Never heard of Eurogamer so im guessing their fairly new.. (or hobbyists perhaps?) but any effect of 'blacklisting' should be fairly negligible if all they are, is game critics.. not like they can ban them from talking... on the other hand.. there is the old saying, theres no such thing as 'bad publicity' so maybe their trying to make themselves heard by advertising their 'bad guys' status.. bit like the celebrity claims of.. 'your nobody unless you have a stalker' in showbiz.. maybe if your a game critic you need to be blacklisted before anybody starts paying attention...
well.. it worked.. i've now heard of Eurogamer..
Eurogamer are nowhere near new, they launched in 1999 and if you at least have anything to do with reading reviews, interviews and whatnot then you have heard of them as they are one of the most popular websites focused in gaming.
Doubtful.. it might be because im in the UK.. but Eurogamer ... despite the fact i've been playing MMO's since... long enough ago i don't even want to think about it.. i can't say i've heard any references to them.. and bearing in mind i've been posting on this site for several years now.. it might just be that their 'focus' is more console related than PC.. there are any number of console game reviewers out there that i've never bothered to read up on.. nor likely to in the future .. so while they might be a popular website concerned with gaming.. its doubtful that its PC gaming related. unless thats also something they started doing recently..in terms of magazines.. pretty much down to PCGamer only.. UK version that is, apparently theres an american version as well but its essentially a seperate magazine to the american one.. even the reviews are different (anecdotal more than anything as i've never read the american one) ...
This is why I never trust the "professional" reviews. I always wait for the player reviews. The professional reviews have always been way too generous, or worse flat our advertisments.
Personally i'm glad they've been black listed. Eurogamer have been guilty of some horribly biased or uninformed reviews very frequently. When i say that i mean from both ends of the scale, both when they decide they supposedly "love something or when they hate it".
Unfortunately their kind of media has been and is the norm bar a few. So much for impartial or trying to look at things from an elevated perspective, i don't think Eurogamer have even an inkling what those mean unless a $ sign is attached.
why only eurogamer? its getting flat out panned by all the reviewers, and 1UP gave it a score of 0 out of 10!
Probably because Eurogamer has such an awful reputation when it comes to game reviews. Frankly, I don't understand why anyone would still visit that site.
"Mr. Rothstein, your people never will understand... the way it works out here. You're all just our guests. But you act like you're at home. Let me tell you something, partner. You ain't home. But that's where we're gonna send you if it harelips the governor." - Pat Webb
Historically(from my perspective) Eurogamer has gotten hate from angry bitter fanboys who did not favor their particular game. In many ways I think we are once again reminded of how stupid gaming journalism is. How silly and unproductive it is. More than the reviewers and publishers who "cheat" I think it's the end-readers who are the most dumb. To even have the slightest stock in someone elses opinion regardless of how legit they are, is failure at highest level.
Reviews are not to be agreed with. Finding a review with the same opinion as yours is not the ideal situation. A person will never find another person who they agree with 100%. That's not the point. That's not what it's about. A reviewer who has the oppesite ideas and tastes as one self might make a much more attractive source of information.
The review is supposed to be a tool. The thing that makes it different from a normal article is the cherry - The editors own opinion sprinkled in over. But many reviewers(including MMORPG.com reviewers) get this mistaken by thinking that they need to babble on about their favorite ice cream and what they think is cool and what is not.
A good review is a source of information to give the reader some facts about a game. The reviewers own opinion should not be the factor(AT ALL) about the readers own desire to play or not to play a game. The facts presented in the written format, should give the reader their own images in their heads about the appeal/lack of appesl about the title.
That is not what is happening today. Today we have scores. The tool for the dumb. The score is an excuse for people not to read the review, but just look at the score and thus have concluded in a single number about the games worth.
A score can never be a substitute for a review. It rarely ads to it. A score can only make it swing to a certain side. There is always a "but" and always a "if. Everyone is different, have different perspectives, preferences, experiences and are on different stages in their live. A score can never be a common ground for everyone. And if it had to just have an as wide an appeal as possible, every game should get 6-7 to cather to everyone, to be some idiotic "objective" opinion that ends up servering no one with it's "neutral stance".
Remove the score, remove the self absorbed ego, and make reviews fun to read again. If all reviews were fun/entertaining to read/watch, people wouldn't need scores.
And if people had any confidence in their own opinions they would not need scores to tell them what is fun and what is not. metacritic, gamerankings, ign, gamespot... These things don't matter. They shouldn't. It's incredible weak character to feed of these things, yet we see many people who do it. Who become upset when something they like, is not echoed throughout the so called "professional gamers".
A term which I laugh at. You can't be a professional reviewer or gamer. Not anymore professional than any fratboy playing Call of Duty teenager or the middle aged mom playing Sims. This is just entertainment. But the idiots on all side of the fence is turning this into serious business, as I am a proof of now as well, since I made this thread.
