Open Letter to Duke Nukem PR
- Thread starter Russ Pitts
- Start date
Recommended Videos
Oh, don't be so judgemental. Its all in good fun. Its not like Russ came out and said "Oh! Oh! So we can't have any of your games early now? Well then, from now on they get a starting rating of 0 out of 100!GotMurf said:
Also I agree with yayforgiveaway too. Mostly because Russ has to agree with him too, or conrtadict himself. Ha!
Unless most people think he is just being a dick....Then all I can say is that I will miss him.
Democracy!
I'm a little confused... are you saying that you think that the Escapist was influenced by advertising dollars to write a negative review? Because I'm pretty sure that a game company attempting to buy a review from a site like this would not be looking for a negative one. And I'm also not sure why The Escapist should not accept ad revenue from a company for a game that the reviewer did not like; they're still a gaming site, and this is a pretty big release that many people in their key demographic would be interested in. If anything, I would see this as an indication that they are not being paid for their opinion, and that the system, at least in this instance, is working. Or am I reading you incorrectly?CrazyCapnMorgan said:
The relationship between an art/entertainment form and its reviewers is always rocky (and I should know... I'm an actor *grins*), and it's very easy for one side to attack the other for behaving unfairly. My advice is twofold: 1) always, always remember that every review you read is based on opinion, which itself is based on varying levels of expertise, and 2) if you're going to pay attention to reviews, and use them to base your initial perceptions of a game, then it is your responsibility to find reviewers whose opinions you trust. If you don't believe that Russ is a reliable source of information about a game, or if you simply don't think that his taste in games and yours are compatible, then you don't have to give his reviews any credence. You can simply read them and let them roll off your back.
The problem with Mr. Redner's comments as I see it was not that he was wrong; there are certainly reviewers who abuse their positions with vitriol, as there have been throughout history and as there will be for the foreseeable future. But it is still a very subjective thing to say that this person's review was a balanced negative review while this other person's review was an unprovoked attack. Was Mr. Redner so objective that he could honestly make that call? And would it justify him making the decision to stop providing advanced copies to a particular reviewer? I don't think so. And that's not his call to make. Readers of reviews are (or should be) smart enough to assess whether they think a reviewer is providing an honest opinion or just hating for hatred's sake. It's up to them to decide which is which.
Bottom line is, a person is never going to agree with any reviewer, even a trusted one, 100% of the time. But that doesn't give anyone the right to stop that reviewer from writing. Because, as people have said here multiple times, everyone is entitled to their opinion.
(This may sound "used", but F@#k it.)Susan Arendt said:
On no she didn't.
Ok, back to Seriousness now. Why don't people get it? Its been a long while. Game reviews, ARE written opinions! The people play the game, they either enjoy it or not depending on the games quality, and what THEY like. Then they tell us through written words and video what they THINK about it from what THEY experienced. If they liked it and said they liked it(or they hated it and said so), then just because you disagree doesn't make what they said a lie! It means you have a different opinion, and that's fine.
What's not fine is saying just because someone doesn't agree with you, that the only explanation is that they are lying, and are wrong.
Also, I did enjoy Dragon Age 2, but I agree with X-Play's review of a 3 out of 5. However, I'm not the Escapist reviewer who played it. I am my own person, with my own thoughts. So sue me.
Welcome to the corporate age of gaming; if you're a paying customer, you're seen as a sucker they can nickle and dime to death while calling you a possible criminal at the same time. Reviews are a cut-throat process where reviewers are bullied or punished for negative reviews and owners of websites and publications are bribed or pressured.
The best days of gaming are over. From the late 80's to early 2000's it was a golden age of dozens of developers competeing against one another and were able to take risks and make niche titles that created loyal customers while making money at the same time! Those loyal customers were rewarded with a few digital items for free between expansion packs.
THEN publishers started to buy up developers and now 3-4 companies own and control the vast majority of the gaming industry, so now we're in a "Hollywood" situation where budgets are huge where they can't take risks so they shit out a mass-appeal focus grouped clone of the last successful release and indie developers just can't compete.
The only thing that can fix this is another video game collapse where EA, Ubisoft, and Activision go bankrupt which will allow developers to pop up again on their own.
The best days of gaming are over. From the late 80's to early 2000's it was a golden age of dozens of developers competeing against one another and were able to take risks and make niche titles that created loyal customers while making money at the same time! Those loyal customers were rewarded with a few digital items for free between expansion packs.
THEN publishers started to buy up developers and now 3-4 companies own and control the vast majority of the gaming industry, so now we're in a "Hollywood" situation where budgets are huge where they can't take risks so they shit out a mass-appeal focus grouped clone of the last successful release and indie developers just can't compete.
The only thing that can fix this is another video game collapse where EA, Ubisoft, and Activision go bankrupt which will allow developers to pop up again on their own.
Mr. Redner said "We will review who will get copies in the future." That's not an opinion, that's a threat.CrazyCapnMorgan said:
Russ's review is barely snarky, and even addresses the juvenile humour aspect as just being not good (in that reviewers opinion - in fact many reviewers opnions).
Can I ask you question?Russ Pitts said:
I've seen much worse games than DNF get more stars than it on this site, and while I agree that DNF isn't a great game, or even a good one from a critical standpoint, DNF was, in my opinion, FUN.
