gamesradar.com

SillySprout · Posted: Wed Jun 23, 2004 5:59 pm Post subject:

Am I the only person waiting to see which of the Driv3r reviews the people in charge choose to use on Gamesradar? Very Happy

_________________
HELLO. I am an outrageous vegetable!
>The Funhouse<
>FunHouse Forum [pink again!]<

OctogenarianPussy · Posted: Wed Jun 23, 2004 5:59 pm Post subject:

With all due respect did I deserve that? So I choose to call this a murky practice. I think it is murky. Very murky. Murky murky murky. Perhaps it's just the word you don't like?
_________________
I came here to chew ass and kick bubblegum. And I'm all out of ass.

Cal · Experienced Member Joined: 14 Jan 2004 Posts: 1324

KKLEIN · Posted: Wed Jun 23, 2004 6:01 pm Post subject:

Bomberman · Posted: Wed Jun 23, 2004 6:03 pm Post subject:

tnman · Posted: Wed Jun 23, 2004 6:04 pm Post subject:

tnman · Posted: Wed Jun 23, 2004 6:08 pm Post subject:

OctogenarianPussy · Posted: Wed Jun 23, 2004 6:08 pm Post subject:

And I'm going to continue to use it because I believe it be true. Please try to answer these questions for me;

- why did the Atari PR team stop online reviews of the game?
- why did Atari allow the game to ship early?
- why did xbw, despite being aware of the games MAJOR shortcomings, give the game a nine?
- why is there an offer for xbw bundled with the game?

I've become more convinced something fishy has gone on since this thread has developed. I'll refer you to my first posts in this thread. I'm willing to believe that this is all some sort of coincidence. But I ask you tnman, the same question I ask Nellis. How does it look to you? How do you think some others see it? Whether there was some kind of murky deal or not, the damage is already done.

We'll see how it all plays out in time.
_________________
I came here to chew ass and kick bubblegum. And I'm all out of ass.

KKLEIN · Posted: Wed Jun 23, 2004 6:09 pm Post subject:

SillySprout · Posted: Wed Jun 23, 2004 6:12 pm Post subject:

tnman · Posted: Wed Jun 23, 2004 6:15 pm Post subject:

banjo_ted · Posted: Wed Jun 23, 2004 6:19 pm Post subject:

ontwofronts · Starting Member Joined: 13 Feb 2004 Posts: 17

The case here is actually two accusations of a lack of integrity.

The first is over the use of non-final code. To 'review' a game and ignore bugs and glitches because the publishers says they will be removed is naive in the extreme. To not state the fact the review code is not finished and that there are issues to iron out is deceitful. You're basing a review on what you think a game 'will' be like. To hide this from your readership is underhand. In effect you're dressing a preview as a review. I would feel very let down to make a purchasing decision based on a review conducted in this manner. Seeing as the final code is still bug ridden and glitchy, these mags owe their readers an apology.

Secondly, there is the accusation that the review scores have been influenced by the publisher and their PRs. In this case there is plenty of circumtantial evidence - ads booked, cover space, review scores - but no smoking gun. Unless or until somebody from Future or Atari breaks ranks and reveals details of a pay off, we are left to suspect and ponder.

In conclusion:

Flawed and untrustworthy review policy - Yes
Corruption and bribery at play - Unknown

tnman · Posted: Wed Jun 23, 2004 6:23 pm Post subject: