worlds? Lair? The Bouncer? State of Emergency?[/QUOTE]

Two Worlds didn't get much hype. Months before game release in the US everyone knew the game had issues, and it didn't help southpeak didn't say a word to anyone.
 
in some cases im sure it happens but not just in terms of money. maybe free games and other things are given up for preferable reviews. and alot of times depending on the reviewer its just pure bias. like that guy who used to review gamecube games on ign the guy was a freakin flamin nintendo worshiper and because of that he could never really give games a clear cut unbiased review score. but in the end the score isnt what matters.


take the reviews from diff places look at what they say about the parts of the game that are important to you look at video footage of the game in action and decide from there. or rent the game and if it sucks dont buy it.
 
Its obvious microsoft has a lot of this guys under the pay roll.
like why you see so many internet bias againts Sony ?
microsoft corruption, its easy to get a small town loser with life spending all of his time in front a PC and make a popular gaming blog and boom! like the likes or joystiq,kotaku,gismodo and websites like 1up or gamestop always looking for anything negative to post againts Sony
ect. they are all just a bunch of corrupt bastards.
 
[quote name='richbastard']Its obvious microsoft has a lot of this guys under the pay roll.
like why you see so many internet bias againts Sony ?
microsoft corruption, its easy to get a small town loser with life spending all of his time in front a PC and make a popular gaming blog and boom! like the likes or joystiq,kotaku,gismodo and websites like 1up or gamestop always looking for anything negative to post againts Sony
ect. they are all just a bunch of corrupt bastards.[/QUOTE]

Wait, I thought you died after you tried to eat a brick.
 
[quote name='Calamityuponthee']Two Worlds didn't get much hype. Months before game release in the US everyone knew the game had issues, and it didn't help southpeak didn't say a word to anyone.[/QUOTE]


before that, it was dubbed "the oblivion killer" :lol:
 
[quote name='rajchakrabarti']Are companies paying off video game reviewers ?[/quote]
Not the big guys (IGN, GameSpot, 1up...). It wouldn't be worth it. They need your trust if you're ever going to believe them. They really go to legths to let you know that they aren't getting payed off. They don't go on publisher payed junkits and whenever a freelancer does they'll usually make mention of it. Although things like the IGN/Prey story still happen, but nobody is getting payed off.

It seems any game with a lot of hype will get a killer review...

metriod.. bioshock... halo 3...

Not to say they are bad games, but the reviews are making them like the best thing since sliced bread.

Its like any game with a lot of backing and marketing is guarenteed a 9.5
Click to expand...
These games are getting a lot of hype because gamers are excited about them. You may have noticed that as Lair came closer to release, less and less game critics where talking about it, and it turned out to be a disappointment.

But games like Metroid and Halo are proven games and the excitement about them can snowball as gamers want to know more about the games and sites write more about them and then even more gamers get excited and, in the case of Halo 3, the mainstream press sees that there's something big coming and they write about it which just creates more excitement.
 
[quote name='rajchakrabarti']Are companies paying off video game reviewers ? It seems any game with a lot of hype will get a killer review...

metriod.. bioshock... halo 3...

Not to say they are bad games, but the reviews are making them like the best thing since sliced bread.

Its like any game with a lot of backing and marketing is guarenteed a 9.5


eh just my 2 cents.[/QUOTE]

These games also tend to have higher budgets and more development time.

Even though game sites/magazines to receive incentives such as review copies, ad revenue and various PR, even if they don't get paid off for reviews it seems like a good portion of the online gaming community freaks out whenever a well hyped game that they are following gets anything less than a 9.9.
 
[quote name='Apossum']before that, it was dubbed "the oblivion killer" :lol:[/QUOTE]

The only thing it killed was my desire to play the game.

I only beat it out of spite, I finished the main quest in 8 hours. Then I traded it for Okami and TR Anniversary.
 
[quote name='richbastard']Its obvious microsoft has a lot of this guys under the pay roll.
like why you see so many internet bias againts Sony ?
microsoft corruption, its easy to get a small town loser with life spending all of his time in front a PC and make a popular gaming blog and boom! like the likes or joystiq,kotaku,gismodo and websites like 1up or gamestop always looking for anything negative to post againts Sony
ect. they are all just a bunch of corrupt bastards.[/QUOTE]:roll:

I really hope you're joking.
 
