Watch Dogs Preview Event Attendees Given a Free Nexus 7 - Update

[Carnagath]

even ladies of the night on some occasions

Is there some kind of story I missed behind that or did you just pull it out of your ass?

 

[J Tyran]

I am going to say this, Ubisoft have been big on the whole linked apps and second screen thing lately and Watchdogs seems it will able to utilise it even more.

Perhaps they wanted to try and make sure the reviewers all had a tablet suitable for the game so they cover it in the review? The little mini game and second screen map feature in Black Flag barely got mentioned in reviews of the game.

That's what I was thinking. From the photo, it looks like the tablets were all charged up and RTR.

As much as I dislike Ubisoft, I'm not ready to shout "bribery!" over this just yet.

How on earth is that a convincing reason? If that was all it was about, they'd have had the tablets set up with the game, where they'd have stayed when the press left.

This is a notorious problem in the games industry, the publishers try to bribe reviewers with lavish parties and gifts. There was a law passed to make it illegal for a lobbyist to buy lunch or give gifts to a politician, because they were doing exactly what these companies are doing, except to influence votes in congress instead of reviews in a magazine or on a website.

It's out and out bribery, just a form that's slightly more socially acceptable than cash bribes. And only slightly -- like I said, it's now recognized as a form of illegal bribery to do it to a politician.

That kind of bribery still goes on with politicians, instead of cash or gifts they are offered a highly paid sinecure within an affiliated company after they leave office. Often their families benefit from the same, look at that Bundy Ranch issue in the US at the moment for a good example. Senator Harry Reids family have jobs with almost every major industry in the state, companies that have benefited heavily from legislation Senator Reid helped pass. His son even works for the multinational energy company that is behind the eviction of those ranchers.

The Ubisoft tablet issue is no different to journalists getting free consoles or tech reviewers getting sent items that they do not need to return, its all a gravy train and I didn't see much rage about individuals that got free PS4s and Xbox ones. Its feasible that Ubisoft did give future reviewers of Watchdogs a free tablet so they are more likely to include the companion app and second screen features in the review, thats pretty much the same as being given a PS4 or the latest £600 graphics card they don't need to return.

Ubisoft are my least favourite of the big publishers but even I am willing to give them the benefit of the doubt on this one.

 

[Owyn_Merrilin]

It's out and out bribery, just a form that's slightly more socially acceptable than cash bribes. And only slightly -- like I said, it's now recognized as a form of illegal bribery to do it to a politician.

And if it is? So what?

It's not like game journalists decide social policy that affect millions of citizens.

Ubisoft bribes reviewer, reviewer gives good score, consumer buys disappointing game.

I fail to see how whether this is a bribe or not will change the fact that people will still buy shitty Ubisoft games.

The entire point of reviews is to have an honest assessment of whether or not something is worth buying. The games industry has a downright /nasty/ case of untrustworthy, bribed reviewers. Who then have a tendency to get upset if you suggest that maybe, you know, they've been bribed.

 

[Owyn_Merrilin]

I am going to say this, Ubisoft have been big on the whole linked apps and second screen thing lately and Watchdogs seems it will able to utilise it even more.

Perhaps they wanted to try and make sure the reviewers all had a tablet suitable for the game so they cover it in the review? The little mini game and second screen map feature in Black Flag barely got mentioned in reviews of the game.

That's what I was thinking. From the photo, it looks like the tablets were all charged up and RTR.

As much as I dislike Ubisoft, I'm not ready to shout "bribery!" over this just yet.

How on earth is that a convincing reason? If that was all it was about, they'd have had the tablets set up with the game, where they'd have stayed when the press left.

This is a notorious problem in the games industry, the publishers try to bribe reviewers with lavish parties and gifts. There was a law passed to make it illegal for a lobbyist to buy lunch or give gifts to a politician, because they were doing exactly what these companies are doing, except to influence votes in congress instead of reviews in a magazine or on a website.

It's out and out bribery, just a form that's slightly more socially acceptable than cash bribes. And only slightly -- like I said, it's now recognized as a form of illegal bribery to do it to a politician.

That kind of bribery still goes on with politicians, instead of cash or gifts they are offered a highly paid sinecure within an affiliated company after they leave office. Often their families benefit from the same, look at that Bundy Ranch issue in the US at the moment for a good example. Senator Harry Reids family have jobs with almost every major industry in the state, companies that have benefited heavily from legislation Senator Reid helped pass. His son even works for the multinational energy company that is behind the eviction of those ranchers.

