|
 |
 |
gamesradar.com
Games and stuff
|
| View
previous topic :: View
next topic |
| Author |
Message |
NickSCFC
Experienced Member
Joined: 03 Jun 2003
Posts:
1566
Location: Stoke-on-Trent, UK
|
 Posted: Thu Jun 24, 2004 1:45
am Post
subject: |
 |
|
Can't be arsed
to read through the whole thread, can someone
remind us of the review scores
please.
_________________
My site!
My collection
| |
| Back
to top |
|
 |
GwiDan
Veteran Member
Joined: 16 Jul 2002
Posts:
5957
Location: Hiding the corpses...
|
| Posted: Thu Jun 24, 2004 9:06
am Post
subject: |
|
|
| tnman
wrote: |
| GwiDan
wrote: |
| Everyone knows that magazines
get paid off; it's been happening for
years. |
Everyone? What a crock of
shite.
|
Yes, everyone. It's like
Watergate - everyone knows that politicians do
dodgy deals, as it's part of their career.
Presidents give the go-ahead for assassinations
etc. Nobody
cares until it's shoved in their faces
publicly, then there's an uproar. History repeats
iself; look back through the timeline and you'll
see many examples of what wouldn't shock anyone in
private conversation causing absolute madness when
it's "made public", so to speak. Do you really
think this is the first - or only - game to be
"improved"? Of course not! It's just that nobody's
making a fuss about the past titles because it was
never made public that these games were actually a
crock of turds.
| tnman
wrote: |
| GwiDan
wrote: |
| Printed magazines are no longer
worth the trees they're printed on - the
journalists don't make enough money to have
ideals, and if they're offered a nice bonus for
some mild "alterations" to an
unimportant-in-the-grand-scheme-of-things game,
then so be it. It's human nature, and filthy
rich game publishers capitalize on
this. |
I’m not saying things
like this don’t happen, but at Future I know
they don’t. For the week I spent there I didn’t
see any cash-ridden envelopes which are what
everyone thinks lies around desks
casually. |
Firstly because bribery of
a magazine would never be via cash - it'd be
administrative and untraceable. A verbal contract
of a review getting a higher score equalling more
advertising pages is much more beneficial than an
envelope stuffed with wads of cash - to both
parties.
| tnman
wrote: |
| GwiDan
wrote: |
| He'd be a brave man to come back
after yesterday, and the fact that their
editorial team bowed to the might of
commercialism instead of refusing with a bit of
integrity showed they're not particularly brave
at that Future
office. |
Nobody who has posted in
this thread has yet to provide iron-cast
evidence that any dodgy dealings have been going
on at Future.
And as Miriam_NGC posted
earlier in the thread, things have been sent
back before - Future employees just don't whore
gifts and shove on a good review
score. |
Wrong, NGC employees don't
whore "gifts" (used in the loosest
"Godfather-esque" way possible). Who's to say the
other mags don't? It's easy enough for the editor
to be slipped a nice Toshiba widescreen for a
bumped up score to a game nobody cares
about.
Last
edited by GwiDan on Thu Jun 24, 2004 9:49 am;
edited 2 times in
total | |
| Back
to top |
|
|
Eighthours
Moderator
Joined: 23 Oct 2003
Posts:
6606
Location: Certainty
|
| Posted: Thu Jun 24, 2004 9:22
am Post
subject: |
|
|
| KKLEIN
wrote: |
Where's Nick 'Harry Potter'
Ellis? He promises he'd come back on here &
guess what? He doesn't. Someone has said
something to him obviously.
I wish
everyone that works for Future would come on
here, in fact any forum for that matter, stick
their jobs & reveal what exactly does go on
in that building because it's now just becoming
a total embarrassment. What are Future going to
do, fire everyone?
