Dark Side of Gaming Industry

[Dark Drakan]

Going to post some articles here that are more to do with the darker side of the gaming industry and the controversies still going on today. Bringing to light some of the crappy and simply stupid business decisions taken by some companies and developers & bringing them to light.

Going to start it off with one that was brought to my attention last night regarding review bias and personal issues possibly reflecting game scores and how that could influence customers.

How far does reviewer personal bias really go? Do reviewers always take the time to get to know a game before settling on a score? Do reviewers know how much their scores can influence customers decisions to make a purchase of a game?

Recently had GameSpots Ashes of the Singularity review brought to my attention by Brad Wardell (Founder and CEO of Stardock) on Twitter. He had been pointing out the fact that their criticisms of the game start to seem rather harsh & confusing when you actually look through the details. He also goes on to point out that the reviewer had even blocked him on Twitter for some reason (possibly to do with GamerGate) some time BEFORE writing the review and followed it with a 4/10 score (one which Gamespot usually saves for games with fundamentally broken features).

Email from April 6th about his concerns about the reviewer assigned to the game.

Brad posted the following response to the review and reviewer on the Ashes of The Singularity forums (link below). Gamespots review is the only negative one on Metacritic so far. He has also said that Gamespot is deleting positive comments about the game and criticism of the review. The same reviewer has also been assigned to review Mohawk Games and Stardock Entertainments Offworld Trading Company too which seems ludicrous to me.

Gamespot’s disgraceful Ashes of the Singularity review

Interested to hear peoples thoughts on this and the issues it could raise within the industry. Reviews are merely opinions but when they can effect/influence customers decisions like the big gaming sites, should they be more objective? ​

 

[Absent Nova]

This is why I don't take reviews seriously. There are always those people, especially with game reviews, that focus on their own agenda rather than doing thier actual job.

 

[Dark Drakan]

This is why I don't take reviews seriously. There are always those people, especially with game reviews, that focus on their own agenda rather than doing thier actual job.

Lots don't take reviews too seriously but at same time lots of people who don't have much disposable income use them as a measuring stick to what games to risk spending their money on.

Same as lots not paying attention to Metacritic ratings and the like but some publishers do and developers can lose bonuses based on the scores of some reviews. So I just think more reviewers should probably be more objective in their reviews and reviews need to be more thorough and detailed so they don't miss key features/points out of their reviews.

 

[WolfOD64]

This is why I don't take reviews seriously. There are always those people, especially with game reviews, that focus on their own agenda rather than doing thier actual job.

Do yourself a colossal favor and stay away from the biased mountain of agenda-driven BS known as Polygon.com. What they spin over there can't even vaguely be categorized as "journalism" so much as "propaganda."

You know. The exact opposite of what you're supposed to deliver in an unbiased review of consumer goods.

 

[DreadnoughtDT]

Polygon, Kotaku and Giant Bomb are all on my blacklist. Quite unfortunate, considering they all used to be great sites.

 

[Dark Drakan]

Polygon, Kotaku and Giant Bomb are all on my blacklist. Quite unfortunate, considering they all used to be great sites.

Amazing how that web is now spreading as loads tend to avoid IGN now too and everyone knows about the Gamespot review scandal of a couple of years ago involving Jeff Gerstmann & his negative Kane and Lynch review.

Giantbomb started out with some good intentions (Gerstmann formed it) and were known to be decent, then Gamespot purchased them. Though the team that fired him are no longer at Gamespot.

 

[xMobilemux]

Stuff like this is why I support Gamergate.

Thanks to the Hulkster, Gawker took one massive hit and Kotaku's days are now numbered.
Still we have a big war to win.

 

[Absent Nova]

Do yourself a colossal favor and stay away from the biased mountain of agenda-driven BS known as Polygon.com. What they spin over there can't even vaguely be categorized as "journalism" so much as "propaganda."

You know. The exact opposite of what you're supposed to deliver in an unbiased review of consumer goods.

I noticed that hardly anyone says anything good about them.

Lots don't take reviews too seriously but at same time lots of people who don't have much disposable income use them as a measuring stick to what games to risk spending their money on.

Pretty much these days I look at gameplay videos or streams to decide if I should get a game. Reviews are just a bunch of words and seeing the actual game in action is alot more helpful in making my decision.

 

[DreadnoughtDT]

Man you should've seen Kotaku's review of the Attack on Titan game. "Meager gameplay", "No reason to attack the limbs of a titan", "no replay value". Um, bwuh?

 

[Lain]

I remember having a debate with a friend about whether reviews should be objective or subjective (it was about film reviews but it's still applicable here). He argued in favour of subjectivity while I was all for objectivity.

I think it stems from having to write English papers in college, I was always taught to keep objective facts separate from any of my subjective views. Nowadays, whenever I try to recommend a game to my friends, I always keep my personal opinions till the very end or even not at all.