[quote name='Liquid 2']:roll:

I really hope you're joking.[/QUOTE]

You clearly haven't read enough of his other posts (don't worry, you're not missing anything worthwhile).
 
[quote name='rajchakrabarti']Are companies paying off video game reviewers ? It seems any game with a lot of hype will get a killer review...

metriod.. bioshock... halo 3...

Not to say they are bad games, but the reviews are making them like the best thing since sliced bread.

Its like any game with a lot of backing and marketing is guarenteed a 9.5


eh just my 2 cents.[/QUOTE]
As a game journalist for the past 8 years, I get sick of this little rumor. It's often "backed" by incorrect theories pawned off as near-facts.

Yes, there are perks to the job -- free games, sometimes interesting events, etc. -- but that's the same with all media, and most others are far more glamorous. I am not, nor have I ever gotten rich off this job. I rent an apartment, drive a used car, and bitch about gas prices and taxes like everyone else.

Some reviewers may get taken in by the hype, but so does everybody. Look at most Metacritic user scores: They're commonly cumulatively higher than the average critic scores of a game. Of course, you have people giving 10s because of pity or zeros out of spite. At least you don't see that in "professional" journalists.

Also, believe it or not, reviewing games isn't that easy. Assigning one number/letter/thumb-position to this massive piece of media with 100s of development hours and infinite aspects isn't an exact science. We do the best we can. Sometimes, people mess up.

But then again, everyone has an opinion. Nobody has the right to say someone else's opinion is wrong, and accusing them of being paid off or whatever because their opinion differs is a little conceited in my opinion.
 
[quote name='SpreadTheWord']Not the big guys (IGN, GameSpot, 1up...). It wouldn't be worth it. They need your trust if you're ever going to believe them. They really go to legths to let you know that they aren't getting payed off. They don't go on publisher payed junkits and whenever a freelancer does they'll usually make mention of it. Although things like the IGN/Prey story still happen, but nobody is getting payed off.[/QUOTE]
Not to pick on you, SpreadTheWord, but what junkets have you been to? IGN/GameSpot/Ziff Davis (EGM, 1-Up, etc.) guys make up the majority of press events, and the majority of them received flight/lodging accommodations to attend. And by the way, freelancers like me make a living being paid by the very "big guys" you mentioned!

Basically, if you're rubbing in the fact that you got to attend a junket, you probably shouldn't have been invited (there are exceptions, but awesome junkets like dogfighting in real planes have gone the way of the dodo). It's like my philosophy on E3: The people who were screaming for t-shirts and diving for shwag shouldn't have been admitted and allowed to crowd the halls.

Getting taken somewhere isn't as big of a perk as some think. When I'm in Vegas seeing some game's demo, it's time I'm not at home working out or paying bills, or working on some other work-related project, or spending time with my wife. That can get old sometimes and makes some people grumpy, so it's only natural publishers would try to make the experience as pleasant as possible. Pissy writers write pissy stories.
 
[quote name='Scorch']Driv3r? Two Worlds? Lair? The Bouncer? State of Emergency?[/QUOTE]
Exactly.

Most games that have ridiculous hype wind up getting bad / lukewarm reviews.

But, -> gasp
 
Strange, I was just reading a letter in EGM's november issue about this. The guy was bitching to EGM about hyping Lair then panning it when it got reviewed. Basically their response was that sometimes until you play the whole game, you don't pick up on a lot of stuff that is completely broken compared to just playing a demo unit for 30 minutes at E3.
 
hyped up games are usually hyped up because either it's a sequel to an excellent game or the game just looks really promising. recent sequels that felt extremely built up: oblivion, FFXII and of course halo 3, all which had previous games that validated the hype.

bioshock and god of war are two that come to mind that didn't have a direct predecessor but garnered their buzz by looking amazing.

of course there are games that don't live up to the hype, but if a game is getting a lot of press and is generating excitement in the community.. it's going to be good.
 
[quote name='tangytangerine']Strange, I was just reading a letter in EGM's november issue about this. The guy was bitching to EGM about hyping Lair then panning it when it got reviewed. Basically their response was that sometimes until you play the whole game, you don't pick up on a lot of stuff that is completely broken compared to just playing a demo unit for 30 minutes at E3.[/QUOTE]
When a game hasn't come out yet, as a lover of the medium, you kind of have to give it the benefit of the doubt -- especially if you haven't actually played it. Movies, TV shows, and albums can seem really promising, too, and may falter in the final, retail product. That's one reason I try not to play many demos -- things can change between now and then (when it's released).
 