Actually, people can be professional reviewers.
There are several problems, however: First amd foremost is the audience, sorry but most people under the age of 30 have the critical thinking ability of a slug. Understand, there is a difference between a blogger who is nothing more than an extension of various publisher's marketing departments and reviewers. Firing Squad, Eurogamer, PCGamer (to a lesser degree tho they seem to be trying to correct their path), and a couple of others actually test the games, make sure that they meet the metrics that the developer and publisher have set and report back with something more than opinion. See, there is a difference between opinion and objective facts. I understand that the media flooded world we live in today stresses opinion far more than fact, but again, that is because of the people's inability to actually think. I am pretty sure that the degree of sag in pants has a direct corelation to deficincies in IQ, see that is opinion :P
You say make the reviews fun to read again? Well, that is the problem. See, opinion is far more entertaining for the unintelligent than that which is measurable. Opinion is constantly argued, and with absolutely zero results. That is why religion and politics are things best left undiscussed in pubs lol. Verifiable facts, on the otherhand, cannot be argued or refuted without actual evidence, but that does nothing for the fanbots. Which of course means that there is no reason to discuss which means that people won't sit on the moronic website for hours possibly looking at an advertisement. Which is all the bloggers have to generate revenue from. Advertisments from publishers. Is it just a coincidence that when a new game from a big publisher comes out every shit blog out there gives over every advertisment spot, plus a popup or two, to that game/publisher? And is it any coincidence that the review always pops up right in the middle of the advertisment contract? I don't think so, but it is just my opinion based on what I have seen for the past several years.
In order to be a professional reviewer one must be able to separate fact from opinion. Most of these sites do not have contributors that are trained to know the difference. Hey, its not all their fault, most professional journalists from the Times to your local rag are incapable of dilineating between the two. Plus, you have to have people that are actually moral individuals. People who understand that they hold power over someone's purchasing of a product. When reviews cater to the publisher they are purposefully lying and defrauding the audience, you. And ANY publisher who gets their panties into a bunch over a negative review should immediately be blacklisted by every gamer. If you support immoral people they have no reason to change.
Props to Eurogamer and every other site that would not bow to a publisher. Too bad those are becoming less and less popular.
Meh they need to just take the whole reviewer out of the equation. I'd be a much happier camper without their opinion watering things down. Eurogamers one of the worst. First issue I have is that Eurogamer simply doesn't play the games they review lol, at least thats what I've gathered from the reviews they've done in the past. They will complain and compliment non existant things in a game. They've been called out on it multiple times now even on these boards, yet they continue.
Give me the facts, thats all I want. I just want outside confirmation on what systems and such are in the game. I want information on how they work. A video of actual game play and some screen shots and I'm set. These useless opinion pieces are just that, useless. Yes, yes, the writer wants to come off witty and sophisticated, but it just doesn't work especially when you fail to even play the game your reviewing.
Again I don't care if it's a steaming pile of dog doo with a controller plugged into it, save your opinions for your friends and your blog. What I feel reviewers are paid to do is inform me and others about the game, thats it and they simply fail at that for the most part now days. I get very little information about the actual game and get this whole "I love it so should you" or "This is a horrible turd and only a moron could find enjoyment in it" shoved down my throat.
Whats needed is for someone to go in and play the game and confirm that the devs have got the systems in they said they would and explain how they work. Discuss the bugs and issues the game faces. But for the love of all that is holy your professionals, leave it at that. Save the meaningless opinions for your friends or for your blog, you know so that only those that give a damn what you think have to read through it.
I mean seriously if "professional" reviewers insist on giving me there opinions I will need a few things before I even consider listening. I need a list of games you liked and didn't like, reasons why you did and didn't like them, age you were when you played them, age of the game when you played them, where your from and where you live (different cultural mindsets do come in to play. Someone in Japan may like the art style of Eastern games while I detest it) etc. etc. etc.
Basically I need to know if we are like minded individuals or not before your opinion even remotely matters. Without knowing that then it's not even remotely reasonable to assume we will have the same gaming taste and prefferences. So the whole opinion thing is worthless.
Feel free to throw in your opinion at the end with some arbitrary number if you like, but don't drowned the facts that are being sought with meaningless dribble which seems to be the standard practice.
I hate having to wade knee deep in self important dribble in a review just to find the few actual facts the writer has about the game I'm looking at. It's like digging in a garbage dump looking for a sandwich, there comes a point when you stop and ask yourself "Am I really that hungry?".
And yes.... this is nothing more than my self important dribble. Though I'm not a proffessional getting paid to inform people about a game they played though so I imagine it's alright :P
This is why I never trust the "professional" reviews. I always wait for the player reviews. The professional reviews have always been way too generous, or worse flat our advertisments.
^.
