It works both ways, people with jobs and family might not have the time to research every game they buy so they find a series or two they like and stick with them, preordering because they know they are going to buy and play it anyway.Malpraxis said:I only saw how his argument benefits Publishers and Reviewers, but not really the consumer (ie. us).
I mean, I know it's better for the consumer to read a fleshed out review with someone with enough time to experience the game, but taking the Colonial Marines example: If embargos didn't exist, it would take virtually no time for reviewers to universally see that it's crap. And you don't need a review for that, just a tweet would be enough, a freaking lolcat picture saying 'it sucks', or a first impressions video if you're feeling fancy. Anything to ultimately help the consumer.
But I guess the status quo is okay... fanboys will always preorder a year in advance, and people with 2 working brain cells can wait for reviews to roll in. I don't quite understand that mentality of 'being the first to play it' anyway. Don't these people have jobs/school, significant others, or hobbies to distract them from the latest release for a few days?.
All in all, the episode was pretty informative and enjoyable.
True, I do agree that is the case, but I think its one of those things that doesn't really hurt us either, when used in non shitty ways.Malpraxis said:I only saw how his argument benefits Publishers and Reviewers, but not really the consumer (ie. us).
Why aren't more people talking about this? "Der Corruption" is a big topic right now, so why isn't anyone getting pissed off at Konami when there's proof of them dicking over Jim?kailus13 said:He made this video http://www.escapistmagazine.com/videos/view/jimquisition/5524-Konami and Konami got pissed and blacklisted him.Gizmo1990 said:This is a bit off topic but it is something I have wanted to know for a while now. What the hell happened between Jim and Konami?
Yeah, I'm aware of it. It's why I generally disagree with Embargoes though, all the power on the corporations side and none of it on the consumer side. The US is a fucked place. Your allowed to lie, cheat, and practically steal people's money at this point. I do generally like the EU's policies on this issue though. See, because of what I said in that section, "At this point, a time where you often can't try before you buy or return goods whether buggy, damaged, lied about or just outright shit, reviews should be looked upon as a required consumer good." In the EU, as you stated, they can return things as is required by law to be upheld. This makes reviews not as essential of a service/good. It's not perfect but its a much better protection than what consumers have here.EternallyBored said:Good luck convincing the U.S. government to actually enforce anything like that, you would be lucky if it didn't die in committee, the U.S. government takes a very caveat emptor (buyer beware) approach to any consumer product that doesn't effect physical safety or health. Reviews are protected from copyright infringement under fair use, but there is very little regulation beyond that, the government sees it as the consumers responsibility to inform themselves and the review industry is a free market enterprise that is providing a non-essential consumer service based on subjective quality of a non-essential good.Demonchaser27 said:2. Journalist aren't attached to Dev/Pubs like a leash. Meaning some form of enforcement (or discount) to make sure all qualified reviewers can get a copy for review. If not this, then at the very list illegality of blacklisting and still requirement for qualified reviewers to get a copy for review. At this point, a time where you often can't try before you buy or return goods whether buggy, damaged, lied about or just outright shit, reviews should be looked upon as a required consumer good. They should be treated as the balance against the marketing forces of entertainment goods. There really isn't any excuse why a publisher should be able to actively harm both the reviewers and consumers by saying "You didn't do what we wanted/give us the score we wanted, your blacklisted".
And as a perfect recent example of all this, Destiny has had an embargo essentially set after release (yes they got the copies but what good is that if you aren't allowed to play the damn game). It's getting to a point that some new laws might have to be made just for some fucking consumer protections against the fraudulent activities of these corporations.
The EU is a little more on the consumer side, with laws stating that even software should be returnable for a refund, and generally stricter laws on false advertisement, but even then, the consumer review industry is still not seen as an essential consumer service, and you would have a hard time convincing them that view should be changed.
Luxury items are generally not very strictly regulated in any fashion, as it is seen as the buyers responsibility to inform themselves, especially if the product has a minimal risk of causing physical harm or issues.
Because trying to focus on everything at same time wont help you achieve nothing.Thoraxington said:Why aren't more people talking about this? "Der Corruption" is a big topic right now, so why isn't anyone getting pissed off at Konami when there's proof of them dicking over Jim?kailus13 said:He made this video http://www.escapistmagazine.com/videos/view/jimquisition/5524-Konami and Konami got pissed and blacklisted him.Gizmo1990 said:This is a bit off topic but it is something I have wanted to know for a while now. What the hell happened between Jim and Konami?
That just makes me thank god for Jim that much more.
Agreed. I never buy games until I've seen a lot of reviews and footage of them. I can't afford to spend 60 dollars on something I might not even like. It honestly boggles my mind that people still pre-order games when so many people have gotten burned by them.senordesol said:...Or you could wait for the review.Solaire of Astora said:The problem is the blacklisting. Not the act of choosing to post a review before a publisher's 'embargo' ends.Jman1236 said:Embargos have always bugged me especially when it's a game that I'm on the fence about. What's even worse prebuying a digital game and learning it's crap before you play it. But jim makes a point about embargos, while a reviewer can break it to warn the public, which we would all be grateful for, he/she would be blacklisted by the industry and basically be commiting suicide.
So do we just go ahead and take it, or try to change it?
Publishers exerting control over an industry they should have no business manipulating is not something we should just shrug at. But at the same time, I'm not sure what can be done when the problem is already highly widespread.
"Keep the public from realizing potential flaws in our game until they already have it" is not and should not be a legitimate marketing strategy.
Outlets like the Escapist need developers more than developers need the Escapist. Without the Escapist's, developers still have content to peddle. Without developers' support; the Escapist doesn't.
If the attitude is 'don't buy in to the marketing machine'...then...don't. Don't pre-order anything and don't buy anything until you've seen a review. Worst case scenario: you buy the game the day after launch.
So lets make a bigger deal out of companies blacklisting journalists. That's a small thing that can have bigger consequences if enough people ***** about it.LivingHitokiri said:Because trying to focus on everything at same time wont help you achieve nothing.Thoraxington said:Why aren't more people talking about this? "Der Corruption" is a big topic right now, so why isn't anyone getting pissed off at Konami when there's proof of them dicking over Jim?kailus13 said:He made this video http://www.escapistmagazine.com/videos/view/jimquisition/5524-Konami and Konami got pissed and blacklisted him.Gizmo1990 said:This is a bit off topic but it is something I have wanted to know for a while now. What the hell happened between Jim and Konami?
That just makes me thank god for Jim that much more.
Focus on improving something specific and then build around it.
Journalists in my opinion are they key to make that happen hence why i believe the focus should be there first.
Thats how i see it, i maybe be wrong but i do not underestimate the people that got a huge voice and influence a lot of people.
That depends on where you live, here in Australia you can indeed return a game which has been falsely advertised (and I have done it). Also GoG.com and Origin both offer return policies for all users, so it's not impossible depending on your location and store you purchase from.Demonchaser27 said:It would do a lot to make sure Developers/Publishers make better products since they know they won't be able to hide behind Pre-orders with no repercussions (remember we can almost never really return games, even if they lie to us in advertising).
Ooooh! I totally missed that one since i'm not playing on a console since... a very long time.Thanatos2k said:Unfortunately Destiny just showed us why they're abused.
A review embargo should never, EVER be on or after the release date, because it shows complete insecurity in your product and a desire to fleece people who preordered it before they find out the truth.
Like what just happened with Destiny.
Of course it didn't bomb, they spent hundreds of millions of dollars on the marketing campaign. However, for the most expensive game of all time to get a middling 75ish on metacritic with people calling it boring is a disaster.Adeptus Aspartem said:Ooooh! I totally missed that one since i'm not playing on a console since... a very long time.Thanatos2k said:Unfortunately Destiny just showed us why they're abused.
A review embargo should never, EVER be on or after the release date, because it shows complete insecurity in your product and a desire to fleece people who preordered it before they find out the truth.
Like what just happened with Destiny.
Did it bomb spectacularly? giddygiddy, please tell me?
I suppose you also think a journalist protecting an anonymous source is also just a PR man? The relationship for access is key to journalism, whether it's games or working at the White House. It's why certain reporters continually get the same key stories, because they've proven that they can be trusted not to reveal sources or to provide a fair report. It's why the film industry has such a stark distinction between reviewers, who have access, and "journalists" (paparazzi) who don't. Once a reviewer stops playing ball, they're not really useful to the consumer or the publisher.MatParker116 said:Embargo's aren't journalism the moment you sign one you become a PR man.
Or the consumer could refuse to pre-order anything until the first reviews come out. That'd put market pressure on the problem.Thanatos2k said:Unfortunately Destiny just showed us why they're abused.
A review embargo should never, EVER be on or after the release date, because it shows complete insecurity in your product and a desire to fleece people who preordered it before they find out the truth.
Like what just happened with Destiny.