Jimquisition: Shadiness of Mordor
- Thread starter Jimothy Sterling
- Start date
Recommended Videos
What the heck why did they even feel a need to do this. I've seen enough unfiltered footage of the game to know I certainly want to get it eventually, jims right all this kinda bs does is make me not wanna play the darn thing.
So maybe I'll wait patiently until its on sale now instead.
So maybe I'll wait patiently until its on sale now instead.
We'll need to get to it, but it usually takes a few days to disseminate the intel and get the right targets and get the info out.EternallyBored said:
No time today for me, but I'll see to it tomorrow (well, in a few hours) if nobody else did yet.
Anyway: Thank you, Jim. You did well here. Finally some proper investigative journalism and reporting.
K12 said:
The problem now is that all the devs owned by Warner brothers jobs are at risk if this cause's people to avoid buying there games in future, remember WB interactive is a tiny part of WB which is only a third of Time Warner if this PR company is used for all Time Warner products WB Interactive has no say in how they advertise that would be Time Warner's legal department but they will suffer the consequence if sales do suffer.
This is the biggest risk of any dev owned by a multimedia conglomerate rather than a pure game/computer company just look at how Disney fucks over it's devs whether owned or contracted for how bad it can get.
The funniest thing about this is that Total Biscuit's review of the game was one of the most positive I have ever seen him give. Maybe he took that deal after all....
Huh, I find that a little weird. Not bad, just a bit strange, probably because the Zelda series is what really got me into gaming in the first place. If you're ever looking to get into the series, I'd recommend Twilight Princess or The Wind Waker. They're both great games that actually might be approached best with minimal outside knowledge. One step up from those, I'd recommend Majora's Mask. It's a little bit rough around the edges in areas, but I still think it's the best game the series has ever produced, and it's by far the darkest and most thematically interesting.AlouetteSK said:
As for Hyrule Warriors, I can't say much because I haven't had access to my Wii U since I left for college, but I'll definitely be picking it up when I go home in a week.
See *this* is the sort of thing the Gamergate people should be focusing on, not the sex lives of indie developers. This is legitimate corruption.
It's pretty much both though, and it would be largely useless to focus on journalistic integrity if you don't at least attempt to address where part of the money and influence is coming from. Otherwise you end up just attacking symptoms instead of causes, and one of the major causes of unethical journalist actions seems to stem from things like this.faeshadow said:
Nah, he doesn't seem like the kind of guy who'd publicly shame a PR firm for its shady practices, only to then take them up on their offer.SacremPyrobolum said:
So Youtubers have the option to either review the game, positively, or put the review up and either have it flagged as copyright(Which is really bad) or just taken down, losing all the time and work they put into the video. Or just not get a review copy at all.Rabidkitten said:
That doesn't seem like corruption to me. That sounds like heavy handed marketing control from the publishers. It would have been corruption in my mind if all the Youtubers went up to WB and said "Hey pay us and we'll all give you a good review". Maybe they don't have a mailing list to coordinate.
And hell, why is it the Youtubers have to abide by this? Wasn't there an article a few days ago about the game and the reviewer, *gasp*, Didn't like it? Lemme see if I can find that.
Publishers: Yes yes, buy our product like good sheepies.RiseUp said:
Journalists: You bought their product! How DARE YOU!!! YOU ARE BAD, DEAD, AND NOT OUR CUSTOMERS ANYMORE!!!
Yeah who do I please when the Publishers want my money and the Journalists seem to not want me in the hobby anymore. I blame both of them. The Publishers for doing shady practice after shady practice, and the gaming media for putting up with if not doing shady practices themselves. I'm also mad at the gamer(Oh no I just labeled people) core/community/etc for letting it get this far and out of control. Should have had the pitchforks out long ago.
Maybe it's not to late to just give up and play tabletop. Keep doing what you do Jim.
Here's the thing: They wouldn't have contracts if they just played games like all the other consumers do; on the day of release.Roofstone said:
The LPers and internet personalities are falling into the exact same trap that reviewers fell into in the 90's. [http://i.imgur.com/0kWbxNB.jpg]
That article I just linked? That's from 1995 from an Amiga magazine. The same trick worked then and it's working now to enslave and silence those who wish to speak to the consumer without the industry mouthpiece.
The problem is that there isn't much they can do about it, especially with the internet. People want reviews and are willing to watch videos from known industry shills if it means they get to watch the review seconds before a perfectly honest reviewer.
I've seen people blame the internet for teaching people to be lazy and decadent when it comes to content evaluation. That can't possibly be true, because the same thing was happening way before the internet even existed. This was a common practice with the movie industry up until some of the great reviewers gave the finger to the industry and reviewed it on their own.
Really it seems to me that Warner Brothers are just porting over their scummy underhanded tactics from their movie industry practices. This wouldn't be out of the ordinary for a business dealing in Hollywood obtaining a television sponsorship.
Maybe WB's mistake was that they're trying to treat the internet like television. Or maybe that's not a mistake at all and it will work wonders to the detriment of everyone.
Of course, I'm saying this as I type in a captcha that has me repeating the glories of Idaho Steaks and their "Easy mashed flavors", whatever the fuck that's supposed to mean.
