Jimquisition: Shadiness of Mordor

KaZuYa

New member
Mar 23, 2013
191
0
0
They actually tried to cut ties with the LOTR/Hobbit films but had "Him" in it. Is he a different copyright or something?

 

PunkRex

New member
Feb 19, 2010
2,533
0
0
Geez Jim, why not just marry TB already... can I be a bridesmaid?

OT: I hear the game is really good, my brother says the combats quick and punchy (stabby) while the nemesis system is generally interesting but fuck that we have an audience to alienate, LETS GO PEOPLE!!!
 

veloper

New member
Jan 20, 2009
4,597
0
0
This shit isn't exactly new either: google EA ronku.

I trust a man like Total Biscuit to stay honest, but I'm pretty sure these schemes wouldn't exist without atleast some takers.
Youtubers and traditional game reviewers are just advertisers to me, until I can find out enough about them that encourages trust.
 

spoonybard.hahs

New member
Apr 24, 2013
101
0
0
UberThetan said:
Roofstone said:
hermes200 said:
Weird that they specified not wanting references to the movies or the books... Its from the same WB, after all.
Was wondering about that as well. Seems strange.
Probably the same reason it's not called Lord of the Rings: Shadow of Mordor, in that the game actually isn't considered canon and is thus "separate" from the mythos.

Or something like that.

Edit: The devs wanted to avoid confusion that it had anything to do with the movies or books [http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2014-10-02-video-why-theres-no-lord-of-the-rings-in-shadows-of-mordors-name].
Which is absolutely bizarre. Gollum as he appears in the films - and even voiced by an Andy Serkis sound-a-like - is the game. Hell, they even establish that this takes place not to long before Fellowship.
 

Mr. Q

New member
Apr 30, 2013
767
0
0
Wow! There is a different between shady dealings and this BS. What kind of corporate scumbag thought this up? I can understand something like that if the game was total ass. But if it was a good or possibly a great game, you only end up shooting yourself in the foot with this dirty deed. No matter what you do from that point forward, a lot of people are going to judge your output with a more critical eye and there might be a game that doesn't deserve it.

Thanks for bringing this up, Jim, and kudos to Totalbiscuit for speaking up as well.
 

Fappy

\[T]/
May 1, 2020
12,010
0
0
Country
United States
A good episode as always. On a somewhat related note I am waiting to get this until I am done with Hyrule Warriors. 7 more Rank 3 weapons to go!

(Agitha can die in a fire, she's so bad DX)
 

Aardvaarkman

I am the one who eats ants!
Jul 14, 2011
1,262
0
0
It's pretty shitty, but I feel you are dancing around the real issue here - reviewers shouldn't rely on free or pre-release copies of games. Reviewers should be buying retail copies at release like everybody else.

You're just playing their game by going down this "first to review" path of bullshit.
 

TiberiusEsuriens

New member
Jun 24, 2010
834
0
0
hermes200 said:
Weird that they specified not wanting references to the movies or the books... Its from the same WB, after all.
The reason is the same reason why "Lord of the Rings" is not in the game title, instead just a reference to 'Middle Earth'. It has been vetted by critics that WB felt very strongly that any ties to the existing media would make Mordor look like a bad movie tie-in or cash grab. After having spent over a decade making debatably-mediocre movie tie-in LotR games, they are really tired of their games being known as such. Any spoken phrase linking Shadows of Mordor to would have "Tainted" players opinions.

Good thing they went the censorship route, because that never taints peoples feelings /sarcasm.
 

Zacharious-khan

New member
Mar 29, 2011
559
0
0
Jim, do you think that the actions of the Publisher are heinous enough to warrant not purchasing this game out of principle. I saw your game play on your youtube channel and the game looked really good but after hearing this the whole thing leaves a bad taste in my mouth
 

ex275w

New member
Mar 27, 2012
187
0
0
So Jim how about plans to have early access to comment on your videos? Here are some rules based on this brilliant sponsored deal:
1. Tweet 7 times how you love the Jimquisition with the tag #Jimquisition4Ever
2. Make a livestream of you watching the video early.
3. Mention how funny the joke at 3:33 is.
4. Tell your livestream audience how distinct and unique's Jim's personality is.
5. Your early comment on the escapist thread must be approved 96 hours by Jim personally.
6. The comment must end with the phrase: "Thank God for Jim!"

So please PM Jim if you want to discuss this totally not shady sponsored Jimquistion deal.

Thank God for Jim!
 

Andy Shandy

Fucked if I know
Jun 7, 2010
4,797
0
0
Okay, I knew it was shady, but I had no idea it was that shady. Particularly stupid, considering how good the game is and you should all buy it.*

*[sub]This post is part of a paid brand deal with Warner Bros.[/sub]
[sub][sub]Not really[/sub][/sub]
 

MXRom

New member
Jan 10, 2013
101
0
0
Now I am conflicted. The game is great, hell I never watched any let's plays or anything like that but I got it on release, and found it a blast. Why does WB feel the need to control video content so stringently and not just let the developer's effort shine through on its own? Is this insecurity, or general assholery?

I feel like I shouldn't have bought it since this was pretty shady of the publisher, but then I'd feel guilty for ignoring a good developer.
 

kuolonen

New member
Nov 19, 2009
290
0
0
"A really good game"? Meh, mediocre for me at least. Combat is fun but gets repetitive fast and plot is not exactly breaking any new grounds. Also game kind of feels rushed and ends in a very painful sequel hook. And if you have read read the books and other lore you may lose some hairs to the degree which they take liberties with Tolkien universe. Lastly, it is a prequel. An Unforgivable sin.

While all above can be subjective, if what Jim describes is company policy, I'd say avoid the game like the plague.
 

Thanatos2k

New member
Aug 12, 2013
820
0
0
Shame on anyone who agreed to deals like this. That's personal integrity out the window.
 

Catasros

New member
Dec 9, 2013
27
0
0
What. F-ing what? This kind of shit is what publishers think will sell games for them? I mean, I saw the TB video so I knew that he had problems getting a code, but I figured it was a single instance. But Warner Brothers had this kind of rules for reviewers to get to review their game? And here I thought the game looked kinda fun, I figured that I'd buy it as soon as it dropped a bit in price, but now I kinda don't, I mean, then it'd be like telling publishers "Yes, this b-ll-shit works, God Speed you mad [email protected]".

.
.
.

Thank GOD/JEHOVAH/ALLAH/BRAHMAN/BUDDAH/OSIRIS/ZEUS/JUPITER/WHOEVER for Jim!
 

Imp_Emissary

Mages Rule, and Dragons Fly!
Legacy
Aug 9, 2020
2,315
1
43
Country
United States
Dang. When I heard about this it sounded like a bad idea, but I didn't know they were actually trying to take down any reviews they didn't pay for.

I feel less bad about deciding to wait a good long while to get SoM. It's a shame because what I've heard of the game is that it's pretty good, so I don't know why they would be so paranoid about its reviews.
 

nevarran

New member
Apr 6, 2010
347
0
0
That's one of the shadiest crap, I've heard of.
I'm adding WB to my "purchase with caution from those assholes" list.
 

Evonisia

Your sinner, in secret
Jun 24, 2013
3,257
0
0
At the very least this controversy makes me want to look into the game. I object to bullshit like this but I don't regularly watch any YouTuber reviewing games so it has little affect on me.

Of course the plan was probably to let the controversy leak out so suckers like me would look into the game. Damn.