This is what I was alluding to earlier. Even this site, at times, seems more like it's advertising a game than reviewing it.
Spec'ing properly is a gateway drug. 12 Million People have been meter spammed in heroics.
A person should never read one review and assume it to be entirely correct. I always read several reviews of a product before considering spending any money on it. Another important point is that I will not even bother reading a review if I can't find any information about the reviewer.
Specialized journalism always suffers from a knowledge gap. Especially scientific journalism and technological journalism are victims of this.There is a huge knowledge gap between a researcher working at CERN and someone who has read the latest Dan Brown book. That reader might know that a such a facility exists and what they are trying to discover, but they have zero clue of the more intricate workings of the organisation and the knowledge behind it. Just like you can't expect a reader to know a lot about advanced science you can't expect gamers to know much about actual game development and the technologies behind it. These days the only news we get from science is generally very basic and will only mention succes and possible consequences of the invention or research, but won't make any mention of the researchers, inventors and the methods they have used. Gaming journalism suffers from a similar knowledge gap. The main difference is that gamers, unlike the general public in respect to advanced science are involved nearly immediately.
To return to gaming journalism. Most game journalists have zero knowledge of actual development. Allow me to give some examples:
Richard Aihoshi has been writing about MMOGs since the mid-1990s, always with a global perspective. As a result, he has observed the emergence and growth of the free to play business model from its early days in both hemispheres.He is the former Editor of RPG Vault and his column, focusing on free to play MMOs, appears on MMORPG.com every Monday.
Bill Murphy came on as a full time writer with MMORPG.com in 2010, his extensive knowledge of the genre and ability to turn a phrase have been a welcome addition to the MMORPG.com team.
Isabella Parsley, better known as Ysharros, is a long time MMORPG player and prolific blogger on the topic. She joins the MMORPG.com columnist team with this Player Perspectives offering every Friday.
Oli joined Eurogamer in 2008 as MMO Editor. In 2010 he became reviews editor, taking responsibility for all the site's reviews, although he continues to look after the MMO section and punch rats in the name of science. He is known as The European because he went to Calais once.
Rich is known as The Blacksmith of the Future round these parts. He's spent 20 years writing about games, mainly for magazines the youngsters of today haven't even heard of. Today he runs high definition video specialist firm Digital Foundry Ltd., in between writing for Eurogamer about things too technical for the rest of us to understand and using words like "hypervisor" in a serious context.
Jim has been a gaming journalist for a long time. As well as doing endless bloggery work for Rock, Paper, Shotgun, he wrote a book about games, which is called This Gaming Life. That means he is also an exciting author. Sometimes writes for architecture type places such as BLDGBLOG and Icon, too. Recently he’s been spotted making a game or two, but they’re not released yet.
Quinns wasn’t very good at his early career as a globe-trotting hobo (or “globo”), and has since limited himself to the domestic journeys of videogames. When he’s not having crushing flashbacks of being groped on nightbuses he writes articles for Eurogamer, IGN, Gamasutra and Edge.
There are much more game reviewers than the ones I have mentioned here, but in my two hours of searching I have not found a single one where they mentioned the person being involved in real development. They might have made some minor games, but nothing beyond the range of what you and I couldn't do as well. Therefore these reviewers are not in any way more reliable than anyone else who played the game and decided to post his review on youtube or metacritic, but since they are generally better writers and because their jobs are at stake you can hopefully assume that they put some effort into it. If you look around for a while, you might notice that you like the style of a certain site or reviewer and take some notes of his reviews, views or ideas about a game, but you should never blindly trust on the opinion of other people.
I would greatly appreciate peer-based reviews done by developers. Instead of having players with good to moderate writing skills we could have some professional reviewing done by the people who understand how complicated it is to make games. Some might say that this would lead to extremely technical reviews or stories no regular gamer could understand, but this does not have to be the case. Unlike scientists working at CERN, game developers are generally still in touch with the general public. At beta-testing, game forums, conventions and many other places you can notice the presence of the developers and community managers. They actively take part in bringing their knowledge to the masses, much like the old scientists in the 17th and 18th century did when they gave science demonstrations proving gravity, magnetism and other mechanics of nature.
To sum things up. I believe Gaming Journalism needs a big injection of authority. This does not mean that reviewers such as Yahtzee should be taken down. I love his reviews for their entertaining value, but I don't think you can take any of his arguments seriously.
In most cases Euro gamer reviews are incredibly biased one way or another. Kind of like cheesy movie reviews by second rate critics. However, they were spot on with the Duke Nukem review. The game really did suck.
Who cares? what does that matter? everyone is biased. Show me a empty vessel of a reviewer who walks around with no soul being neutral. We're shaped by our past. Our ideas and preferences come from our lives.
the most jaded person can still provide factual information that might make me want to play it.
DNF getting 3/10 has no impact on my desire to play or not to play the game or not. The factual information and descriptions inside. these are not the personal anecdotes that merely are icing on the cake, but not the point of the article. what is an factual information? - The story is cheesy, the game is old school. Maybe that is exactly what I am looking for, and thus I am in a much better position to enjoy the game than the reviewer.
This is an example. A very square example.
Not entirely true, there are still reviewers who are spot on and objective and honest in there opion about the game they review, i know only view who fit this profile but there still out there.
What me most disturb is that a themepark lover review a sandbox hardcore game or a consoleplayer review a PC game. Also lately you see a review of games played with gamepad on console and just copy to PC section and say they reviewed the PC version.
Also gamesites that are payed by company that they also review will not help get a good review.
Reviews are just indication of what it maybe can be nothing more, best is investigate first alot of sites who review game watch gameplay movies on youtube or of posible play demo first then if your still intrested buy game.
Never heard of Eurogamer so im guessing their fairly new.. (or hobbyists perhaps?) but any effect of 'blacklisting' should be fairly negligible if all they are, is game critics.. not like they can ban them from talking... on the other hand.. there is the old saying, theres no such thing as 'bad publicity' so maybe their trying to make themselves heard by advertising their 'bad guys' status.. bit like the celebrity claims of.. 'your nobody unless you have a stalker' in showbiz.. maybe if your a game critic you need to be blacklisted before anybody starts paying attention...
well.. it worked.. i've now heard of Eurogamer..
Eurogamer are nowhere near new, they launched in 1999 and if you at least have anything to do with reading reviews, interviews and whatnot then you have heard of them as they are one of the most popular websites focused in gaming.
Have paid attention to reviews, interviews and whatnot but still barely heard of them until a few years ago. They aren't as popular as you think.
Never heard of Eurogamer so im guessing their fairly new.. (or hobbyists perhaps?) but any effect of 'blacklisting' should be fairly negligible if all they are, is game critics.. not like they can ban them from talking... on the other hand.. there is the old saying, theres no such thing as 'bad publicity' so maybe their trying to make themselves heard by advertising their 'bad guys' status.. bit like the celebrity claims of.. 'your nobody unless you have a stalker' in showbiz.. maybe if your a game critic you need to be blacklisted before anybody starts paying attention...
well.. it worked.. i've now heard of Eurogamer..
Eurogamer are nowhere near new, they launched in 1999 and if you at least have anything to do with reading reviews, interviews and whatnot then you have heard of them as they are one of the most popular websites focused in gaming.
Have paid attention to reviews, interviews and whatnot but still barely heard of them until a few years ago. They aren't as popular as you think.
Im from europe and never been to eurogamer, ok they almost destroyed Darkfall with rediculous review by a sandbox free for all pvp mmo hater reviwer, but i think its a terible site hearing alot negative things about that site.
Never heard of Eurogamer so im guessing their fairly new.. (or hobbyists perhaps?) but any effect of 'blacklisting' should be fairly negligible if all they are, is game critics.. not like they can ban them from talking... on the other hand.. there is the old saying, theres no such thing as 'bad publicity' so maybe their trying to make themselves heard by advertising their 'bad guys' status.. bit like the celebrity claims of.. 'your nobody unless you have a stalker' in showbiz.. maybe if your a game critic you need to be blacklisted before anybody starts paying attention...
well.. it worked.. i've now heard of Eurogamer..
Eurogamer are nowhere near new, they launched in 1999 and if you at least have anything to do with reading reviews, interviews and whatnot then you have heard of them as they are one of the most popular websites focused in gaming.
Have paid attention to reviews, interviews and whatnot but still barely heard of them until a few years ago. They aren't as popular as you think.
Im from europe and never been to eurogamer, ok they almost destroyed Darkfall with rediculous review by a sandbox free for all pvp mmo hater reviwer, but i think its a terible site hearing alot negative things about that site.
lol I've been in the MMO scene since UO's beta and didn't hear about Eurogamer until DarkFalls review. Checked through several of there reviews and haven't been back since lol. I can look past biased reviews and opinions I don't agree with but they just have way to much misinformation on the games they review. I don't care if it's intentional or not in either case it makes for a bad review site. They are far from popular considering the first time most seem to hear about them is when they messed up one game review or another bad enough to get attention, then people just don't seem to go back lol.
Never heard of Eurogamer so im guessing their fairly new.. (or hobbyists perhaps?) but any effect of 'blacklisting' should be fairly negligible if all they are, is game critics.. not like they can ban them from talking... on the other hand.. there is the old saying, theres no such thing as 'bad publicity' so maybe their trying to make themselves heard by advertising their 'bad guys' status.. bit like the celebrity claims of.. 'your nobody unless you have a stalker' in showbiz.. maybe if your a game critic you need to be blacklisted before anybody starts paying attention...
well.. it worked.. i've now heard of Eurogamer..
