Not as ugly as a slaughterhouse :)

sixonedoesitall

Rather old discussion... if you get "games" out of the context, and put... "movies" for instance.

I'm pretty shure the exact same things happened there, and maybe still happens.

Games should have a fair appraisal, but that doesn't mean people should be allowed to use dirty tactics to force game journalists to do so.

Also, unfortunately, blood, sweat and 100 hours of weekly work doesn't make a game good.

It also isn't a requirement for a good game, as great planning and creativity can surpass such hardships.

Games are risky business, it's like music, a painting, or a movie... it's art. So, even if the developer made everything for it to be perfect, and he does love the game like his own son, the people who'll play it might not like it so much.

But yeah, every game, if reviewed, should have a decent testing before a final score is given.

It's understandable that today, there are just too many games being made out there, so some publications might not be able to test all of them... but it's better to not publish a review and score from a game not tested, than publish some harsh review on a game that was only superficially tested.

There's also the issue of expectations, game sizes and the base of comparison for the scores.
The eternal conflict between having a easy to read and understand score, versus all the complexities of judging a variable media with sometimes hundreds of factors such as games.

How much a point is worth? What makes a game loose points?
It's all subjective. So yeah, game reviewers must always try to be fair. But game developers also have to understand the game reviewer's side.

Bokusatsu_Tenshi

I've actually been on both sides (so not so much PR as something else), and I have to say that reviewing games, while it will influence my purchase, is a bit of a joke. Looking around, you'll find that the industry average is a 70 or so. Most critics, or at least myself, are rather loose is their reviews of the games - going from a top down approach (loving everything then finding faults). Whereas you have more 'gimmicky' critics (hating from the bottom up) that may have fun with their reviews, but are bringing up some good points. Now if we can just get somewhere in-between, or be more like Edge magazine, then the world would be better, and video games, too.

As video games become more of an art/maturing, so do our reviews. But I guess it just reflects the nature of the consumer/reader of reviews.

Or maybe I'm just full of it.

thespyderboy

@Acebuckeye13: I think that had more to do with the fact that Vakero was complaining about. They did give Halo 3 a perfect score. They go and give brutal scores to tons of games, but then Halo 3 waltzes in, and they drop all of their pretenses of being "The brutally honest reviewers" and start gushing over the game due to the hype and money.

I think that kind of attitude just infuriates consumers.
Nobody gets mad at a prostitute for sucking cock for cash. However, if a politician who preaches moral superiority does it, it gets people rather pissed.

Ad-hominem

@Ajey:...you're added. Six times.

Thorax

@VakeroRokero: Keep in mind, however, that we, the consumer, can be vicous too. Remember all those people who screamed bloody murder when edge gave MGS4 a 8 out of 10.

Acebuckeye13

Just because a game is overhyped, does not make it a good game... BUT that doesn't mean it's a bad game either. Halo3, as overhyped as it was, is still a good game whether you hate it or not. Just because it isn't your cup of tea, doesn't mean the tea isn't any good.

Ajey

@Pornosaur: Can you say "Driv3r"? Bad games still get good reviews these days, if they are hyped enough and things like 'exclusives' are thrown around.

Treesus

That's why EGM, even with the absence of Hsu, is the only gaming magazine I really read. They called out the companies that where black balling them. I haven't seen another publication have with the balls to do that.

Thorax

So does Shoe run Sore Thumbs?

GreyFoxV1

Any time money is involved, dignity is the first thing that goes out the window. That's why Halo 3 got reviews like if God had written the code.

VakeroRokero

I was frtunat to find this site from the beggining and yes, it is a very good insight into th industry. Great Stuff!

Mucudadada

Seems like this is all a little too late to the party. Maybe 15 years ago when print was you're only option of getting a game "review". Way too much information out there now for a publisher to into cahoots with a web or print based reviewer to really shine a turd game.

Pornosaur

This is why Kotaku can't have a spell checker or any kind of checker.

AndroidKing

I'll start considering removing the air-quotes from around journalist when the gaming press actually begins to ask hard questions in interviews instead of just lobbing items at a publisher / developer that came straight off their latest press release.

I'm not even looking for hard hitting investigative journalism, just something that asks a few pointed questions where the interviewer has done some homework beforehand.

qhue

Technology has rendered reviews irrelevent. If a blind prerelease review can persuade you to spend sixty dollars on a game, you're either not a very discriminating consumer, or you were probably predisposed to the title in question. It is so simple to find enough information to make an intelligent decision-- and for me, little of that information is based on anything but my own critical thought.

