Hey kids! It's June 11, and that means that the non-disclosure agreement I had to sign when I reviewed
Metal Gear Solid 4 has now expired. So let's talk about that.
Or rather, let's not. I'm sick of this topic already... and I haven't even talked about it. There's been an awful lot of noise on the subject because of the MGS4
review embargoes story by Stephen Totilo. On one hand, I can't complain about the fresh discussion regarding review integrity this has sparked; on the other, the signal-to-noise ratio about the MGS4 embargo as it relates to EGM's most recent issue is distressingly low. Our MGS4 review goes up tomorrow, and I would rather any discussion of the review to focus on the merits of the game or on the article rather than being drowned out by babble about the circumstances surrounding its print companion. Thus, we nip that babble in the bud today.
In case you've somehow missed it -- not likely, if you've been anywhere near the Internet's gaming venues over the past few weeks -- EGM's most recent issue doesn't include a review of MGS4. Instead, a five-page roundtable on the game concludes the magazine's review section, prefaced by a disclaimer about how we chose not to review the game because we weren't satisfied by some of Konami's terms. Unfortunately, this has led to a few widespread misunderstandings which, thanks to the NDA, we couldn't really debunk until now. Two weeks is a long time in the Internet's echo chamber...plenty of time for people to assume this situation confirms their personal biases. Please allow me to burst a few bubbles with some factual statements:
- We aren't boycotting the game. EGM will be reviewing MGS4 in the next issue.
- Konami is not a bunch of evil Nazi monsters.
- EGM wasn't grandstanding to draw attention to itself.
Disappointed yet? Sorry! Here's the reality of the situation.
Andrew,
Matt, and I went down to LA to review the game early in May. EGM had been working with Konami for a few weeks to get the game into the current issue, and they were even nice enough to allow us to come in a day earlier than the rest of the press to accommodate our looming deadline. We had three days to review the game and, coincidentally, three days before our issue had to ship. Not the best timing, but for a game this big you suck it up and deal with the distress. Konami's reps mentioned a few times that we'd need to sign a non-disclosure agreement before we left -- no big deal, as NDAs are standard when it comes to large releases, and it's not like we're in the habit of spoiling games for people anyway.
Unfortunately, the NDA was supposed to have been ready day one, which would have been fine. Our practice when presented with NDAs is to run them by the legal department first. But they didn't give us our NDAs on the first day. Or the second. Instead, they presented them to us at the literal last moment -- I was watching the game's closing credits scroll past -- and made it clear that we wouldn't be leaving until we signed them. This was a problem, as we had a plane to catch and a magazine to ship within the next few hours, which didn't leave time for running things by legal. So, despite some misgivings, we signed. We didn't really leave us a choice.
Afterwards, we contacted 1UP HQ and realized the problems that we'd signed ourselves into. For instance, there was a general disagreement on the embargo date, which apparently wasn't quite what had been settled on in advance. Or something -- I leave the review haggling to people with a higher tolerance for irritation, so I'm a little fuzzy on the details. Rather, we review grunts began to feel heartburn about some of the specifics of the contract. We were OK with not spilling info on the licensed products, because what respectable reviewer is going to let the presence of an iPod or an obscure Japanese swimsuit model affect their review score? (Never mind that Kojima himself spilled the beans on every single one of these items a few days later at a press conference anyway.) The bit about not mentioning install times wasn't really a big deal, because nitpicking minor technical necessities isn't our style. And the request not to spoil plot specifics was completely unneeded, because, well, we're not assholes.
What we weren't so happy with was the restriction on discussing the length of the game's cutscenes. The wording of the line item was nebulous: Did it mean the total time of all cutscenes? The specific length of individual sequences? Or simply the general proportion of cutscene to action? Far from being a minor technicality, this is an issue that cuts right to the heart of the biggest criticisms against the Metal Gear series. By preventing us from addressing this aspect of the game, Konami was tying our hands. Regardless of embargo dates, being hampered from talking about something that for many gamers is a make-or-break issue was an unacceptable compromise.
The obvious solution would have been to simply drop the MGS4 review for the issue and wait until the next. Unfortunately, there was that "hard deadline" concern that print publications have to deal with. We had all of a few hours to fill the five pages allocated to the review. Five pages of text to be written and copy-edited and laid out and proofed and corrected? Yeah, not happening.
There was also the matter of the issue's polybag (the foil wrapper that protects the magazine on newsstands), which we have to print up a week or two in advance of the magazine deadline. It promised "the final word on MGS4," meaning we were obligated to have something in the issue.
Had we more time, had the polybag not already been printed, we would have filled those five pages with something totally different and simply shrugged off the entire thing. But the timing bit us in the ass, and we had to settle for a review roundtable as Milky got on the phone and worked out a new arrangement with Konami. Our initial roundtable discussed too much of the game for their liking, though, so we had to slap together a
second roundtable while the plane back was boarding. That the issue somehow made it to press on time is a testament to the entire team's ability to drop everything and make things work in the worst circumstances...but our imperfect solution to a big problem has led to an awful lot of noise and speculation and downright falsehood being spread around.
Anyway, that's the not-at-all-sordid reality of the situation. There's definitely been some frustration on our end (and likely on Konami's, once the Internet started to leap to conclusions), but we're all grown-ups and have learned a lesson or two, sitcom-style. And none of this affects our feelings about MGS4 itself. (We like it, in case you were wondering.)
So, let's all put this behind us and get on with discussing the game for its actual merits or failings, shall we?
ing time. And for what? Like 3 milliseconds faster than the 360 version? For the amount of space & time the installation took up, I should never see another load screen or pause in action in the game.
k
