Open Letter to Duke Nukem PR
- Thread starter Russ Pitts
- Start date
Recommended Videos
I can sort of understand it when game developers get upset when their product gets a negative review, but PR firms saying stuff like that is just sad. I'm glad that they apologized, and I love how Russ so graciously accepted it.
The way I look at it, the only thing worse than a negative review is no review at all. At least with a negative review, I can read it and decide for myself if I agree with the reviewer, based on the negativity be due to bugs, or bad gameplay, and then say take a chance on the game anyway if I disagree. As opposed to no review at all, where all I have to go on is the hype and PR spin, which means about as much to me as month old banana peel.
Simply put, I'd be more likely to buy a game with a negative review, than no review at all.
The way I look at it, the only thing worse than a negative review is no review at all. At least with a negative review, I can read it and decide for myself if I agree with the reviewer, based on the negativity be due to bugs, or bad gameplay, and then say take a chance on the game anyway if I disagree. As opposed to no review at all, where all I have to go on is the hype and PR spin, which means about as much to me as month old banana peel.
Simply put, I'd be more likely to buy a game with a negative review, than no review at all.
Honestly, I think Metacritic says something here about the honesty of reviews from any source. 1 negative 'reviewer' review versus 182 negative user reviews on the PS3, 414 on the xbox, and over eight hundred on the PC, almost double the positive user reviews on all of them and double for the PC and then some. Combined with my own incredibly negative experience of DA2, I would be hard pressed to find it believable someone could say anything other then 'mediocre game' when trying to be flattering.Susan Arendt said:
In fact, the DA2 review was full of PR-talk. and your dismissal of his arguments by attacking the first sentence and that alone makes it incredibly obvious that this is the case.
This whole corporatisation of the industry has really created a cynical milieu throughout the entire community. It's common knowledge (however erroneous it may be) that publishers and PR firms put pressure on media outlets for a favorable critical response. I personally haven't seen anything that leads me to question the integrity of the Escapist, and reviewers often have varying 'scales' they use to measure the quality and enjoyment of a game. The actions of the respective PR group were highly unprofessional and damage the trust consumers have in the industry as a whole. With opinion comes responsibility and a company which deals with public relations should know better than to attack the consumer end of the market; this paints publishers as money whores instead of ethical business people.
Employed by 2K.Koios said:
Actually, it works both ways and I think in the case of metacritic the integrity of a good deal of those reviews are more questionable. I distinctly remember a ruckus over review bombing, specifically of DAII. I even witnessed it for myself. People who review bomb have zero credibility in my eyes because they're not even attempting a balanced -- therefore -- a more authoritative and informative opinion.Firehound said:
This is not to say that your experience is wrong: I don't question that. I just don't think the matter is as you say.
I met a person the other day who swears that Mario 64 is a terrible game. People have different opinions and value different things in videogames; is that really so surprising?Firehound said:
There ARE positive user reviews for DA2. Clearly, it is not out of the question that someone had a great time with the game. This shouldn't be a matter for debate.
'Compared to my own experience, I can't believe anyone would say anything else.' Maybe you should try accepting the fact that other people have opinions that differ from your own. I didn't enjoy DA II, but it's getting slightly ridiculous that not a single thread goes by without someone harping on about how the Escapist has lost all credibility because Greg enjoyed the game.Firehound said:
Wasn't talking about the escpaist not having any credibility, so kindly keep your words away from my mouth. I don't put any stock in industry reviews. It's something I have never done. As in not ever. However, the white wash of a game that is at best mediocre, makes the review look more like an ad for DA2 then a review.Shamanic Rhythm said:
It doesn't mention the worst parts of the system, or glosses over them if it does, and basically, it is more a press release then a review. DA2 is not something worthy of five stars. Ever. At all. Instead of pointing out EVERY DUNGEON IN THE GAME IS REUSED WITHOUT SO MUCH AS A TEXTURE SWAP, he mentions that a couple are similar. He doesn't mention that every battle involves at least three waves of enemies that pop out of thin air.
That is why dragon age 2's review is wrong. I am not going to demand heads and cease my premium subscription, but I will say that that review is just not even trying to be a good review. It is instead a press release.