Ultimately, qualitative game journalism is ridiculous-- we can certainly embrace quality investigative stories, first look impressions, event coverage of things like PAX and TGS-- but review journalism is utterly foolish. Most review outlets have a bent-- strong on some genres or publishers, short on some works... ever notice the "reviewlets" at the end of the review section in your favorite game rag? They don't offer more than a cursory note about whole markets-- there is no responsibility to it... understandably, reviewers (almost to a man) gotta eat, too-- and they have a vested interest in carrying a certain weight with both their peculiar audience and the publishers. We have no critical language for gaming, and the journalists attend to a greater responsibility to self-preservation than to the gamers. Is it any wonder it doesn't work?

wild homes abides!

Considering my efforts to break into game journalism, I'm intensly interested in this!

Thanks, Mike!

Atheist Jew

@thespyderboy: I've also been on both sides and I basically agree. Game writing is a joke. Game publishing is serious business. If writers and editors - present company excluded, of course - took their jobs half as seriously as the publishers did, then there frankly would not be any problems with payola or integrity. Guys like Dan Hsu are not the norm in the gaming press - if they were, then it wouldn't even be necessary to make a big stink about these issues because the way reviews were written would work totally differently.

Publishers do what they do with the press because a) they do genuinely believe in their games and want to get them the best reviews possible, and b) they know they can get away with it. If they didn't think they could get away with threats, with payoffs, with all these other things, then they wouldn't do it. But they know the press is all too willing to roll over for nothing more than an exclusive, or for a paid trip to New York, or whatever.

As a former reviewer, I understand the temptations, and I know the mentality of most reviewers. They're party people for the most part; they're by and large not 1950's style "journalists" all hunched over their laptops late at night trying to submit a 2,000 word investigative piece before the morning deadline that they've worked on for months day in and day out. They just don't have that level of discipline, and neither do the publications that they work for.

I also understand the motives of the PR departments at game publishers. Their entire reason for existence is to get the best press possible, so how can you fault them? They're going to push it as far as they can. It's up to the writers on the other end to say "enough!"

badasscat

"there aren't that many good game journalists"

He's not only right, he's understating the issue.

Calhoun

I believe that the "living off the blood sweat and tears of creative people" etc statement can be applied to any branch of a game, be it within the development team, a game being just plain cancelled before release. One incident comes to mind, I was at a friend's watching the Halo 3 behind the scenes, and someone mentioned having worked hours and hours on concept art, and bringing it to their boss only to have them say "Do it over". They promptly went back to their desk, cried a little and continued on.

A game journalist might spend a few hours writing a review or feature about a game that had thousands of hours poured into it, but again, that works for any group that reviews, interviews and just takes a look at anything. I'm sure that there are plenty of movies that critics rated terrible, and the directors, actors and the like poured more then enough time into the movie.

As long as there is media in any form, there will be critics, and people who hate those critics for doing their job.

Talleh

I have to agree. There aren't a lot of good game journalists out there when you consider the average score of some of really bad games out there (Gears of War) in connection to just how much advertising money they use.

WittyUserName

@Treesus: Didn't touch it with a ten foot pole my friend. I guess I meant to convey everyone is so connected now that those you share similar interests with will let you in on whether a game is worthy or not. Hmmm social reviewing I guess.

Pornosaur

All of this is precisely why we in the industry need more universally accepted standards and, in a way, stars. If you compare games to movies, the two very distinct factors you'll find is anyone willing to work in movies will basically need to go to one city, and make a name for himself to the general public.

In games, it's the contrary. You can leave any studio and land a job at a few different places within a matter of days, and your name is never going to be on the cover of the game unless you're one of the very very few stars.

What it provides is the huge hype for very few titles and absolutely nothing for the whole rest, which in turn is why publishers have to act that way to get the word out. It's all about visibility on the market, and if you miss that, that's not just 1 or 2 unsold copies.

For some reason we gamers have come to expect that the next ICO team game will be great. The same way that we also expect any MGS game to be exceptional.

In movies, people will or won't go see a movie based on the actor on the cover. Why can't we get the same thing? Because we developers don't have a union protecting and earning our rights like the movie industry does. Publishers want to establish their brand, certainly not a guy's name as a brand.

Once you get that, you'll be able to follow a developer's carrier, and relate to his past games to know what he's done. The same way you may have loved an actor in his previous movie and will go see his next one because of that.

Shift that drive from the license to the developer (and not the publisher) and you'll go a long way in educating the general public.