To get to the topic at hand, I believe that you should always take game reviews with a grain of salt. Reviewers don't always take the time to play the game to its fullest and some reviews I've seen have been saturated with bias. Unfortunately people do often take reviews at face value.

 

[Foxtrot94]

I remember having a debate with a friend about whether reviews should be objective or subjective (it was about film reviews but it's still applicable here). He argued in favour of subjectivity while I was all for objectivity.

And why not having both? Make people know of any fact about the game, like the presence/absence of a certain feature and so on, but also indicate if the game may or may not be for a certain target audience, pointing out the style of gameplay, atmosphere etc (which are all subjected to a person's personal preference), kinda like Angry Joe usually does, for example.

That is a complete review in my opinion.

 

[WolfOD64]

Man you should've seen Kotaku's review of the Attack on Titan game. "Meager gameplay", "No reason to attack the limbs of a titan", "no replay value". Um, bwuh?

You want to see something that defies reality? Look at Leigh Alexander's review of Fire Emblem: Radiant Dawn for Destructoid. The review literally starts with her saying that she hates strategy games.

Clearly, she was 100% qualified to review the most gnashingly-difficult game in a series of notoriously-difficult stratehy games.

 

[Maxman]

sure reminds me when IGN gave Web of Shadows a 5.0 back when it came out

 

[Dark Drakan]

You want to see something that defies reality? Look at Leigh Alexander's review of Fire Emblem: Radiant Dawn for Destructoid. The review literally starts with her saying that she hates strategy games.

Clearly, she was 100% qualified to review the most gnashingly-difficult game in a series of notoriously-difficult stratehy games.

Yeah the opening paragraph is...

I hate tactical games. I hate strategy games, real-time strategy games, and tactical RPGs. I would rather drive screws into my nostrils with the business end of a power drill and, of course, apply a nail gun to my eyes than play a tactics title. But Linde stole all my Castlevanias, kidnapped my cat and said I can't play Trauma Centeruntil I wrote this review. I drove a few screws into the soft part of my skull in an attempt to assuage his evil, but alas, he made me do it anyway.

So no matter how good of a strategy game it was it was never going to get a good score off this reviewer so why bother?

 

[Absent Nova]

All these mentions of bad reviews remind me of IGN's God Hand review. Man that was an awful one.

 

[Dark Drakan]

I mean reviews are opinions and opinions overall will differ, some people will like a game that others don't. However to claim a game lacks certain features/systems that it actually contains is essentially misleading potential customers. Like someone reviewing a car and saying it lacks power steering, air conditioning and 4WD when the car in fact has all of them.

 

[Dark Drakan]

A Video Discussing Whether Or Not Hello Games Lied About No Man's Sky (The Jimquisition)

Should Hello Games & Sony be held accountable for misleading marketing & false advertising?​

 

[Dark Drakan]

Jim Sterling comes out on top as lawsuit with Digital Homicide dismissed

Statement by James Stanton (aka Jim Sterling)

For those curious about this resolution, I was not a direct part of the communication between Romine and my lawyer, but as I understand it, the agreement to drop the suit with prejudice was the result of Hartman's enviable reasoning ability. The plaintiff agreed to drop his case after my lawyer explained exactly what would happen if this went to court and how we would respond.

That it got as far as it did, went on for as long as it did, is atrocious - especially when this is a case that amounts to a game developer wanting to silence a game critic. While the accusations found within the lawsuit are farcical and definitively veer into comedy territory - as we'll find out when I go through it in detail at a later date - the existence of it is simply grotesque.

That you can be made to spend that much money and effort defending yourself from spurious claims should be a worrying prospect for anybody whose job involves saying things that some people aren't going to like.

​

 

[Dark Drakan]

Will AngryJoe do a Zelda Angry Review?

Angry Joe Calling out Nintendo Japan on their idiotic Youtube policies.

Before we started major work on the Zelda Angry Review we wanted to revisit Nintendo's Policies on Youtube to see if this new console cycle things have changed for the better... It hasn't.
It's worse. IMO a continued bad business decision by Nintendo Japan.

Our Review is going to probably be heavily delayed, but we are working on one, so please be patient!

​

 

[Dark Drakan]

RIP Mike Forgey


WB Games have been known for their questionable business practices for a long time now but none have stuck more cords than their latest debacle. It seemed at first that they might have turned a corner but then they let their shady practices slip into what should have been a noble gesture.

Last week Monolith Productions announced a DLC that will immortalise executive producer Mike Forgey. Forgey was 43 years old and had died of cancer so the studio aimed to release some DLC in honour of his memory with proceeds going to his family. The Forthog Orc-Slayer DLC costs $5 and Warner Bros said it would donate $3.50 of every purchase.

The small print however revealed that money would only go to the Forgey family in most states in the US, and in the US only. Meaning any purchase outside of those states and the US would go directly to WB Games and his family would receive nothing from the sale, leading many to accuse WB Games of attempting to profit from his death.

Total Biscuit exposed Warner Brothers Games in regards to this in the following video.

​