If magazines weren't
a total laughing stock before they certainly are
now. |
Btw, a Future employee has
been on here in the meantime to further defend the
mags....a quick look at the content of the posts
(look back over the last 2 or 3 pages) will let
you know who it is. I don't feel happy revealing
his name since he clearly doesn't want us to know,
so don't make the usual "is it so and so" posts,
just work it out for yourself! It's not
rocket-science!!
As for the guy who was
talking about how some people will enjoy the game
so there's nothing wrong with the reviews......let
me reiterate (for about the 30th time) why there
are suspicions....
1. The ONLY 2
overwhelmingly positive reviews for the game were
the exclusive reviews, published before any
others. Critical consensus is that the game isn't
very good. The 2 positive reviews are total
anomolies, waaaay out of the "score zone" that the
other reviews have given the game. Hmm.....the
only 2 exclusive reviews...the only 2 really good
marks. How suspicious is that???!!!
2.
Atari PR was ordering websites and publications
not to put up reviews before Driv3r was on the
shelves, and threatened websites that did.
Basically, anyone who disagrees that this
at least LOOKS incredibly dodgy, is either being
disingenuous or isn't very clever. And I don't
believe that the poster who defended the reviews
is stupid.
_________________
Humiliate John Rodney Bennett
Trash CompDeck
Confront Juliet
But do
it quickly....you've only got eight hours to
live
Last edited by Eighthours
on Thu Jun 24, 2004 9:45 am; edited 1 time in
total | |
| Back
to top |
|
|
Sprite
Machine
Starting
Member
Joined: 23 Jun 2004
Posts:
8
Location: London
|
| Posted: Thu Jun 24, 2004 9:29
am Post
subject: |
|
|
| jeebus
wrote: |
| Sprite Machine
wrote: |
| jeebus
wrote: |
Another good example of personal
opinions not mattering when reviewing games
would be Pro Evo
....
it's again rather
obvious that this is one of the best football
games ever
conceived. |
 You do realise the
inherent contradiction there,
dontcha? |
Er... no I do not. Care
to explain that inherent contradiction a bit
then? |
Certainly.
Your comment
said that personal opinions sometimes don't matter
when reviewing games; then you said that Pro Evo
was one of the best football games around. That is the
contradiction. "Pro Evo is one of the best
football games around" is your personal
opinion.
| jeebus
wrote: |
I didn't say it was the best
football game around, I said one of.
I
was just saying how, despite the fact I don't
care about football, it is still obvious that
Pro Evo is an exceptionally well designed
game... |
Yes, obvious to you. That's
still an opinion; however it's one which
has been well-considered beyond the normal
boundaries of what you'd call 'fun'.
Um, see?  | |
| Back
to top |
|
|
Pug
Fugly
Experienced
Member
Joined: 17 Jun 2003
Posts:
836
Location: Idiotsville
|
| Posted: Thu Jun 24, 2004 9:35
am Post
subject: |
|
|
So what have we
established so far..
A magazine received
some unfinished review code (as it seems is
standard practice), and were told that the bugs
would be fixed by launch (as appears to be
standard practice), so that they could get a
review out before launch, given magazine lead
times etc..
The reviewer enjoyed it, and
due to the fact he was told that the bugs would be
gone by launch, he gave it a good review.
Turns out the game was released with the
bugs still intact, and by many accounts is a bit
of a stinker. It also turns out that Atari have
been running some promotions with the magazine.
Ah well, sh*t happens. And the
results? Some 'casuals' have bought a 'crap' game.
Which they'll probably actually enjoy, they seem
to enjoy most games anyway ("Bad Boys II is
awesome" - true story).
I tell you
what though, I'm desperate to
play the game.......! | |
| Back
to top |
|
|
driverman
Starting Member
Joined: 23 Jun 2004
Posts:
1
|
| Posted: Thu Jun 24, 2004 10:02
am Post
subject: |
|
|
Reasons why
Atari would want to rush Driv3r out the door...
1) they told their shareholders, several
times, that Driv3r is their "make or break" title.