Furyo

@Furyo: You have got to be kidding.

The movie industry and the game industry are already alike in that regard.

We all know Will Wright's name, but he isn't the sole programer, designer, anything regarding his games.

Just like the movie industry, the huge amount of work is done in the background by a multitude of talent people.

Unlike the movie industry, having a huge name is not a guarantee of success. Some actors can save an otherwise poorly done movie, but one big name game designer cannot wave a magic wand and make the shoddy frame rate or game crashing bugs disappear.

Placing that kind of expectation upon individuals instead of whole teams could lead to substandard hiring just as long as enough money is tossed to the "big names".

It didn't make Fable great. It didn't make Too Human great. And to hear some of the "Metal Gear Solid 4 is my favorite movie" comments, it didn't make MGS great either.

In the end, Star Power can only hurt games. Not help.

If you need reference material, just remember that John Romero is going to make you his bitch. Suck it down.

WittyUserName

Look at game journalists at the press events. They dress like bums off the street.

If you can't be bothered to look professional, you can't be bothered to act professional.

Tyrannical

Engineers pour their blood, sweat, and tears into their work. No one thinks its acceptable for them to coerce people to hide the fact that a bridge was almost up to code.

I bet a ton of people worked extremely hard on Disaster Movie, but you don't give them points for just trying.

The only reason they get away with it in the games industry is rampant fanboyism and the fact that the games journalism industry can't be trusted.

Warskull

Really don't dig on the, "People who don't make the games shouldn't criticize them because they don't fully appreciate all the work that goes into it and they are leaches" trope. You know what? Most of your customers don't make games, either. The question isn't whether you worked hard. The question is whether the fruit of your labor is worth gamers' $60.

Dirk Dorkelson

Game publishers pay reviewers to give their games good reviews :Shock and awae: No not really, this shit's been happening for years, look at too human for a perfect example of what happens when other devlopers pay off everyone to give a certain game BAD reviews *COUGH COUGH*

masterhobbes

The whole gaming news industry on both sides is a joke. The PR people will do what it takes to promote their game and the "journalists" have about as much integrity as The National Enquirer or World Weekly News.

Any media chock full of yellow journalism can't (and shouldn't) be taken seriously.

toadwarrior

There are too many wannabe game journalists out there who can't write well. They don't do proper research. Most of them think writing a review is a contest to spew forth the most comical vitriol instead of forming a coherent and balanced assessment of a game's good and bad points. Present site generally excluded (except when devs are misquoted for sensational headlines...that drives me up a wall).

billnabors65

@Treesus: As the PR guy who actually handled DRIV3R, I assure you it did NOT get artificially high reviews here in the States (59% average).

In fact, I was very nearly fired for refusing to bribe (before) and punish (after) the press in the USA.

Truth is -- PR people who use tactics like this (pulling ads, offering pay-offs, etc) are lazy, cowardly and shameful. You always have the choice to stick to your ethics. Sure, you might get fired, but at least you won't be a douchebag.

PR people who use these tactics are typically the ones who love to talk about "journalistic ethics" when a bad preview or review comes in and they have marketing people halfway up their ass demanding some kind of primitive revenge, but they conveniently forget that ethics apply to public relations as well.

If you can't respect a press member's right to provide a subjective score or opinion -- which is what you are asking them for, after all -- then why should the press respect you?

Sorry - tangent - just wanted to point out that DRIV3r is a bad example here in the USA (maybe not so bad in EUR, but that was a whole different ball of wax at the time... ugh.

PR_Flak

@WittyUserName:

I agree with what you're saying when you start off with "we all know Will Wright...."

Who's that we you're talking about ? If you mean gamers then yes, if you mean the whole market the publishers are going after, I couldn't disagree more. No one knows Will Wright, no one knows David Jaffe, and no one knows Ken Levine.

If you talk to publishers, they'll tell you the "gamers" market is one they don't focus on because they know these guys will just ultimately always come back to games. They breathe and live by and with games, and know what they want without anyone having telling them what is or isn't good.

However when it comes to the general public, the guys Nintendo was so good at targetting and who will eventually move on to bigger and better things, these guys have no idea who the designer stars are in this industry and the continuity in good products people crave for relies on the franchises.

The problem with that is precisely that no one knows that hardly any dev team remains even close to identical over two different games and 4-5 years. So there is actually no certainty to have when it comes to games yet people EXPECT it to be true.

