To all the pros saying that sales don't make a good game....

#51TeholBeddictPosted 2/13/2013 10:49:45 AM
"Very well, but that's only true if you count user reviews. You cant deny that dozens of major gaming publications gave it a good score."

Those major publications probably got an advance copy of the game, and they probably signed an agreement stating that they wouldn't give the game lower than x/10 score, would write a generally favourable review, etc etc, in order to get the advance copy.

It's an incredibly common thing in this business. Destiny, a LoL/Starcraft 2 streamer, talked about it on his stream a couple of times. He could have gotten an advance copy of Far Cry 3, so that he could make youtube videos showing the game off, only the conditions for receiving that copy were to score it no less than 9/10, not show any glitches or bugs in the game, to say nothing negative about the game and to have an overall positive review.

Saying that major gaming publications gave it a good score holds no weight with me. Their goal is to make money. Creating content for a game's launch day helps them make money, and the only way they can do that is if they get advanced copies of games. Why would a company continue to send a gaming publication advanced copies of games if they end up getting horrible review scores from them? They wouldn't. Less reviews = less site traffic = less money.
---
PSN: TeholBeddict
#52MadigariPosted 2/13/2013 10:59:27 AM
TeholBeddict posted...
He could have gotten an advance copy of Far Cry 3, so that he could make youtube videos showing the game off, only the conditions for receiving that copy were to score it no less than 9/10, not show any glitches or bugs in the game, to say nothing negative about the game and to have an overall positive review.


I've seen the "they're all paid off!" conspiracy theory before, but never where the bribe is nothing more than getting to play the game early. Seems rather underwhelming.
---
Gamertag is Madigari, for both Xbox 360 and PSN.
Of all the things I've lost, I miss my originality the most.
#53SephirothDZXPosted 2/13/2013 11:03:55 AM
After the whole Laruen Wainwright Tomb Raider/Squeenix ordeal, I'm not going to blame anybody who thinks reviewers are paid off. Considering how influential reviewers can be to the success of a game, you'd have to be awfully naive to think that developers or publishers wouldn't want to try and help out their own cause.

Also, good reviews definitely don't make a good game either - Grand Theft Auto 4 says hi.
#54MadigariPosted 2/13/2013 11:07:47 AM
SephirothDZX posted...
After the whole Laruen Wainwright Tomb Raider/Squeenix ordeal, I'm not going to blame anybody who thinks reviewers are paid off.


You can think that all you want, despite how uncomfortable it makes me to see people define a group based on its outliers.

But to say that the bribe is solely getting the early access copy of a game is a bit ridiculous.
---
Gamertag is Madigari, for both Xbox 360 and PSN.
Of all the things I've lost, I miss my originality the most.
#55Capt_HerlockPosted 2/13/2013 2:33:01 PM
moaristyle posted...
I bought the game, enjoyed it and still play it. So I guess, I win?

---
http://backloggery.com/capt_herlock
#56finalfantasy94Posted 2/13/2013 4:58:38 PM
TeholBeddict posted...
"Very well, but that's only true if you count user reviews. You cant deny that dozens of major gaming publications gave it a good score."

Those major publications probably got an advance copy of the game, and they probably signed an agreement stating that they wouldn't give the game lower than x/10 score, would write a generally favourable review, etc etc, in order to get the advance copy.

It's an incredibly common thing in this business. Destiny, a LoL/Starcraft 2 streamer, talked about it on his stream a couple of times. He could have gotten an advance copy of Far Cry 3, so that he could make youtube videos showing the game off, only the conditions for receiving that copy were to score it no less than 9/10, not show any glitches or bugs in the game, to say nothing negative about the game and to have an overall positive review.

Saying that major gaming publications gave it a good score holds no weight with me. Their goal is to make money. Creating content for a game's launch day helps them make money, and the only way they can do that is if they get advanced copies of games. Why would a company continue to send a gaming publication advanced copies of games if they end up getting horrible review scores from them? They wouldn't. Less reviews = less site traffic = less money.


hows that tin foil hat. I can understand feeling that some people can be shady but not 100% of them.
#57gamer6879403333Posted 2/13/2013 6:29:57 PM
SilentS89 posted...
I agree with this, the game needs to be heavily bashed to balance out all the undeserved praise it gets.


Interesting... So, pray tell what unfair praise it gets besides from "professional" reviews who you shouldn't take seriously anyway? What undeserved praise does it get from actual gamers? Any? At all? Not from what I've seen. Then again, antis consider calling the game even good (forget great, just "good") as undeserved praise. So again, what undeserved praise does it get from gamers, not review websites, actual run of the mill gamers like the people on this board?
---
They shot a diamond made of iron at a car moving at 400 walls per hour-One of the dumbest sentences ever.
#58NeoTStylePosted 2/14/2013 12:37:40 PM
From: moaristyle | #042
GoW lol, that's more casual than DmC

I heard GoW's Chaos mode is actually hard though.
#59vgundamPosted 2/14/2013 2:41:12 PM
Madigari posted...

I don't get where you people feel you need this saying the game flopped. It's like saying, "I think racists are awful! (Flame Shield Max Power!!! Oh god, here comes the avalanche of dissenters!!!)"

---
It's "I COULDN'T care less" PLEASE GET IT RIGHT PEOPLE.
#60Muscle BusterPosted 2/14/2013 3:08:04 PM
TeholBeddict
Saying that major gaming publications gave it a good score holds no weight with me. Their goal is to make money. Creating content for a game's launch day helps them make money, and the only way they can do that is if they get advanced copies of games. Why would a company continue to send a gaming publication advanced copies of games if they end up getting horrible review scores from them? They wouldn't. Less reviews = less site traffic = less money.

SephirothDZX
After the whole Laruen Wainwright Tomb Raider/Squeenix ordeal, I'm not going to blame anybody who thinks reviewers are paid off. Considering how influential reviewers can be to the success of a game, you'd have to be awfully naive to think that developers or publishers wouldn't want to try and help out their own cause.

Also, good reviews definitely don't make a good game either - Grand Theft Auto 4 says hi.


Oh so true.
---
Don't look at me like that, you cretin.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mx4CL4Y2Cx0 / http://tinyurl.com/8ccm7pv