TIme for the off topic brakes to be engaged and put this runaway thread back on track.
pay·o·la/pāˈōlə/
Noun: The practice of bribing someone to use their influence or position to promote a particular product or interest.
Nope, not a made up word.
How can a review be 'wrong'? A review is a subjective personal opinion. Opinions can be misinformed, but they cannot be 'wrong.' If Greg didn't mention the copy-pasted dungeons, then he felt it clearly wasn't a dealbreaker for him the way it was for others. Just because you or I found them annoying doesn't mean he automatically should have. Stop demanding everyone conform the same tastes as you.Firehound said:
I didn't know "payola" was a word.
Is it supposed to be a play-on-words with "Crayola", because they're using money to try and "color" a reviewer's opinions? If so, I like it. It's the sort of wordplay I'd be proud to have come up with.
EDIT: The guy probably just started throwing threats around because, as someone who whores himself out to corporations that (frequently) make shit games, he can't stand people that have actual integrity. Kind of like how
Is it supposed to be a play-on-words with "Crayola", because they're using money to try and "color" a reviewer's opinions? If so, I like it. It's the sort of wordplay I'd be proud to have come up with.
EDIT: The guy probably just started throwing threats around because, as someone who whores himself out to corporations that (frequently) make shit games, he can't stand people that have actual integrity. Kind of like how
Lord Voldemort gets injured by Harry Potter because Voldemort has had to cut his soul into pieces in his quest for immortality.
Wrong is the incorrect word. terrible was what I should of used. I apologize. Writing at one or so in the morning doesn't help me much.Shamanic Rhythm said:
And stop white knighting. I have yet to demand greg stop liking DA2 this instant. I just think it is not a review but a press release. A five star review should not be given to a game that oversimplifies everything about the last game, for both good and bad, dumbs down conversation to 'dumbass' 'evil' 'good' 'question' 'MONEY'
I honestly can't see that as an improvement. I'm not saying the game was OMGTERRIBLEBAD, just that it wasn't digital Ambrosia. Reading over it, it sends up several buzzwords that reviewers don't tend to use. Pinnacle, as in pinnacle of success, is the biggest one. As in this is the ultimate game. It is the best. That isn't review speak, that is PR talk for- Buy it nowwwww.
The biggest issue is that it drips of fanboyism, which explains a lot of the issues I have for his DA2 review. Reviewers should take a step back and make sure they aren't being compromised by their love of a series, as is what probably happened here instead of some insidious PR company dropping bags and bags of money into the review copy's box. It's obvious that Tito likes Dragon Age, and when you like a series, your more likely to pave over the rough spots in a sequel when you talk about it.
But, seeing as you can't get past the whole 'he doesn't think it was a good review, in fact he thinks it was a bad. He must be trying to force opinion down throat. I can't let go of that, nor can I act like a rational being.' It was a bad review. Again, let me repeat the part that the review I don't agree with isn't going to make me stop my subscription and write angry letters. Better yet, so you actually read that part, let me write it again, IN CAPS. ONE REVIEW I DISAGREE WITH IS NOT GOING TO MAKE ME STOP MY PREMIUM SUBSCRIPTION OR DEMAND HEADS TO START A-ROLLIN.
If you need me to put each word on it's own line for you to get that I seriously think it's a terrible review, that's a bit far.
Bravo Mr. Pitts. Bravo.
When a dog takes a crap on the living room floor, you've gotta rub it's nose in it, just a bit.
To everyone else: the key here is consistency. Maybe you agree with Mr. Pitts' conclusions about the game, maybe you don't. But as long as his opinion and style remain consistent, you can use that opinion to gauge games for yourself.
Let's look at some of the points that Mr. Pitts dislikes from DNF. Grabbing unflushed turds and throwing them around, giant slappable wall-tits, in-game BJs for no apparent reason, fetch quests to acquire dildos for strippers.
Now examine those things, and list for me the games in which Mr Pitts reviews gave positive feedback for such items.
I'll wait.
Nothing? Nothing at all? So this level of toilet humor doesn't appeal to Mr. Pitts, and never has. Maybe that makes him too "high brow" for your tastes. But I for one agree with him, and have agreed with him on a great many games in the past.