How many persons are going to purchase Need For Speed for their teenage boy "because he liked the last one", these are things you hear every time you walk into a general store and until the general public can follow individual developers' career like they can actors and directors, then you'll always end up disappointing your audience.

Furyo

I find it funny when people blow off all reviewers for such limited and illogical reasons.

Sure, some reviewers are paid off, and some can't write, and some like nuts on their fudge sundaes. But proclaiming that all reviewers are greedy corporate tools or retards with pens is like proclaiming that all women are for sex and making sandwiches.

And for those of you are saying that reviewers are corrupt because they gave a good review to a game that you thought was terrible...how in Satan's left testicle did you manage to wake up this morning and not strangle yourself putting on your own pants?

Switch0025

@PR_Flak: As the PR guy who actually handled DRIV3R, I assure you it did NOT get artificially high reviews here in the States (59% average).

Truth is -- PR people who use tactics like this (pulling ads, offering pay-offs, etc) are lazy, cowardly and shameful. You always have the choice to stick to your ethics. Sure, you might get fired, but at least you won't be a douchebag.

No offense, but you're obviously not cut out for PR. (Neither am I, so this is not as much of a criticism as it sounds.) The reason people get fired from PR is for not getting their games good PR. And that's exactly what you're talking about. That's the job of a PR department. If all you're going to get your games is an average of 59%, and you're not willing to do what it takes to get higher than that, then why should the company even bother having a PR department? Look at it from your employer's point of view.

I'm all for standing up for principles - I've quit jobs before where I felt I was being asked to compromise them. But you need to realize that the entire reason to even have a PR department is to get the company better press than it would without having a PR department. That doesn't just mean packing games up in boxes and shipping them out to publications - any production assistant can do that. The job of PR is to do whatever you can to get good press. If you're too principled to do it, then that's fine, but it means that field is probably not for you.

@Switch0025: I don't see anyone blowing off reviewers for "limited and illogical" reasons. Some of us have worked in the field, on both sides. We're not talking out our asses.

badasscat

@badasscat: Just because PR has a soul-sucking reputation doesn't mean it can't have its ethics as well. The PR person's job, as I see it, is to pitch the product and get it in the hands of people who will play it and write about it. If the game is a big steamy turd, the PR person shouldn't get in trouble because he failed to try to bribe the reviewer. A pig in a dress is still a pig, regardless of how the PR flak may try to spin it.

Dirk Dorkelson

@badasscat: "I don't see anyone blowing off reviewers for "limited and illogical" reasons. Some of us have worked in the field, on both sides. We're not talking out our asses."

Actually I said, "I find it funny when people blow off ALL reviewers for such limited and illogical reasons". "All" being the keyword there. I don't deny that SOME reviewers are as crooked as a bendy straw but that doesn't mean we need to attack ALL game reviews or reviewers with such "limited" proof. As for the "illogical" part, well, some were trying to assert that reviewers are corrupt just because they don't agree with their reviews; I've seen this same argument elsewhere and it's asinine. Sorry about the confusion.

Switch0025

@badasscat: "If you're too principled to do it, then that's fine, but it means that field is probably not for you."

It is possible, however to have principles AND do a great PR job. You actually have to be an accomplished PR person, is all.

The job of PR is to get good coverage, agree.

But that doesn't necessitate a "by any means necessary" tagline.

GOOD PR leads to good coverage. GOOD PR is being strategic and thoughtful. GOOD PR is finding, defining and pushing the right messages. GOOD PR is working with the media to find the right opportunities rather than trying to bend them to your will.

BAD PR is trying to accomplish the same things by bullying your way through. BAD PR is relying on marketing dollars to save your ass from your own failures.

Usually the PR people who say "Well, it's not my fault, after all, it's my JOB to do this" are usually formerly marketing people, currently scared of their marketing people or are just making excuses to justify their behavior.

I don't accept - and no one should - the suggestion that to be a successful PR person you need to have some kind of inherent tendency to be a slimy pig.

I know plenty of incredibly successful PR people in this industry who I've been working alongside for almost a decade who do not fit that lazy stereotype.

PR_Flak

@badasscat: It's not going to be such good PR if you bribe your game reviews higher (and to get good reviews for Driver, that would have to be some pretty ostentatious bribing) and get caught out, is it?

Sounds to me like the game review industry is corrupt as fuck on both sides... this is of course disgraceful, but unfortunately it's not really that much worse than 'mainstream' journalism. There are studies about the number of newspaper stories which are actually regurgitated company press releases, which is frankly a lot more worrying than a few bogus video game reviews.

quen