The NDA

[Alaster Angelo]

Is RE6 really looking that bad? I mean, I've yet to download the demo, and I've hardly seen any videos of it, but I would've hoped it be decent at best.

 

[Gearhead mk2]

Actually, the english OXM got word out. And it is AWFUL. INCREDIBLY INCREDIBLY AWFUL.

 

[ksn0va]

Oh Capcom, why couldn't you have just repayed Epic the favor and ape GoW. At least then your game would've been somewhat good.

Captcha: practice makes perfect

 

[Quiet Stranger]

So why does it suck exactly?

 

[JohnDoey]

I liked the demo for the most part and think the game looks pretty cool.

 

[natster43]

I am apparently one of the 10 guys on the escapist that liked the demo. Sure it isn't probably going to be as good as Revelations or 4, and Chris' campaign had a lot of problems in the demo, but I thought it was fun, and that is what matters for me. At least they made the menu/inventory is better than it was in 5.

 

[Madara XIII]

Seriously, anyone who was actually looking forward to RE 6 DESERVES to have 10K volts surging through their body. For Christ's sake, they killed off the series' main villain in RE 5, how could RE 6 be anything BUT "We want more money from this franchise" crap? Got a buddy of mine who's begging me to get it so we can play together. I said even if he bought it for me, I'd just take it back and trade it in towards something else.

Granted, it doesn't help that I've never been huge into the RE series. But when I heard they were making another one after the way RE 5 ended, I had to stop myself from facepalming because I knew I'd crush my skull if I did. Seriously, I would have punched a hole through my face I wanted to facepalm so hard.

They also killed off the main villain in Resident Evil 1, and 2 is largely considered the best game in the series. Resident Evil 6 is terrible, but it's not terrible because of the story, the story can't actually get any worse.

Ah Screw it. I ain't buying anything from CAPCOM anyway.

Not with Metal Gear Rising coming out and Bayonetta 2 coming on the Wii-U, I see no reason to even give those sell outs my money anymore. To be quite Frank, it seems Platinum (Ex Clover Studios) took the best of CAPCOM with it when it became it's own independent developer.
And for that I applaud them. That'll teach CAPCOM to cut the Viewtiful Joe Trilogy short.

Sorry CAPCOM, but your last good game was Asura's Wrath and even then your money grubbing ways were not so subtle in the final part.


I personally like to think CAPCOM can be represented by the shop owner in this Skit.


<youtube=rEbjM3zhDQg&list=FLvAFEo7p-bSI2Rvz7fuQ1sQ&index=16&feature=plpp_video>

 

[Madara XIII]

Eh there is a reason the movies are pretty much better than the games.

LE FUCK!?!?!
I mean...in terms of...what?!!? Have you been reading Cracked? No seriously I really want to know your reasons not to patronize but to essentially ponder just how.

These are two different mediums in which the audience varies in such a major gap.

IN SHORT!!

 

[Madara XIII]

Le bro snip

Cracked IS awesome, but no I havent been reading it...lately.

I prefer the story... as much as there ever is one when it comes to Resident Evil... of the movie series over the game series, I just never had fun with the games.

At least the movies haven't had Napoleon in them...

...Yet...

So yeah...

Ok in terms of Story consistency at least the movies do try to stay somewhat linear where as the games branch off into so many arcs and it only goes to convolute the whole Umbrella/Tricell conspiracy to the point of nonsensical.

Although I gotta give RE 1-3 it's props for trying to stay within the boundaries of its own reality.


So with that I just gotta say...Good point. No sense in arguing further. Idk maybe it's just because I was bored to the point of wanting to know EVERYTHING there was about Resident Evil that drove my bias towards the game.

NOTE: I still don't like the movies. And Im somewhat enraged after they fucked up Wesker's role ever so horribly.


So.....Bro fist?

 

[anthony87]

I'm happy with the demo. Chris section was kinda "meh", Leon and Jake sections were fun. Really don't see why people are getting so up in arms.

 

[otakon17]

Didn't seem to apply to Conan
<youtube=R9U7R6ukNss>
I wonder why?

They pulled it so I think it DOES entail him too.

 

[Nami nom noms]

I don't understand this comic... how many of those saying the game is shit have actually played it?

I've played the demo several times, and I love it. At first I didn't think too much of it (average) but once I discovered all the little nuances and cool things you can do, I'm really excited for it.

 

[Leoofmoon]

I kinda wanna try the game...it seams to be a lot of fun.

 

[Imp_Emissary]

Why would they show the game to anyone if they don't want you talking about it?

Also, why would anyone agree that they can't talk about the game before they get to see it?

If I sound Whiny or ignorant I apologize. I just really would like to know how people get into these situations. It doesn't seem good for either side.

Well company A wants to have a launch day review of a game. If they can only buy the game when it comes out how can they have a review ready? They can't. So they sign an NDA with the publisher and the publisher sends them a review copy the game early enough that they can have their review ready to publish on launch day.

Well, this is where the power of the publisher to tweak reviews comes in. They will often include a "review check list" of game features they want the reviewer to talk about, sometimes even things they don't want the reviewer to talk about. Sometimes they will even include a range they feel the score should fall in. If you deviate too far from these "suggestions" you may not get an early review copy of their next AAA game.

Since AAA game reviews bring massive page hits, ad revenue and even new readers this is a huge deal for sites like IGN, Gamespot, even The Escapist and many others. In fact you should read about Jeff Gerstmann, who lost his job for giving a certain game "too low" of a score.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeff_Gerstmann

So it really is a sordid world in this so called "games journalism". Not all sites fall prey to this, I believe that The PA Report does not nor Ars Technica's play section. There are other, mostly smaller sites that are not beholden to publishers in this way.

I remember that thing with Mr. Gerstmann. That was lame.
Wait. Does this mean they can't give a day one negative review if they agree to this? That doesn't sound right.