... there was an undisclosed spoiler for Mass Effect 3 in the latest escapist s**tcast, and it has totally put a downer on the game for me, hopefully the woman was simply wrong, but if she's correct, I would've rather she just kept her trap shut...
You spelt it, I didn't. It could've been sootcast, or seatcast, or anything else unpleasent with an s at the beginning and a t at the end with four letters.
Anyway, she gave her opinion that Mass Effect 3 was
more like an fps than an rpg just like ME2, which irritated me
... there was an undisclosed spoiler for Mass Effect 3 in the latest escapist s**tcast, and it has totally put a downer on the game for me, hopefully the woman was simply wrong, but if she's correct, I would've rather she just kept her trap shut...
You spelt it, I didn't. It could've been sootcast, or seatcast, or anything else unpleasent with an s at the beginning and a t at the end with four letters.
Anyway, she gave her opinion that Mass Effect 3 was
more like an fps than an rpg just like ME2, which irritated me
OT ? Of course they should get it early. Otherwise the review won?t come out until a few weeks after the game, which is pointless. I?m sure there are plenty of people who wait for at least some reviews before forking over their cash to get a game.
... there was an undisclosed spoiler for Mass Effect 3 in the latest escapist s**tcast, and it has totally put a downer on the game for me, hopefully the woman was simply wrong, but if she's correct, I would've rather she just kept her trap shut...
You spelt it, I didn't. It could've been sootcast, or seatcast, or anything else unpleasent with an s at the beginning and a t at the end with four letters.
Anyway, she gave her opinion that Mass Effect 3 was
more like an fps than an rpg just like ME2, which irritated me
OT ? Of course they should get it early. Otherwise the review won?t come out until a few weeks after the game, which is pointless. I?m sure there are plenty of people who wait from at least some reviews before forking over their cash to get a game.
How is it pointless? What are the chances people are waiting for day 1 game reviews of games? Surely there's hardly anyone. My point is, to avoid possible leaks of information like this reviewer did, I think they shouldn't be given early access, I don't see an argument, in my opinion, that justifies it.
Most people will want to get the game at least the week of release generally, and as I say, I'm sure most people like to gather information from reviewers.
Also, she didn't leak information. She offered an opinion, which she actually later retracted when someone gave their own opinions of what makes an RPG.
And further more, should they be allowed to? I kinda understand why, it's so they have time to put the review out 'as soon as' the game comes out (which only benefits people who are on the fence because anyone who doesn't want to have massive spoilers will avoid reviews at all costs until they've finished the game), but is this valid?
Why don't they have to be restricted like the rest of us? Car reviewers (Motor Journalists) also get cars early, but that's different, people most people don't want to be surprised by cars, yet like games, potential customers would also like to know more about the product before buying it.
I might've answered my own question in there, but I'm going to try to make it into a discussion, and as usual, add a poll because I love polls.
I'm not going to answer your question purely because I'd be repeating the sentiments of most other people in this thread so far. Sentiments that I agree with, on the whole. However, I do take umbrage with one single point of yours, i.e. that people on the fence don't want to see reviews because of spoilers.
My point here is that spoilers shouldn't be in reviews anyway, and I have never seen a review by anyone who I respect as a journalist or critic, or indeed anyone with a good name in the industry (or any industry for that matter) who posts spoilers in their reviews. Anybody who puts spoilers in a review shouldn't be reviewing things in the first place, and indeed doing so is one of the worst things a critic can do, something widely acknowledged by most critics anyway. I saw one 'critic' on this very site in the User Reviews section who posted spoilers in his reviews, and nearly everyone posting on the threads called him out on it. The better reviewers here (Marter, Pimppeter2, etc.) keep spoilers out of their work, or to a minimum, so I can't see that as being a reason for you to get annoyed over reviews. If the reviews you read have spoilers in them, you need to avoid those critics, because they clearly are no good at their jobs.
I seem to have the exact opposite opinions to you.
1. I wholeheartedly approve of reviewers getting the game early. It allows the careful consumer to make a well-informed decision and still obtain the game on launch day. That is definitely a huge win for the consumers.
2. I don't really understand why publishers do it. Everything else they do seems designed to get you (the potential customer) to ride the marketing hype train right up to the pre-order register. I understand that they want publicity, but particularly for mediocre games (and there are plenty of those), there are going to be plenty of potential sales (from people who might have bought the game on day based on developer reputation, or trailers) lost due to poor reviews. Seems like they might be better off giving them the game too late to review it prior to release, thus getting both publicity and first-day sales from those who couldn't wait to find out if it's worth it. But hey, maybe the "there's no such thing as bad press" thing applies here, somehow.
I'm glad they do to be honest, back in the gamecube days before I became internet friendly I blew so much money of games I knew nothing about but just looked good.
In publishing, there's also the very real matter of print deadlines, especially if your magazine is a monthly one (which most are). If you've got a months' worth of games to cover for review / preview, you're not going to want to get the code at the last minute before you go to the printers.
Plus, as has already been mentioned, by getting review code early, it means potential purchasers can read the reviews before they decide to part with their hard earned cash.
... there was an undisclosed spoiler for Mass Effect 3 in the latest escapist s**tcast, and it has totally put a downer on the game for me, hopefully the woman was simply wrong, but if she's correct, I would've rather she just kept her trap shut...
You spelt it, I didn't. It could've been sootcast, or seatcast, or anything else unpleasent with an s at the beginning and a t at the end with four letters.
Anyway, she gave her opinion that Mass Effect 3 was
more like an fps than an rpg just like ME2, which irritated me
OK... you are too childish to admit that you by sh**cast mean shitcast and you think that a person saying that Mass Effect is more like an fps than an RPG is a spoiler? That is something that could come from someone who played the demo.
OT: Reviewers should be allowed to get early copies of games in order for us to be able get a last chance to cancel our pre-order if it turns out to suck a lot or to decide if we should pre-order it. It makes sense both why they should get it and why publishers choose to give them advanced copies.
Despite being quoted 5 more times, I'm not going to quote 5 people to say 1 or 2 main things.
I didn't like the podcast, sometimes I do, sometimes I don't, I didn't like this one because it had, IMO shit content, hence shitcast, I don't see why anyone would have a problem with me not liking the podcast at all, shit podcast can be shortened to shitcast, I was clearly having a go at whoever quoted me claiming it was 'childish' it was just a more efficient way of communicating my opinion.
As for 'its her opinion not a spoiler' that's bullshit, let me go forward in time, finish ME3, then tell everyone how the game plays like with my 'opinion' that its more of a
shooter than an rpg because of x, y, z
and I would and should be condemned for revealing a spoiler.
But that point was only symptymatic of the larger issue, that I don't see any justification for game reviewers getting the game earlier, other than to 'promote hype' in magazines and online, but I think at most the delay would only ever be an issue of a magazine, so at the risk of spoilers being announced, I think its better to insulate everyone before the game comes out, then all at once, everyone gets to play it - that's not even happening for ME3, the US gets it 1.5 days before Europe or Australia (and who knows where else), which is pretty bloody pathetic imo.
So people can make an informed as possible decision as soon as possible. "People who will buy it early have already made up their minds" is a huge generalization, and a very weak case for reviewers not getting them early.
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