Very fun, a blast to play. I think that there lies a misconception that a good game must be fun, and fun games must be good.
DNF shows thats not the case. Like the recent transformers movies, they may suck, but you couldn't help but smile or cheer when you see 15 giant robots beat the gears out of each other with the city blowing up around them.
Well, Take Two has now dropped them as a client. Good for them.
Doing foolish things like this - mistake or not - is completely out of order. Mistake or not, the fact that he was thinking it, was bad enough. Then he goes and types it up. And Tweets it.
I've had a love and hate relationship with the media for longer than most have had hot dinners, but when the Sun goes down, we all know where that line - which must not be crossed - is. That's reason why we're all still here, doing our jobs and trying to move along with the conveyor belt that is the industry rat race. We're all friends here. At least that's what Facebook thinks. Not to mention the many industy events where we all mingle "like it never happened".
It is the outsiders - like these crazy PR companies all fighting to belong and be relevant - who come in and break the synergy that is the madness within. We're all mad. We know this. We accept it. With pride, grace - and beer. Lots and lots of beer. And junk food. And weird emoticons. And murderous spouses who still haven't figured out yet that we're all stark, raving nuts.
I agree that some of the Duke reviews themselves have been a tad over the top, but lets face it, the game itself is flat out over the top. So what's wrong with reviewing a game and using the very same expressions that said game seems to promote?
The Ars Technica review was the craziest of the lot and Ben didn't mince his words one bit. Now that's emotion that was directly in line with the spirit of the game's very premise.
And given that Randy knew that the reviews were going to be all over the place, my guess is that what we're seeing isn't as shocking as it appears, since he warned us all no less than two weeks ago.
Doing foolish things like this - mistake or not - is completely out of order. Mistake or not, the fact that he was thinking it, was bad enough. Then he goes and types it up. And Tweets it.
I've had a love and hate relationship with the media for longer than most have had hot dinners, but when the Sun goes down, we all know where that line - which must not be crossed - is. That's reason why we're all still here, doing our jobs and trying to move along with the conveyor belt that is the industry rat race. We're all friends here. At least that's what Facebook thinks. Not to mention the many industy events where we all mingle "like it never happened".
It is the outsiders - like these crazy PR companies all fighting to belong and be relevant - who come in and break the synergy that is the madness within. We're all mad. We know this. We accept it. With pride, grace - and beer. Lots and lots of beer. And junk food. And weird emoticons. And murderous spouses who still haven't figured out yet that we're all stark, raving nuts.
I agree that some of the Duke reviews themselves have been a tad over the top, but lets face it, the game itself is flat out over the top. So what's wrong with reviewing a game and using the very same expressions that said game seems to promote?
The Ars Technica review was the craziest of the lot and Ben didn't mince his words one bit. Now that's emotion that was directly in line with the spirit of the game's very premise.
And given that Randy knew that the reviews were going to be all over the place, my guess is that what we're seeing isn't as shocking as it appears, since he warned us all no less than two weeks ago.
"Hello, Mr. Reader, have you come for a review today?"nexekho said:
"Yes"
"I'm sorry, but we don't have one because we have been blacklsited by corr -
*click*
Pop-UP
"Wait! Wait! We have an amusing cartoon for you to enjoy, it reviews a game!"
"When was it released"?
"Two weeks ago."
*click*
I want to say that while you're entitled to your opinion, so are several others. The majority opinion is not in your favor.Jabberwock xeno said:
http://www.metacritic.com/game/xbox-360/duke-nukem-forever/user-reviews
However, I haven't played the game and have nothing to compare it to. I only have several negative reviews to go by.
Still, this article was about the response from PR firms and threatening to take reviews away from certain outlets.
you give faith to this young heartAgentBJ09 said:
i have preordered the BOS and it didnt came the day it supposed to came
i was immensely disappointed by the reviews... but the game play looks good... i don t know what to think
but if there is people that still think it is worth it, i´ll go and pick it up today and give it a try, if anything i will have the collectibles
Nicely done boss. I fully support your position, and I am thankful that you approached this potentially volatile situation like a consumate professional. I come to the Escapist before I go anywhere else on the web, because simply put, the Escapist is the most honest. You all never pull punches, and are quick with praise for good games. You go out of your way to bring quality programs like ZP and Escape to the Movies to the masses and you aren't afraid to give a dude like that Jim guy a forum to rant. (Don't like him myself, but it seems many do. The point of my mentioning Jim's show is that I like that there is a dichotomy here; I never feel like I'm being pandered to on the Escapist.) I appreciate all the hard work the Escapist staff puts into this site, and all of the time you spend defending common sense in an increasingly commercial industry. Keep up the good work folks! Much love from the bay area!Russ Pitts said:
You absolutely do. But by the same token, we're entitled to not allow certain ones on our forumsyayforgiveaway said:
Implying that opinions in reviews aren't honest is indeed calling the reviewer a liar. Ads and editorial are handled by two completely separate departments, and never the twain shall meet. Someone liking a game you didn't (or not liking a game you did) is a matter of opinion, nothing more.MirrorForTheSun said: