EGM Postpones Review of MGS4 Because Konami Imposed "Limitations"

Good move by EGM. I don't care how big of a game this is, if anything gets out that negatively impacts your credibility as a publisher, that is far worse than refusing to falsely cover a large story.

If anything, this just boosts EGM's credibility.
 
Hmm. I didn't even notice that. I had no interest in the game and didn't even look at the review. As for EGM. I'm all for it. I really am glad that those guys hve been putting these companies on notice with stuff like that. I was glad Hsu put Midway on blast about a year ago and I love the fact that they not only say things like that but they legitimately publish that in their magazines so they can't run from their comments when questioned about it. 2 kudos to EGM.
 
Whaat?
Ugh.
Good for them, though. This is why I rather go to forums and just read what other people are saying about the game, you just never know if a review has been boasted...just because..

:applause: for EGM
 
I took that to mean that they weren't allowed to have a full review before the release of the game. So they decided to have a "discussion" this month to whet our appetites and then they will have full reviews next month.

[quote name='mtxbass1']People still read EGM?[/quote]

Of course. Where have you been living? It's arguably the best, most informative gaming publication available. And the 1up podcast is second only to the CAGcast. ;)
 
I noticed that when I read the issue. I still read it. I don't know, I've had a subscription since middle school...so that'd be 8 years. I still enjoy reading it even though I already know most of the information online.

Still find it more enjoyable than the other gaming magazines out there (though I do remember reading a friends copy of Game Informer and it seemed to have gotten better from the last time I had a subscription)
 
EGM is pretty petty magazine company now. Someone says something bad about their reviews so they hammer all the big releases that come out afterwards. If a company doesnt give them a game to review until close to release date they get all pissy and give it a crap review with little more reason then "gameplay is repetitive."

EGM hasnt been the best gaming magazine in years. Now its a pamphlet full of ads, stupid columns by Sean "Its okay that Im racist because Im dating a black girl" Baby, and sad rants about how game companies get mad when they bash a good game. I wish they would grow up and just do their job, magazines have a hard enough time surviving now without being a bunch of babies.
 
[quote name='CheapyD']EGM Refuse To Review MGS4 Because Konami Imposed "Limitations"
Your thoughts?[/quote]I think that picture of Marcus that's on the cover is awesome.


I don't have a problem with them not reviewing the game for this reason. The problem I have is that Gaming Media has in the past given weighted reviews, influenced by advertising revenue. Not all the mags, not all reviews, not all the time. But the first thing I thought of when reading this was that I'd like the editors to be free to be completely unbiased with all reviews. Which is a hard thing to do because you have to pay your bills, but still it was my initial reaction.
 
6 pages of content with no review scores from two of the three reviewers doesn't sound like not doing a review to me. If they had no coverage then yes, that'd rule. That would of been a better message towards konami. That or an entire page that shows a middle finger with the subtitle (fuck you konami).
 
I wonder if the GameSpot thing a few months ago started something. If this is the beginning of the end of bought review scores, I'm all for it. EGM gets 15 classy points in my book.
 
Another big thumbs up to EGM. This is why I have kept my subscription. They're the only professional review source I trust 100% to be unbiased by publishers, advertisers etc.

Glad to see they're sticking to their guns under Mielke, I was slightly worried things would change with Hsu's departure (i.e. perhaps he left as the publisher didn't want the mag to take such a hard stance and lose advertisers etc).
 
They pretty much reviewed it; just didn't give it a score. They just didn't do an actual review because they weren't allowed to discuss plot details or any surprises in the game. Konami has always been secretive about MGS2. Does no one remember the Raiden surprise in MGS2.
Konami did impose restrictions on what reviewers could talk about but most of those are probably about plot.

If EGM had actually decided not to review maybe I would have sided with them. Since they chose to have large "discussion" they just seem to be doing it for attention.
 
[quote name='mrlokievil']They pretty much reviewed it; just didn't give it a score. They just didn't do an actual review because they weren't allowed to discuss plot details or any surprises in the game. Konami has always been secretive about MGS2. Does no one remember the Raiden surprise in MGS2.
Konami did impose restrictions on what reviewers could talk about but most of those are probably about plot.

If EGM had actually decided not to review maybe I would have sided with them. Since they chose to have large "discussion" they just seem to be doing it for attention.[/QUOTE]

Its not about the plot or surprises. EGM even said in the "final preview" that they would never spoil the plot of a game like MGS in a review. Instead, the limitations included not talking about the length of movies, the space needed to install the game to the HDD, and lots of other stuff.
 
They're putting up a stand, but they're not retarded. MGS is a huge franchise, and to not at least cover the game would have pissed off a lot of readers.

No readers = No EGM > Quit yer bitchin'.
 
[quote name='Maklershed']I took that to mean that they weren't allowed to have a full review before the release of the game. So they decided to have a "discussion" this month to whet our appetites and then they will have full reviews next month.[/QUOTE]

This. Before everyone assumes "limitations" means "nothing less than B+ for score, please," it might just as well mean "NO talking about plot points until June 12" or whatever. Not necessarily the Big Bad Publisher throwing its weight around with the Lil' Principled Magazine, though we sure do like that narrative.
 
[quote name='thorbahn3']6 pages of content with no review scores from two of the three reviewers doesn't sound like not doing a review to me.[/quote]Did they mention the HD install(s) or cut scene length?
 
EGM played by konami's rules in this issue, and because they did so, they didn't "review" the game or give it a score. There will be a review down the line, probably next month, with scores, when they're able to get the game at retail and play through it on their own terms.

The review limitations have to do with the exclusive, invite only playthrough at Konami's ritzy resort in Japan. (Which was not a final version, but it was close) Any other magazine you see a review of the game in right now likely reviewed based on that event and accepted konami's rules about the 90 min cutscenes and the install.

EGM probably did the best they could with this situation, but the "final preview" should have gone somewhere else than the reviews section.
 
In a list of the 1,000 best ways to stick it to Konami for putting restrictions on the reviews, I've got to believe writing 6 pages without talking about the banned subjects and then not scoring it has to fall somewhere in the 900's.

EGM is on the brink of death. You'd think they'd have more balls. What do they have to lose by either not talking about the game at all or completely throwing the restrictions in Konami's face?
 
I bet they still give it an A.

I don't see why Konami is worried, the hardcore fans will still eat this up regardless of the 7 minute install or lengthy cutscenes. Hell, I went through a 7 minute install twice for GTA4 (first was corrupted). As long as I can pause or save before cutscenes, I'm good to go and I'm sure most gamers will agree with me.
 
They still followed the rules even if they didn't score the game. There's no way EGM can afford to piss off Konami's PR folks.

Let's face it, if they refused to cover Metal Gear Solid 4 because of the restritions people would applaud them for standing up to Konami, but then the same people would just go somewhere else for coverage of the game.
 
7 minutes!? That's all? 7 measley minutes? Big deal! How is THAT one of the things that is going to detract from this game? Are gamers in 2008 so wired up and riddled with ADD that they can't handle a 7 minute long installation process?
 
This isn't going to do anything really for either sides. Its not like MGS4 won't be selling itself based on name alone. Its selling PS3s too. People won't see this and say "now I must pick up EGM to see how they didn't review MGS4".

Magazine sales have been declining in general anyway. How many times have you read a magazine where the article/section says for more to go xmagazine.com? There isn't enough space and anything exclusive makes it way onto the internet anyway.
 
[quote name='VanillaGorilla']7 minutes!? That's all? 7 measley minutes? Big deal! How is THAT one of the things that is going to detract from this game? Are gamers in 2008 so wired up and riddled with ADD that they can't handle a 7 minute long installation process?[/QUOTE]

I was just guessing on the 7 minutes based on GTA4, HSG, VF5, etc...none had more than a 7 minute load, so I cant imagine it has more than 5-10 minutes.
 
Am I naive to think this has less to do with reviewers "exposing" the cut scene lengths and the install, and more to do with Konami being incredibly cautious about not wanting the story to be spoiled in any possible way?
 