If it fails, they're in BIG financial trouble;
and 2) even if they spent another 6 months
developing and tidying the game, it couldn't win a
head-to-head sales battle with GTA:San Andreas,
which will be released in November. Not to mention
Burnout 3 and many other fantastic-looking racing
games coming out at that time.
For
evidence of Atari's situation, take a look at
this:-
http://quotes.nasdaq.com/quote.dll?page=charting&mode=basics&selected=ATAR&symbol=ATAR
And note the shareprice drop for the last
2 days (ie. since the Driv3r reviews hit the net).
Oh dear.. | |
| Back
to top |
|
|
Eighthours
Moderator
Joined: 23 Oct 2003
Posts:
6606
Location: Certainty
|
| Posted: Thu Jun 24, 2004 10:43
am Post
subject: |
|
|
| driverman
wrote: |
| and 2) even if they spent
another 6 months developing and tidying the
game, it couldn't win a head-to-head sales
battle with GTA:San Andreas, which will be
released in November. Not to mention Burnout 3
and many other fantastic-looking racing games
coming out at that
time. |
When you consider how well
the franchise has sold before, that's a pretty
chickens*it attitude from Atari to be honest,
isn't it!!! If they gave Reflections time to
finish the job properly, there's no reason why the
game couldn't sell millions more than it will now,
as previous iterations did.
Serves them right,
frankly.
_________________
Humiliate John Rodney Bennett
Trash CompDeck
Confront Juliet
But do
it quickly....you've only got eight hours to
live | |
| Back
to top |
|
|
Jonny_Darko
Member
Joined: 09 Dec 2003
Posts:
124
|
| Posted: Thu Jun 24, 2004 11:03
am Post
subject: |
|
|
The saddest
thing about all this is The Boy Who Cried Wolf
syndrome. It's a crime that Ico didn't sell, ditto
Rez and dozens more over the last couple of years
which are the kinds of games that could have
expanded the industry, and took us in new and
exciting directions.
But why would anyone
listen to someone saying "No, look, it's really
good, buy it!" in a mag when the last time they
said it was about Driv3r or Galleon or something
of that ilk? You can only let people down so many
times before they stop listening.
As for
the whole opinion / fact theory, Big_Damn_Hero (a
Firefly reference, like it!) was spot on. Games
reviewing isn't easy, and not any mug can do it
right, but nowadays there's plenty of mugs being
paid to do it. There's a whole world of difference
between "Do I like this?" and "is this a good
game?". If you can't see that difference, get the
hell out of the industry.
I disliked (for
example) Freelancer, but that didn't stop me
giving it a decent review because I could tell it
was a decent game. | |
| Back
to top |
|
|
Steve
Moderator
Joined: 08 Jul 2002
Posts:
7344
Location: Hill Valley circa 1955
|
| Posted: Thu Jun 24, 2004 11:20
am Post
subject: |
|
|
| Pug Fugly
wrote: |
So what have we established so
far..
A magazine received some
unfinished review code (as it seems is standard
practice), and were told that the bugs would be
fixed by launch (as appears to be standard
practice), so that they could get a review out
before launch, given magazine lead times etc..
The reviewer enjoyed it, and due to the
fact he was told that the bugs would be gone by
launch, he gave it a good review.
Turns
out the game was released with the bugs still
intact, and by many accounts is a bit of a
stinker. It also turns out that Atari have been
running some promotions with the magazine.
Ah well, sh*t happens. And the
results? Some 'casuals' have bought a 'crap'
game. Which they'll probably actually enjoy,
they seem to enjoy most games anyway ("Bad Boys
II is awesome" - true story).
I tell
you what though, I'm desperate to
play the
game.......! |
Yes, that just about sums
it up. Almost.
The whole reason I created
this thread was to highlight what I’ve been saying
for years – never believe everything you read. I’m
sick to death of dishonest reviews.