Eurogamer are nowhere near new, they launched in 1999 and if you at least have anything to do with reading reviews, interviews and whatnot then you have heard of them as they are one of the most popular websites focused in gaming.
Have paid attention to reviews, interviews and whatnot but still barely heard of them until a few years ago. They aren't as popular as you think.
Im from europe and never been to eurogamer, ok they almost destroyed Darkfall with rediculous review by a sandbox free for all pvp mmo hater reviwer, but i think its a terible site hearing alot negative things about that site.
lol I've been in the MMO scene since UO's beta and didn't hear about Eurogamer until DarkFalls review. Checked through several of there reviews and haven't been back since lol. I can look past biased reviews and opinions I don't agree with but they just have way to much misinformation on the games they review. I don't care if it's intentional or not in either case it makes for a bad review site. They are far from popular considering the first time most seem to hear about them is when they messed up one game review or another bad enough to get attention, then people just don't seem to go back lol.
It was the same for me, didn't hear about them until DF's reveiw, then checked out their other MMORPG's review and it was horrid play an hour here and there then review it having only been in lowbie zones.
This article looks at what has happened and 2K dropping the PR company involved. The hype machine and how we are being sold games like they were washing up powder is rather obvious from this:
Duke Nukem PR firm dropped following online review row
By Daniel Emery Technology reporter, BBC News
The game has been in development for over 13 years
US games publisher Take 2 has parted company with public relations firm The Redner Group, following Twitter comments concerning Duke Nukem Forever.
Redner's contract was terminated after it said journalists who gave the game a poor review would be blacklisted.
Take 2's subsidiary, 2K Games, said it did not share "or endorse" the views.
Duke Nukem Forever, which has been in development since 1998, was criticised for its embarrassing character, dated design and poor controls.
The row erupted when Redner Group's founder, Jim Redner, published an angry tweet as the negative reviews of Duke Nukem Forever started to come in.
"Too many went too far with their reviews...we r reviewing who gets games next time and who doesn't based on today's venom," he tweeted.
The threat was quickly picked up by blog and gaming sites across the world, accusing Take 2 of strong arm tactics.
The most recent message on Redner's Twitter feed reads: "Again, I want everyone to know that I was acting on my own. 2K had nothing to do with this. I am so very sorry for what I said."
Classic reworked
First announced in 1998, Duke Nukem Forever was cancelled in 2009 when its developer - 3D Realms - collapsed.
"Too many went too far with their reviews...we r reviewing who gets games next time and who doesn't based on today's venom ”
End Quote Tweet Jim Redner
It was subsequently resurrected by US developer Gearbox Software which released the game on PC, PS3 and XBox 360.
It now holds the record for the longest time between game releases. That was formerly held by StarCraft, which had a 12-year hiatus.
The series had legions of fans who waited in expectation of the next release.
However, while expectations were high, the final product disappointed most reviewers.
US game website 1Up said the game was one "not even the most maladjusted 13-year-old could love", IGN described it as a "muddled, hypocritical exercise in irritation" although compensated for by "solid shooting mechanics", and Gamespot UK said "it turns a famous gaming icon into an embarrassment".
Rik Henderson, a former co-presenter of Gamesmaster and writer with Pocket Lint, said that he was surprised at such a public statement by Jim Redner, but not the sentiment expressed.
"This sort of thing happens behind the scene regularly from a number of different companies; I've encountered this on many an occasion, naming no names," he told BBC News.
"Considering the number of games that come out every year, not everything is an A list title.
Duke has failed to win over critics the world over.
Mr Henderson said it was common practice for firms not to send out review code until a game was in the shops and journalists who broke such gentleman's agreements would find themselves down the list when it came to receiving future games.
However, he added that a game like Duke Nukem Forever had been so hyped up that this course of action was not a realistic option.
"That said, I'm still waiting for my review code," he quipped.
Take 2 refused to make any further comment on the ongoing row when contacted by the BBC.
2K fired the PR firm (Redner Group) that was responsible for the uproar.
Regardless, Eurogamer is one of the worst gaming sites on the net, known for publishing poorly written reviews that lack substance and objectivity. Often being called out by various communities, and they have repeatedly proven that they invest a minimal of amount of time playing the actual game prior to writing the review.
They also have a habit of using reviewers who are not even fans of the genre they are reviewing, leading to negatively biased reviews that give the reader a skewed view and inaccurate portrayal of how a game truly is.
I can't believe someone actually thinks Eurogamer is a quality site, almost spat my coffee onto my monitor when I read that little gem.
Some part of gaming journalism is just a industry, making favourable reviews for rights and hype-material. Basicly what I have heard from local media in the past(Pelit-magazine), publishers gave exclusive-material for certain score and amount of space on magazine. So basicly they were paid marketing, as this material increased the sales of magazine and for it they had to make favourable reviews.