[quote name='rajchakrabarti']Are companies paying off video game reviewers ? It seems any game with a lot of hype will get a killer review...

metriod.. bioshock... halo 3...

Not to say they are bad games, but the reviews are making them like the best thing since sliced bread.

Its like any game with a lot of backing and marketing is guarenteed a 9.5


eh just my 2 cents.[/quote]

I think you're forgetting that this is the fall season, a large majority of the highly anticipated, highly hyped, and high production cost games come out now.

It's only natural for a number of them to get good reviews.
 
[quote name='ViolentLee']Not to pick on you, SpreadTheWord, but what junkets have you been to? IGN/GameSpot/Ziff Davis (EGM, 1-Up, etc.) guys make up the majority of press events, and the majority of them received flight/lodging accommodations to attend. And by the way, freelancers like me make a living being paid by the very "big guys" you mentioned!

Basically, if you're rubbing in the fact that you got to attend a junket, you probably shouldn't have been invited (there are exceptions, but awesome junkets like dogfighting in real planes have gone the way of the dodo). It's like my philosophy on E3: The people who were screaming for t-shirts and diving for shwag shouldn't have been admitted and allowed to crowd the halls.

Getting taken somewhere isn't as big of a perk as some think. When I'm in Vegas seeing some game's demo, it's time I'm not at home working out or paying bills, or working on some other work-related project, or spending time with my wife. That can get old sometimes and makes some people grumpy, so it's only natural publishers would try to make the experience as pleasant as possible. Pissy writers write pissy stories.[/quote]

I've heard from GFW (a part of Ziff Davis) that when they get offers to go places and see games that don't make any sense (like "Come to Africa and go on a safari and get to see Fallout 2!") then they'll turn it down. But in some cases like where the makers of Stalker put on a tour of Chernobyl they had a freelancer go because they felt like it would be worth it.

I'm getting this from some GFW podcasts where they've talking about this subject and a podcast that Jeff Green (GFW EIC) did with Gamers with Jobs. But who knows, I could have heard stuff wrong.
 
well when i first posted.. i didn't particulary mean that sites are getting paid off.. but what was posted earlier about how the higher production games come out in the fall.... thus the higher scores... makes some sense in why these games get a good rating.

Obviously there are flops....but i think franchise names get a little benifit of the doubt.
 
I feel a lot of stuff gets over-rated lately to cater to fanboys. It seems like you're not allowed to say negative things in reviews anymore, even if it's true.

Zelda: Twilight Princess, Metroid Prime 3, Halo 3, and Bioshock all were over-rated. Especially Zelda and Halo.
 
[quote name='SpreadTheWord']I've heard from GFW (a part of Ziff Davis) that when they get offers to go places and see games that don't make any sense (like "Come to Africa and go on a safari and get to see Fallout 2!") then they'll turn it down. But in some cases like where the makers of Stalker put on a tour of Chernobyl they had a freelancer go because they felt like it would be worth it.

I'm getting this from some GFW podcasts where they've talking about this subject and a podcast that Jeff Green (GFW EIC) did with Gamers with Jobs. But who knows, I could have heard stuff wrong.[/QUOTE]
Ziff did have a policy (I don't know if it's still in effect) of not letting companies fly them in and put them up in hotels. Other places have tried that, too. I personally don't see the point. Besides, gaming outlet budgets aren't what they used to be. I don't see the harm in -- as I said -- being treated nice when you're away from home/family to see some company's game. I guess the philosophy is, if it's worthy enough to pay to see, then it's worthy to go to.

Probably the most extravagant event I ever went to actually helped my understanding of the game. For a well-known flight-game series, the company took us to Air Combat USA, where retired fighter pilots take novices up in the air, give them the stick, and let them dogfight for real. It was not only one of the coolest things I've ever done, it really helped you grasp how to fly and thus compare the real thing with not only their game but other flight games.

I think companies are usually pretty good about making the events relate to the games: Haunted house tour for Fatal Frame, go to WrestleMania for WWE games, uzi training for Time Crisis/Dead to Rights 1, desert racing for Smuggler's Run, etc.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top