The
review that sticks out in my mind was the
laughable Tomb Raider: AoD review in OPS2M. The
reviewer (I forget who it was now) slagged the
game off over 5 pages yet awarded it 8/10. The
poor reviewer was brutally honest in the games
faults but the overall score simply didn’t reflect
the review in question. It was fixed, simple at
that. Any gamer reading this review would have
though “Ooh, Tomb Raider, 8/10! Wow! It must be
good!” and wasted 40 notes on that bit of crap.
The reason it angered me more than Driv3r was that
Tomb Raider was going to sell on its name alone,
what we didn’t need was bent reviews in the gaming
press.
And that’s another thing, the UK
games press has always been the best. Go back to
the 80’s and early 90’s and we had a multitude of
fantastic gaming magazines dedicated solely to our
favourite pastime. It could be argued that not all
of them were straight but at least the ones I
bought were written by gamers for gamers. It’s
simply not the case today. Like all things
everything must be produced to gain as much profit
as possible using whatever means possible.
There’s only a few decent magazines
available today, Edge (obviously), NGC, games™, PC
Gamer and erm, that’s it. The rest are absolute
rubbish.
PSM2 has been mentioned umpteen
times in this thread. I remember just before the
PS2 launched in Europe this great magazine
launched. It was better than the official PS2
magazine which was (and still is) nothing more
than a large advert for Sony, it was
professionally laid out and everything was worded
well, i.e. OPSM always took the positive stance,
particularly with Sony’s in-house games, whereas
PSM2’s opinion on forthcoming games was always one
of apprehension and doubt.
I remember
buying PSM2 a few months ago as they used a quote
or two of mine in one of their features (GTA). It
was the first time I’d bought the magazine in a
long time and I was appalled at how bad the layout
and even more surprised at the overall tone that
the magazine was written in. Text and pictures
were scattered all over the place, the overall use
of the English language was dumbed down to appeal
to a different target audience to the one the
magazine intended to aim at the very beginning. I
can only compare it to the god-awful CVG and
GamesMaster. How can a magazine take such a dive
in 18 months? It’s either Future dictating that
PSM2 appeals to a different target audience (hence
the changes) or poor editorial leadership.
Maybe, just maybe this thread can have a
positive outcome. Maybe a few people can take a
look at themselves and perhaps change how they do
things. That is really what I had hoped this
thread would achieve. It’s obvious the Driv3r
reviews in PSM2 and XBW were nonsense and I have
to feel sorry for Nick defending himself and his
magazine. Either he had the bollocks to come on to
explain (yes, his post was laughable and as
transparent as one of Jordan’s tops, but hey, at
least he bothered!) or he was sent here by his
employers/Editor. Either way at least one magazine
has had a say which means they are concerned.
I’m realistic enough to realise this whole
incident will not force any drastic changes and it
won’t stop anything like this from happening again
but at least editors and publishers know they
cannot fool everyone with their dishonesty.
Around August/September the annual
build-up for Christmas begins. The likes of PSM2
will have their annual trips to EA to get the
low-down on the 2005 editions of each of the large
sports franchises. Wouldn’t it be nice if they
could be brutally honest with their findings?
Wouldn’t it be nice to read reviews of
Halo 2 that haven’t been sucked in by all the
hype? Wouldn’t it be nice to read something that
isn’t worded like a carefully written press
release by PR companies? Wouldn’t it be nice if
magazines started to write like unofficial
publications and give us the hard facts and truth
that they promise their readers? It’s not too
much to ask
surely?
_________________
Xbox
Live Gamer Tag: Steve007
Last edited by Steve on Thu
Jun 24, 2004 2:31 pm; edited 2 times in
total | |
| Back
to top |
|
|
OctogenarianPussy
Experienced Member
Joined: 19 Sep 2003
Posts:
649
Location: Retard Proof Clothing - Available
now
|
| Posted: Thu Jun 24, 2004 11:21
am Post
subject: |
|
|
| gamespy
wrote: |
The only reason this
muddled offering isn't getting one star is the
impressive car physics and cities. But we can't
forget the single-player game that's over in
less than three hours once you've learned the
routes of each mission, a series of me-too
mini-games that offer no reason to play them,
and an offensively small number of rewards.