Then there is some real-reviews which don't take bribes. Internet likely has changed this quite a bit, but still there is questions is it made for money or real journalism...
Comments
Doubtful.. it might be because im in the UK.. but Eurogamer ... despite the fact i've been playing MMO's since... long enough ago i don't even want to think about it.. i can't say i've heard any references to them.. and bearing in mind i've been posting on this site for several years now.. it might just be that their 'focus' is more console related than PC.. there are any number of console game reviewers out there that i've never bothered to read up on.. nor likely to in the future .. so while they might be a popular website concerned with gaming.. its doubtful that its PC gaming related. unless thats also something they started doing recently..in terms of magazines.. pretty much down to PCGamer only.. UK version that is, apparently theres an american version as well but its essentially a seperate magazine to the american one.. even the reviews are different (anecdotal more than anything as i've never read the american one) ...
Very nice post Kalfer.
Jeremiah 8:21 I weep for the hurt of my people; I stand amazed, silent, dumb with grief.
Join me on Twitch Facebook Twitter
This is why I never trust the "professional" reviews. I always wait for the player reviews. The professional reviews have always been way too generous, or worse flat our advertisments.
Personally i'm glad they've been black listed. Eurogamer have been guilty of some horribly biased or uninformed reviews very frequently. When i say that i mean from both ends of the scale, both when they decide they supposedly "love something or when they hate it".
Unfortunately their kind of media has been and is the norm bar a few. So much for impartial or trying to look at things from an elevated perspective, i don't think Eurogamer have even an inkling what those mean unless a $ sign is attached.
why only eurogamer? its getting flat out panned by all the reviewers, and 1UP gave it a score of 0 out of 10!
It's not just about The Duke fella.
Probably because Eurogamer has such an awful reputation when it comes to game reviews. Frankly, I don't understand why anyone would still visit that site.
"Mr. Rothstein, your people never will understand... the way it works out here. You're all just our guests. But you act like you're at home. Let me tell you something, partner. You ain't home. But that's where we're gonna send you if it harelips the governor." - Pat Webb
Meh they need to just take the whole reviewer out of the equation. I'd be a much happier camper without their opinion watering things down. Eurogamers one of the worst. First issue I have is that Eurogamer simply doesn't play the games they review lol, at least thats what I've gathered from the reviews they've done in the past. They will complain and compliment non existant things in a game. They've been called out on it multiple times now even on these boards, yet they continue.
Give me the facts, thats all I want. I just want outside confirmation on what systems and such are in the game. I want information on how they work. A video of actual game play and some screen shots and I'm set. These useless opinion pieces are just that, useless. Yes, yes, the writer wants to come off witty and sophisticated, but it just doesn't work especially when you fail to even play the game your reviewing.
Again I don't care if it's a steaming pile of dog doo with a controller plugged into it, save your opinions for your friends and your blog. What I feel reviewers are paid to do is inform me and others about the game, thats it and they simply fail at that for the most part now days. I get very little information about the actual game and get this whole "I love it so should you" or "This is a horrible turd and only a moron could find enjoyment in it" shoved down my throat.
Whats needed is for someone to go in and play the game and confirm that the devs have got the systems in they said they would and explain how they work. Discuss the bugs and issues the game faces. But for the love of all that is holy your professionals, leave it at that. Save the meaningless opinions for your friends or for your blog, you know so that only those that give a damn what you think have to read through it.
I mean seriously if "professional" reviewers insist on giving me there opinions I will need a few things before I even consider listening. I need a list of games you liked and didn't like, reasons why you did and didn't like them, age you were when you played them, age of the game when you played them, where your from and where you live (different cultural mindsets do come in to play. Someone in Japan may like the art style of Eastern games while I detest it) etc. etc. etc.
Basically I need to know if we are like minded individuals or not before your opinion even remotely matters. Without knowing that then it's not even remotely reasonable to assume we will have the same gaming taste and prefferences. So the whole opinion thing is worthless.
Feel free to throw in your opinion at the end with some arbitrary number if you like, but don't drowned the facts that are being sought with meaningless dribble which seems to be the standard practice.
I hate having to wade knee deep in self important dribble in a review just to find the few actual facts the writer has about the game I'm looking at. It's like digging in a garbage dump looking for a sandwich, there comes a point when you stop and ask yourself "Am I really that hungry?".
And yes.... this is nothing more than my self important dribble. Though I'm not a proffessional getting paid to inform people about a game they played though so I imagine it's alright :P
^.
This is what I was alluding to earlier. Even this site, at times, seems more like it's advertising a game than reviewing it.
Spec'ing properly is a gateway drug.
12 Million People have been meter spammed in heroics.
A person should never read one review and assume it to be entirely correct. I always read several reviews of a product before considering spending any money on it. Another important point is that I will not even bother reading a review if I can't find any information about the reviewer.
Specialized journalism always suffers from a knowledge gap. Especially scientific journalism and technological journalism are victims of this.There is a huge knowledge gap between a researcher working at CERN and someone who has read the latest Dan Brown book. That reader might know that a such a facility exists and what they are trying to discover, but they have zero clue of the more intricate workings of the organisation and the knowledge behind it. Just like you can't expect a reader to know a lot about advanced science you can't expect gamers to know much about actual game development and the technologies behind it. These days the only news we get from science is generally very basic and will only mention succes and possible consequences of the invention or research, but won't make any mention of the researchers, inventors and the methods they have used. Gaming journalism suffers from a similar knowledge gap. The main difference is that gamers, unlike the general public in respect to advanced science are involved nearly immediately.
To return to gaming journalism. Most game journalists have zero knowledge of actual development. Allow me to give some examples:
Richard Aihoshi has been writing about MMOGs since the mid-1990s, always with a global perspective. As a result, he has observed the emergence and growth of the free to play business model from its early days in both hemispheres.He is the former Editor of RPG Vault and his column, focusing on free to play MMOs, appears on MMORPG.com every Monday.
Bill Murphy came on as a full time writer with MMORPG.com in 2010, his extensive knowledge of the genre and ability to turn a phrase have been a welcome addition to the MMORPG.com team.
Isabella Parsley, better known as Ysharros, is a long time MMORPG player and prolific blogger on the topic. She joins the MMORPG.com columnist team with this Player Perspectives offering every Friday.
Oli joined Eurogamer in 2008 as MMO Editor. In 2010 he became reviews editor, taking responsibility for all the site's reviews, although he continues to look after the MMO section and punch rats in the name of science. He is known as The European because he went to Calais once.
Rich is known as The Blacksmith of the Future round these parts. He's spent 20 years writing about games, mainly for magazines the youngsters of today haven't even heard of. Today he runs high definition video specialist firm Digital Foundry Ltd., in between writing for Eurogamer about things too technical for the rest of us to understand and using words like "hypervisor" in a serious context.
Jim has been a gaming journalist for a long time. As well as doing endless bloggery work for Rock, Paper, Shotgun, he wrote a book about games, which is called This Gaming Life. That means he is also an exciting author. Sometimes writes for architecture type places such as BLDGBLOG and Icon, too. Recently he’s been spotted making a game or two, but they’re not released yet.
Quinns wasn’t very good at his early career as a globe-trotting hobo (or “globo”), and has since limited himself to the domestic journeys of videogames. When he’s not having crushing flashbacks of being groped on nightbuses he writes articles for Eurogamer, IGN, Gamasutra and Edge.
There are much more game reviewers than the ones I have mentioned here, but in my two hours of searching I have not found a single one where they mentioned the person being involved in real development. They might have made some minor games, but nothing beyond the range of what you and I couldn't do as well. Therefore these reviewers are not in any way more reliable than anyone else who played the game and decided to post his review on youtube or metacritic, but since they are generally better writers and because their jobs are at stake you can hopefully assume that they put some effort into it. If you look around for a while, you might notice that you like the style of a certain site or reviewer and take some notes of his reviews, views or ideas about a game, but you should never blindly trust on the opinion of other people.
I would greatly appreciate peer-based reviews done by developers. Instead of having players with good to moderate writing skills we could have some professional reviewing done by the people who understand how complicated it is to make games. Some might say that this would lead to extremely technical reviews or stories no regular gamer could understand, but this does not have to be the case. Unlike scientists working at CERN, game developers are generally still in touch with the general public. At beta-testing, game forums, conventions and many other places you can notice the presence of the developers and community managers. They actively take part in bringing their knowledge to the masses, much like the old scientists in the 17th and 18th century did when they gave science demonstrations proving gravity, magnetism and other mechanics of nature.
To sum things up. I believe Gaming Journalism needs a big injection of authority. This does not mean that reviewers such as Yahtzee should be taken down. I love his reviews for their entertaining value, but I don't think you can take any of his arguments seriously.
Not entirely true, there are still reviewers who are spot on and objective and honest in there opion about the game they review, i know only view who fit this profile but there still out there.
What me most disturb is that a themepark lover review a sandbox hardcore game or a consoleplayer review a PC game. Also lately you see a review of games played with gamepad on console and just copy to PC section and say they reviewed the PC version.
Also gamesites that are payed by company that they also review will not help get a good review.
Reviews are just indication of what it maybe can be nothing more, best is investigate first alot of sites who review game watch gameplay movies on youtube or of posible play demo first then if your still intrested buy game.
Have paid attention to reviews, interviews and whatnot but still barely heard of them until a few years ago. They aren't as popular as you think.
Im from europe and never been to eurogamer, ok they almost destroyed Darkfall with rediculous review by a sandbox free for all pvp mmo hater reviwer, but i think its a terible site hearing alot negative things about that site.
lol I've been in the MMO scene since UO's beta and didn't hear about Eurogamer until DarkFalls review. Checked through several of there reviews and haven't been back since lol. I can look past biased reviews and opinions I don't agree with but they just have way to much misinformation on the games they review. I don't care if it's intentional or not in either case it makes for a bad review site. They are far from popular considering the first time most seem to hear about them is when they messed up one game review or another bad enough to get attention, then people just don't seem to go back lol.
It was the same for me, didn't hear about them until DF's reveiw, then checked out their other MMORPG's review and it was horrid play an hour here and there then review it having only been in lowbie zones.
This article looks at what has happened and 2K dropping the PR company involved. The hype machine and how we are being sold games like they were washing up powder is rather obvious from this:
Duke Nukem PR firm dropped following online review row
By Daniel Emery Technology reporter, BBC News
US games publisher Take 2 has parted company with public relations firm The Redner Group, following Twitter comments concerning Duke Nukem Forever.
Redner's contract was terminated after it said journalists who gave the game a poor review would be blacklisted.
Take 2's subsidiary, 2K Games, said it did not share "or endorse" the views.
Duke Nukem Forever, which has been in development since 1998, was criticised for its embarrassing character, dated design and poor controls.
The row erupted when Redner Group's founder, Jim Redner, published an angry tweet as the negative reviews of Duke Nukem Forever started to come in.
"Too many went too far with their reviews...we r reviewing who gets games next time and who doesn't based on today's venom," he tweeted.
The threat was quickly picked up by blog and gaming sites across the world, accusing Take 2 of strong arm tactics.
A day later, 2K Games sacked Redner Group and tweeted that it maintained "a mutually respectful relationship with the press and will continue to do so. We don't condone @TheRednerGroup';s actions at all".
The most recent message on Redner's Twitter feed reads: "Again, I want everyone to know that I was acting on my own. 2K had nothing to do with this. I am so very sorry for what I said."
Classic reworked
First announced in 1998, Duke Nukem Forever was cancelled in 2009 when its developer - 3D Realms - collapsed.
It was subsequently resurrected by US developer Gearbox Software which released the game on PC, PS3 and XBox 360.
It now holds the record for the longest time between game releases. That was formerly held by StarCraft, which had a 12-year hiatus.
The series had legions of fans who waited in expectation of the next release.
However, while expectations were high, the final product disappointed most reviewers.
US game website 1Up said the game was one "not even the most maladjusted 13-year-old could love", IGN described it as a "muddled, hypocritical exercise in irritation" although compensated for by "solid shooting mechanics", and Gamespot UK said "it turns a famous gaming icon into an embarrassment".
Rik Henderson, a former co-presenter of Gamesmaster and writer with Pocket Lint, said that he was surprised at such a public statement by Jim Redner, but not the sentiment expressed.
"This sort of thing happens behind the scene regularly from a number of different companies; I've encountered this on many an occasion, naming no names," he told BBC News.
"Considering the number of games that come out every year, not everything is an A list title.
Mr Henderson said it was common practice for firms not to send out review code until a game was in the shops and journalists who broke such gentleman's agreements would find themselves down the list when it came to receiving future games.
However, he added that a game like Duke Nukem Forever had been so hyped up that this course of action was not a realistic option.
"That said, I'm still waiting for my review code," he quipped.
Take 2 refused to make any further comment on the ongoing row when contacted by the BBC.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-13795782
And some more news on the subject...
http://www.tgdaily.com/business-and-law-features/56653-redner-group-fired-over-duke-nukem-threats
"I am my connectome" https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=HA7GwKXfJB0
2K fired the PR firm (Redner Group) that was responsible for the uproar.
Regardless, Eurogamer is one of the worst gaming sites on the net, known for publishing poorly written reviews that lack substance and objectivity. Often being called out by various communities, and they have repeatedly proven that they invest a minimal of amount of time playing the actual game prior to writing the review.
They also have a habit of using reviewers who are not even fans of the genre they are reviewing, leading to negatively biased reviews that give the reader a skewed view and inaccurate portrayal of how a game truly is.
I can't believe someone actually thinks Eurogamer is a quality site, almost spat my coffee onto my monitor when I read that little gem.
Some part of gaming journalism is just a industry, making favourable reviews for rights and hype-material. Basicly what I have heard from local media in the past(Pelit-magazine), publishers gave exclusive-material for certain score and amount of space on magazine. So basicly they were paid marketing, as this material increased the sales of magazine and for it they had to make favourable reviews.
Then there is some real-reviews which don't take bribes. Internet likely has changed this quite a bit, but still there is questions is it made for money or real journalism...