Except that this company heavy-handedness may have a direct impact on journalistic integrity by locking them into such a draconian agreement just to review the game, and going out of their way to silence those who review the game but didn't sign into the brand deal. Sorry, but you can't pick and choose here. If the GamerGate crowd can't, or won't, see how this is precisely the thing they should be lighting the torches and sharpening the pitchforks over, then they're just undermining their own "we hate corruption" argument.faeshadow said:
I imagine that is something to appease the Tolkien folks. I hear they are very strict regarding everything that goes into a Middle-Earth media. Polygon had an article where a developer had put a pumpkin patch in the Shire and they had to go back and remove it at their behest.Roofstone said:
EDIT: Here is a link to that Polygon article if anyone is interested: http://www.polygon.com/2014/9/29/6863443/pumpkin-spice-latte-in-middle-earth
As for the contract stuff the video was about, the only word I can come up with is "Shameful". And the saddest part of all is that this game is great. I bought it myself and have had a great time with it, like Jim already said. It's sad they felt the need to go this route.
No they're just as guilty as everyone else too. Just because they're small, doesn't mean they're still not part of the problem. You can't make the argument that being small somehow negates them from being part of the problem when they themselves are repeating the industry mistakes that got people who want to enjoy video games into this mess.RiseUp said:
The only reason scummy rags and shady developers aren't taking just as much fire over this is because it's really easy to point at a big specter like Warner Brothers and say they are the cause of the industries' woes. It's easy to get distracted by the bigger players while the smaller players commit just as worse atrocities to journalistic integrity.
It's the same with the Let's players who are signing these contracts. The only reason they're signing these contracts is because they want even the tiniest edge over their competition. Which hurts everyone, because now everybody wants that tiny edge no matter what contract they have to sign to get it. I can't blame Warner Brothers for offering the contract as much as I do the let's players for signing it.
Really all of Gamergate has been that way, people wanting accountability for the underhanded tactics that are meant to get an edge in the industry to the detriment of everyone else. I hope the best to the people supporting it, but I can't in good faith take to twitter to help fight for it when I know that it's a longstanding problem with advertisement industries in general that isn't ever going to go away.
As someone who has worked with a number of social causes big and small over the years, you gotta attack both the big and the small targets for anything like tackling a systemic issue to have a lasting impact.Sticky said:
While pointing at the big guys is easy, actually attacking them is much much harder than attacking the smaller targets. On the flip side, the small guys are better at avoiding being targets, but they are much easier to actually attack, because they will generally respond, and can be hurt far easier than the big fish.
It's a common problem in a lot of social change organizations I've worked for over the years, the desire to focus only on the the smaller symptoms and players is tempting because there is actually a good chance that you can engage and either change or attack them. The problems start to crop up when you leave the big players unmolested, or focus too much attention on the more easily attacked small fry, you either end up being unable to effect change because the small players are too easily replaced and for every one you knock down another springs up, or you end up changing things on a a mezzo or micro level, but the macro level issues make it so the changes you fought so hard for end up being undone in a year or two due to downward pressure from macro level organizations that hold the majority of the money and power.
That's not to say attacking at the micro level is bad, but I've seen even the most well intentioned groups fail because they were drawn in by the more easily attacked small targets and never quite worked up the courage to attack the big players, because changing the big guys is probably one of the hardest parts of these types of movements.
This video has effectively turned me off the purchase of this game.
To be honest, I was never planning to buy this game new to begin with...it's always been a title that interests me but could wait for a price drop. Knowing this...I really don't feel 'okay' supporting the product anymore. I can live without this title despite the fact that it still looks cool (the shadowstep combat stuff seems amazingly fun!).
I won't go as far as to say that I'll boycott companies that do this but if I'm on the fence about something...I'd rather not support a company that uses this kind of practice to sway my decision.
I don't watch these personalities to experience a talking game advertisement...I'm not going to these channels to watch an informercial.
To be honest, I was never planning to buy this game new to begin with...it's always been a title that interests me but could wait for a price drop. Knowing this...I really don't feel 'okay' supporting the product anymore. I can live without this title despite the fact that it still looks cool (the shadowstep combat stuff seems amazingly fun!).
I won't go as far as to say that I'll boycott companies that do this but if I'm on the fence about something...I'd rather not support a company that uses this kind of practice to sway my decision.
I don't watch these personalities to experience a talking game advertisement...I'm not going to these channels to watch an informercial.
Someone needs to get a list together of all the fools who actually took this brand deal.
Then, provided their tongues can be forcibly removed from the bottom of Warner Brother's boots, we can calmly and firmly make it plain to them that if this is ever repeated that they are silly people who shall never again be worthy of our attention ever regardless of circumstance.
Because come now, really? The biggest consumer revolt in years is taking place right now over lack of transparency and some nork sitting at his desk behind his 'Chungus St. McChungusson' name plate thought this was brilliant?
Really?
Then, provided their tongues can be forcibly removed from the bottom of Warner Brother's boots, we can calmly and firmly make it plain to them that if this is ever repeated that they are silly people who shall never again be worthy of our attention ever regardless of circumstance.
Because come now, really? The biggest consumer revolt in years is taking place right now over lack of transparency and some nork sitting at his desk behind his 'Chungus St. McChungusson' name plate thought this was brilliant?
Really?
You are correct. Going after the press for anything related to indies, especially ones that make free games is laughable.RiseUp said:
It should be noted, that simply taking money to promote a product utterly destroys your credibility as a journalist, previewer, or reviewer. If you take money for a preview and then turn around and review the product in a separate video, just because the video is separate does NOT mean that a conflict of interest hasn't established.
If regular news journalist made a video about how great Bank of America was then a week later wrote an editorial relating to Bank of America, would you listen to that person? HELL NO.