That's the DRIV3R package; all flash and no
substance. Rent this, spend a few days marveling
at the undulating town scenery of each locale,
and once you finish the game, try to make your
own fun. Reflections forgot to include that
part. |
_________________
I came
here to chew ass and kick bubblegum. And I'm all
out of ass. | |
| Back
to top |
|
|
Eighthours
Moderator
Joined: 23 Oct 2003
Posts:
6606
Location: Certainty
|
| Posted: Thu Jun 24, 2004 11:27
am Post
subject: |
|
|
Something else
I've just remembered......didn't PSM2 (yes, that's
Mr 90%) give Driv3r an absolutely scathing preview
only 3 or 4 months ago, basically saying that it
was turning out to be rubbish? I'm sure it
did....oh the hilarity! 
_________________
Humiliate John Rodney Bennett
Trash CompDeck
Confront Juliet
But do
it quickly....you've only got eight hours to
live | |
| Back
to top |
|
|
John
Square
Experienced
Member
Joined: 05 Jan 2004
Posts:
376
|
| Posted: Thu Jun 24, 2004 11:32
am Post
subject: |
|
|
| Jonny_Darko
wrote: |
I disliked (for example)
Freelancer, but that didn't stop me giving it a
decent review because I could tell it was a
decent game. |
*Hands Jonny_Darko a
banana*
I think that being able to
differentiate between a good game and a game you
like (irrespective of it's flaws) is the
differentiator between the
posters/reviewers/magazines I like to read and
those I don't.
I love Silent Scope and
HOTD3, but not for one second do I assume that
they are "better" than Zelda:TWW or Mario64 (both
of which leave me a bit cold, TBH).
How
does this relate to Driv3r? Well, everyone seems
to equate their personal preference with the
"right" review score. There is a connection- I'd
never give a game that I didn't like a 90%,
irrespective of how superb it was supposed to be
(IMO, any 85%+ game should make you like it-if
only a bit- even if it's not initially to your
taste), but reviewing a game does have an
objective basis.
You can/should talk about
technical ability. You can/should talk about level
design. You can/should talk about the way saves
are utilised, and so on.Opinion comes in when the
review tries to give an impression of how well
these elements tie together.
The opinion
of the reviewer (as distinct from the opinions of
a forumite, which is about whether you like it)
should be a professional one. That is what this
thread is about really- Did the reviewers act as
professionals? Did they look at the game, divorce
personal opinions (that could have been swayed by
any number of *ahem* factors), and give you as
objective as possible a rundown on the game?
Edge review brilliantly- they say what
works and what doesn't and how the peices mesh
together. I may not agree with the reviewer, but I
can extract the relevant facts (save point
distribution, and so on), and form an opinion of
whether I
will like a game. Did the 90% Driv3r reviews do
this*? If the answer is no, then the 90% review is
a sham and we are right to be outraged. If the
answer is yes, then we don't agree with the
reviewer, and need to get over it.
*I
think we all know the answer to this
bit.... | |
| Back
to top |
|
|
KKLEIN
Veteran Member
Joined: 15 Jul 2002
Posts:
8444
Location: Misery Guts Avenue
|
| Posted: Thu Jun 24, 2004 11:51
am Post
subject: |
|
|
| Steve
wrote: |
| PSM2 has been mentioned umpteen
times in this thread. I remember just before the
PS2 launched in Europe this great magazine
launched. It was better than the official PS2
magazine which was (and still is) nothing more
than a large advert for Sony, it was
professionally laid out and everything was
worded well, i.e. OPSM always took the positive
stance, particularly with Sony’s in-house games,
whereas PSM2’s opinion on forthcoming games was
always one of apprehension and doubt.