Oh, and last thing, you might want to note that it wasn't ALL bad. Russ seemed to like the vehicle sections.
When a dog takes a crap on the living room floor, you've gotta rub it's nose in it, just a bit.
To everyone else: the key here is consistency. Maybe you agree with Mr. Pitts' conclusions about the game, maybe you don't. But as long as his opinion and style remain consistent, you can use that opinion to gauge games for yourself.
Let's look at some of the points that Mr. Pitts dislikes from DNF. Grabbing unflushed turds and throwing them around, giant slappable wall-tits, in-game BJs for no apparent reason, fetch quests to acquire dildos for strippers.
Now examine those things, and list for me the games in which Mr Pitts reviews gave positive feedback for such items.
I'll wait.
Nothing? Nothing at all? So this level of toilet humor doesn't appeal to Mr. Pitts, and never has. Maybe that makes him too "high brow" for your tastes. But I for one agree with him, and have agreed with him on a great many games in the past.
Oh, and last thing, you might want to note that it wasn't ALL bad. Russ seemed to like the vehicle sections.
And just a quick comparison between Duke Nukem Forever (henceforth: DNF) and Duke Nukem 3-D (DN3D.)
In DN3D you could interact with toilets to hear a flush and "Ahhh. Much better." Nothing told you this was available (had to find it out yourself) and there was no actual reward.
In DNF you get to watch yourself pee, aim it. You get to pick up poo and fling it. The game tells you to do these things, by putting instructions in the center of your screen. You get achievements for it.
In DN3D, you'd occasionally find "babes" captured by the enemy, begging to be killed. They were always covered (if barely) as needed. Also, strippers were covered up as well.
In DNF, they're butt naked, being raped by aliens, and moaning. Tits on the captured babes, tits on the strippers, tits on the walls.
In DN3D, the babes/strippers/etc were usually hidden or in limited supply.
IN DNF, they literally fall into your lap, face first.
DN3D featured huge sprawling maps, jet-pack exploration, hidden passageways, etc.
DNF levels are on rails.
DN3D let you carry enough firepower to arm a small nation
DNF: 2 weapon limit, because all the cool games are doing it.
The list goes on, but literally EVERY change was a negative one (unless you count polygons) Any one or two of those would have been annoying but bearable. The whole list is just too much. Suffice to say, Mr Pitts is well within his rights to give the game a good verbal lashing. And the company that cries about said lashing needs to get a wake-up call as well
In DN3D you could interact with toilets to hear a flush and "Ahhh. Much better." Nothing told you this was available (had to find it out yourself) and there was no actual reward.
In DNF you get to watch yourself pee, aim it. You get to pick up poo and fling it. The game tells you to do these things, by putting instructions in the center of your screen. You get achievements for it.
In DN3D, you'd occasionally find "babes" captured by the enemy, begging to be killed. They were always covered (if barely) as needed. Also, strippers were covered up as well.
In DNF, they're butt naked, being raped by aliens, and moaning. Tits on the captured babes, tits on the strippers, tits on the walls.
In DN3D, the babes/strippers/etc were usually hidden or in limited supply.
IN DNF, they literally fall into your lap, face first.
DN3D featured huge sprawling maps, jet-pack exploration, hidden passageways, etc.
DNF levels are on rails.
DN3D let you carry enough firepower to arm a small nation
DNF: 2 weapon limit, because all the cool games are doing it.
The list goes on, but literally EVERY change was a negative one (unless you count polygons) Any one or two of those would have been annoying but bearable. The whole list is just too much. Suffice to say, Mr Pitts is well within his rights to give the game a good verbal lashing. And the company that cries about said lashing needs to get a wake-up call as well
This is getting way off topic, so I'll just reiterate my point that all you are doing is holding out your opinions as though they are facts, and claiming that because Greg failed to acknowledge them, he was guilty of being either a 'fanboy' or a willing compliant in a PR scandal. I have nothing more to say.Firehound said:
Now back on topic. Good on you, Russ. I just read Gamespot's review before and I must say, the days of Kane and Lynch have been put well behind them, as they absolutely tore the game a new one. I'm guessing they were looking at being on this 'blacklist' as well.