Activision: Engaging With Fans Turned MW3 Leak Into a Triumph

[John Funk]

I like Eric Hirshberg. He makes a much better public face for Activision than ol' Bobby. (Who I also like, if only for comedic potential).

 

[Electrogecko]

I think I'm going to barf.

Why is it that I think less of annual CoD releases than I do of any sports franchise?

Probably because there aren't 17 released football games every year.

 

[smudgey]

CoD still gets good reviews. Someone must be doing something right.

Like paying reviewers, or threatening to withhold early copies of future releases if they don't get a good score?

Ah yes, my personal favourite hater argument strategy. The professional reviews disagree with my opinion? Clearly, they must be paid.

Are you seriously naive enough to think that sort of thing does not happen in the gaming industry?
Did you not hear of what happened to Jeff Gerstmann?

 

[repeating integers]

CoD still gets good reviews. Someone must be doing something right.

Like paying reviewers, or threatening to withhold early copies of future releases if they don't get a good score?

Ah yes, my personal favourite hater argument strategy. The professional reviews disagree with my opinion? Clearly, they must be paid.

Are you seriously naive enough to think that sort of thing does not happen in the gaming industry?
Did you not hear of what happened to Jeff Gerstmann?

Was he the guy who got fired from Gamespot - supposedly - for his Kane & Lynch review?

I think it's possible that paid reviews do exist. I think that incident was incriminating. But before I accept it as an incontrovertible fact of life, I want concrete proof. Also, what was Gamespot's stance? Did they ever provide an explanation to the general public, or did they just sit there being ominously silent?

Still, I just don't like attitudes like yours. People are too prone to assuming their opinion is the only right one, and grasping for explanations when they see signs that the majority disagrees with them. "Pah, CoD became the best selling game of all time? Clearly, none of its customers have any taste in gaming and they've all only ever been exposed to it. IT'S THE ONLY EXPLANATION!" "pfft, a critic gave CoD a good score? Well, they must be paid. It's not like it's possible for them to like the game or anything - after all, I don't."

 

[smudgey]

CoD still gets good reviews. Someone must be doing something right.

Like paying reviewers, or threatening to withhold early copies of future releases if they don't get a good score?

Ah yes, my personal favourite hater argument strategy. The professional reviews disagree with my opinion? Clearly, they must be paid.

Are you seriously naive enough to think that sort of thing does not happen in the gaming industry?
Did you not hear of what happened to Jeff Gerstmann?

Was he the guy who got fired from Gamespot - supposedly - for his Kane & Lynch review?

I think it's possible that paid reviews do exist. I think that incident was incriminating. But before I accept it as an incontrovertible fact of life, I want concrete proof. Also, what was Gamespot's stance? Did they ever provide an explanation to the general public, or did they just sit there being ominously silent?

Still, I just don't like attitudes like yours. People are too prone to assuming their opinion is the only right one, and grasping for explanations when they see signs that the majority disagrees with them. "Pah, CoD became the best selling game of all time? Clearly, none of its customers have any taste in gaming and they've all only ever been exposed to it. IT'S THE ONLY EXPLANATION!" "pfft, a critic gave CoD a good score? Well, they must be paid. It's not like it's possible for them to like the game or anything - after all, I don't."

Wow. I don't know where you got all of that from, because i never said it. I just told the guy not to always trust reviews, and you've gotten all upset about it. And just because something sells, that doesn't mean it's good. Look at Transformers 2.

And in relation to the Gamespot controversy, there was no official explanation from Gamespot as to the reason for the firing. GameSpot reviewer Frank Provo and GameSpot Reviews Editor Alex Navarro both quit shortly after, with Provo claiming he could no longer work for a publication that softened its scores to appease advertisers.

 

[repeating integers]

CoD still gets good reviews. Someone must be doing something right.

Like paying reviewers, or threatening to withhold early copies of future releases if they don't get a good score?

Ah yes, my personal favourite hater argument strategy. The professional reviews disagree with my opinion? Clearly, they must be paid.

Are you seriously naive enough to think that sort of thing does not happen in the gaming industry?
Did you not hear of what happened to Jeff Gerstmann?

Was he the guy who got fired from Gamespot - supposedly - for his Kane & Lynch review?

I think it's possible that paid reviews do exist. I think that incident was incriminating. But before I accept it as an incontrovertible fact of life, I want concrete proof. Also, what was Gamespot's stance? Did they ever provide an explanation to the general public, or did they just sit there being ominously silent?

Still, I just don't like attitudes like yours. People are too prone to assuming their opinion is the only right one, and grasping for explanations when they see signs that the majority disagrees with them. "Pah, CoD became the best selling game of all time? Clearly, none of its customers have any taste in gaming and they've all only ever been exposed to it. IT'S THE ONLY EXPLANATION!" "pfft, a critic gave CoD a good score? Well, they must be paid. It's not like it's possible for them to like the game or anything - after all, I don't."

Wow. I don't know where you got all of that from, because i never said it. I just told the guy not to always trust reviews, and you've gotten all upset about it. And just because something sells, that doesn't mean it's good. Look at Transformers 2.

And in relation to the Gamespot controversy, there was no official explanation from Gamespot as to the reason for the firing. GameSpot reviewer Frank Provo and GameSpot Reviews Editor Alex Navarro both quit shortly after, with Provo claiming he could no longer work for a publication that softened its scores to appease advertisers.

Alright, I misinterpreted. But a lot of people DO have attitudes like that, which irritate me as much as any form of arrogance. Sorry.

As for the second part, that sounds pretty incriminating. But who says all Gamespot's (or any other site's) reviews are "softened to appease advertisers"?

 

[smudgey]

But who says all Gamespot's (or any other site's) reviews are "softened to appease advertisers"?

Who says they are? Who says they're not? We can never be completely sure, until more journalists start blowing more whistles. All we know for certain is that a lot of money changes hands in the name of advertising dollars, and a big publisher such as EA or Activision threatening to pull these dollars could seriously impact a website's livelihood. Sure, most reviews are probably genuine, but i personally prefer to take them all with a grain of salt and rent, borrow or demo the game myself. After all, your own opinion is worth more to you than someone's who you've never met. Look at the 1987 Arnie movie Predator; it has a Metacritic score of 36!

 

[repeating integers]

But who says all Gamespot's (or any other site's) reviews are "softened to appease advertisers"?

Who says they are? Who says they're not? We can never be completely sure, until more journalists start blowing more whistles. All we know for certain is that a lot of money changes hands in the name of advertising dollars, and a big publisher such as EA or Activision threatening to pull these dollars could seriously impact a website's livelihood. Sure, most reviews are probably genuine, but i personally prefer to take them all with a grain of salt and rent, borrow or demo the game myself. After all, your own opinion is worth more to you than someone's who you've never met. Look at the 1987 Arnie movie Predator; it has a Metacritic score of 36!

Really? Huh, that's odd. It's got 76% on Rotten Tomatoes.

And yes, no professional opinion is a substitute for your own. But spending money on a game you don't know that you'll like can be a gamble.