|
I’ve got to disagree with you
there Steve, OPS2 from issue 1 to 20 was great. It
was laid out neatly, clean, nicely written &,
look wise anyway, was on par with EDGE. From issue
26 something happened, the old Editor left &
the mag took a nose dive. Less writing, more
pictures, tacky pictures or topless pictures (that
didn’t even correspond with the text), wonky
reviews, re-used demos). It was awful. It changed
editor again last year & along with it the
look. In the last year alone, has changed twice. I
have to admit it is better, not has how I remember
it though. But then neither was OPM, that changed
for the worse too in 1999.
| Eighthours
wrote: |
| didn't PSM2 (yes, that's Mr 90%)
give Driv3r an absolutely scathing preview only
3 or 4 months ago, basically saying that it was
turning out to be rubbish? I'm sure it did....oh
the hilarity! |
Yes they did, they absolutely
slagged it off – for 2 issues straight.
| John Square
wrote: |
| Edge review brilliantly- they
say what works and what doesn't and how the
peices mesh together. I may not agree with the
reviewer, but I can extract the relevant facts
(save point distribution, and so on), and form
an opinion of whether I will like a
game. Did the 90% Driv3r reviews do this*? If
the answer is no, then the 90% review is a sham
and we are right to be outraged. If the answer
is yes, then we don't agree with the reviewer,
and need to get over
it. |
Take a visit to 'our' (and I
use that term very lightly) site & click the
reviews section under 'PS2', you'll find the PSM2
review there. I say no, no it
doesn't.
_________________
That's a disc drive.
What's been in them you ask? Well:
PS2 - Smackdown
HCTP, PSM2 disc 51.
Xbox - Driv3r
| |
| Back
to top |
|
|
Eighthours
Moderator
Joined: 23 Oct 2003
Posts:
6606
Location: Certainty
|
| Posted: Thu Jun 24, 2004 11:57
am Post
subject: |
|
|
| KKLEIN
wrote: |
| Eighthours
wrote: |
| didn't PSM2 (yes, that's Mr 90%)
give Driv3r an absolutely scathing preview only
3 or 4 months ago, basically saying that it was
turning out to be rubbish? I'm sure it did....oh
the hilarity! |
Yes they did, they absolutely
slagged it off – for 2 issues
straight. |
Well there's even more
evidence for you doubters, then!!
_________________
Humiliate John Rodney Bennett
Trash CompDeck
Confront Juliet
But do
it quickly....you've only got eight hours to
live | |
| Back
to top |
|
|
Steve
Moderator
Joined: 08 Jul 2002
Posts:
7344
Location: Hill Valley circa 1955
|
| Posted: Thu Jun 24, 2004 12:10
pm Post
subject: |
|
|
| Eighthours
wrote: |
| KKLEIN
wrote: |
| Eighthours
wrote: |
| didn't PSM2 (yes, that's Mr 90%)
give Driv3r an absolutely scathing preview only
3 or 4 months ago, basically saying that it was
turning out to be rubbish? I'm sure it did....oh
the hilarity! |
Yes they did, they absolutely
slagged it off – for 2 issues
straight. |
Well there's even more
evidence for you doubters, then!! |
I think we need to move
away from gathering evidence. As my post above
illustrates, I'm trying to steer this topic on
what can be learned from this debacle and how
things can be put right to avoid scenarios like
this in the future. Obviously I expect zero input
from Future as it's pretty much admitting they're
in the wrong which they will never ever
do.
_________________
Xbox
Live Gamer Tag: Steve007 | |
| Back
to top |
|
|
|
|
Watch
this topic for replies
|
You can post new topics in this
forum
You can reply to topics in this
forum
You can edit your posts in this
forum
You can delete your posts in this
forum
You can vote in polls in this
forum
|
| |
| |
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Profile
You have no new messages![Log out [ Rev. Stuart Campbell ]](../templates/futurenet/images/icon_mini_login.gif){kind=icon}
Log out [ Rev. Stuart Campbell
]