I think EGM are more covering their asses than "standing up" to Konami.

They're probably paranoid about getting tarnished with the same brush as Gamespot when it comes to people unduly influencing their review scores.

EDIT - Or maybe they just think the Konami PR person is a nob, who knows ?
 
[quote name='VanillaGorilla']Am I naive to think this has less to do with reviewers "exposing" the cut scene lengths and the install, and more to do with Konami being incredibly cautious about not wanting the story to be spoiled in any possible way?[/QUOTE]

Exactly...the cutscene rumor has been around for weeks and most large PS3 games (and some small) have installs now, so who knows.
 
I find it baffling how Konami thought installation time or cutscene length would deter from the review. I think most people over inflate the install times as a negative. If you are a fan of MGS are you really not going to play the game because of install time? The cutscene lengths may also be long but its commonplace in the series...so what the hell is the big deal? All these "issues" usually mean nothing in the end.

Even if you love or hate EGM they did the right thing...but I agree they should have boycotted it completely.
 
As long as the install time isn't as long as DMC4's (seriously, how is that 22 minutes?) or GT5P disc (I heard 40 minutes), I'm sure people will be fine with it.

Hopefully we see EGM stand up to to "limitations" put on by other games being reviewed. Mainly every single one of them. All publishers ask for limitations on reviews, not just Konami.
 
Does this game even need a review? Just title it 'the only reason to get a PS3 if you don't already have one' and move on. It doesn't even look like EGM took any of the liberties of not giving the game a score and just "forgot" to throw a grade at the end of it.

I don't think they need to talk about the story because most of us know what to expect from Kojima. Which is to say that there is going to be a lot of really crazy shit going down throughout the game and somewhere in it some loose ends are going to be tied up... then Snake kills himself (possibly after doing something slightly homo erotic).

Buy, beat, sell.
 
I was skimming my magazine last night and thought it was odd that there was no grade for it. I really have no problem if they do away with all the scores/grades and actually make people read the review.
 
[quote name='GuilewasNK']I was skimming my magazine last night and thought it was odd that there was no grade for it. I really have no problem if they do away with all the scores/grades and actually make people read the review.[/QUOTE]
This.
 
It's new on consoles. We're used to just popping in and playing with little or no wait time. Installs are one of many things, albeit a small thing,that always turned me off from PC gaming.
 
It's cool that they let people know about the situation, but that just reinforces the notion that game journalists are weak in the face of publisher demands. The proper way to handle it would be to print the review anyway and start a complete media shitstorm if Konami tried to cut them off.

I'm curious about whether this happens to book and movie reviewers as well. Could a publisher or studio afford to cut off or restrict prominent outlets?
 
[quote name='Frogurt.man']Why do people complain about the PS3 installs??? It took me 2 hours to install Company of Heroes Opposing Fronts!![/quote]Age of Conan install + patches

LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL
 
[quote name='mrelusive']Age of Conan install + patches

LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL[/QUOTE]

And apparently, it's still broken as shit!
 
[quote name='Frogurt.man']Why do people complain about the PS3 installs??? It took me 2 hours to install Company of Heroes Opposing Fronts!![/quote]

What worries me is if they start doing it on the 360. It's not really a problem for PS3 owners as they can upgrade the HD easy enough.

But I've got just less than 10 gb left on my 360 HD, game installs I do not need.
 
It's an interesting gesture, but the fact that they decided to print five pages about the game instead of a typical review (aren't they usually two pages tops?) sort of cancels it out, especially if they still didn't touch any of the forbidden topics.

That said, the discussion format sounds much better than a typical magazine/Website review. Based on that, plus the game weapons and Nintendo features that GameSetWatch mentioned, I may actually go pick up a copy of the issue.
 
[quote name='mykevermin']They pretty much reviewed it without giving it a letter grade.

What a way to stand up to the man![/quote]

This. They got all high and mighty about integrity and then basically reviewed it with Konami's restrictions, anyway. They're full of shit.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top