The Ubisoft tablet issue is no different to journalists getting free consoles or tech reviewers getting sent items that they do not need to return, its all a gravy train and I didn't see much rage about individuals that got free PS4s and Xbox ones. Its feasible that Ubisoft did give future reviewers of Watchdogs a free tablet so they are more likely to include the companion app and second screen features in the review, thats pretty much the same as being given a PS4 or the latest £600 graphics card they don't need to return.

Ubisoft are my least favourite of the big publishers but even I am willing to give them the benefit of the doubt on this one.

Hey, I never said the bribery stopped. I just said that this specific form of it has, in fact, been recognized legally as a form of bribery. Scumbags gonna scumbag, whether in politics or commerce. Doesn't mean we have to be okay with it.

 

[weirdee]

Does the tablet have anything to do with the game? Like a second screen game thingy maybe? If so, that would make sense..

since they're building the wii u game for those features, they're probably going to put some of that development towards the tablet connectivity functions on the other consoles (or, well, the other way around, since ubisoft has chosen which consoles should be their priority after all their lip service), although obviously they're gonna have to make it optional on them

 

[Aiddon_v1legacy]

Ubisoft, I realize you put a lot more money into this game than is feasibly safe, but ya don't have to go and start bribing people.

 

[J Tyran]

I am going to say this, Ubisoft have been big on the whole linked apps and second screen thing lately and Watchdogs seems it will able to utilise it even more.

Perhaps they wanted to try and make sure the reviewers all had a tablet suitable for the game so they cover it in the review? The little mini game and second screen map feature in Black Flag barely got mentioned in reviews of the game.

That's what I was thinking. From the photo, it looks like the tablets were all charged up and RTR.

As much as I dislike Ubisoft, I'm not ready to shout "bribery!" over this just yet.

How on earth is that a convincing reason? If that was all it was about, they'd have had the tablets set up with the game, where they'd have stayed when the press left.

This is a notorious problem in the games industry, the publishers try to bribe reviewers with lavish parties and gifts. There was a law passed to make it illegal for a lobbyist to buy lunch or give gifts to a politician, because they were doing exactly what these companies are doing, except to influence votes in congress instead of reviews in a magazine or on a website.

It's out and out bribery, just a form that's slightly more socially acceptable than cash bribes. And only slightly -- like I said, it's now recognized as a form of illegal bribery to do it to a politician.

That kind of bribery still goes on with politicians, instead of cash or gifts they are offered a highly paid sinecure within an affiliated company after they leave office. Often their families benefit from the same, look at that Bundy Ranch issue in the US at the moment for a good example. Senator Harry Reids family have jobs with almost every major industry in the state, companies that have benefited heavily from legislation Senator Reid helped pass. His son even works for the multinational energy company that is behind the eviction of those ranchers.

The Ubisoft tablet issue is no different to journalists getting free consoles or tech reviewers getting sent items that they do not need to return, its all a gravy train and I didn't see much rage about individuals that got free PS4s and Xbox ones. Its feasible that Ubisoft did give future reviewers of Watchdogs a free tablet so they are more likely to include the companion app and second screen features in the review, thats pretty much the same as being given a PS4 or the latest £600 graphics card they don't need to return.

Ubisoft are my least favourite of the big publishers but even I am willing to give them the benefit of the doubt on this one.

Hey, I never said the bribery stopped. I just said that this specific form of it has, in fact, been recognized legally as a form of bribery. Scumbags gonna scumbag, whether in politics or commerce. Doesn't mean we have to be okay with it.

The same almost certainly happens in the gaming industry, I bet loads of reviewers end up with jobs with the publishers and developers. The thing is though do many people really trust gaming "journalists" anyway, review scores are almost always inflated and the way they withhold access to information and products and give websites that toe the line preferential treatment with things like exclusive interviews is all well documented. The primary income of reviewers like IGN and the rest comes from those publishers

The big reviewers are well known as being an extension of the big publishers PR departments, I cannot really blame the individual reviewers from taking advantage of the loot on offer. They cannot really give frank reviews anyway, if they are too honest they don't have a job for long or the review might not even get published. There are plenty of anecdotes from reviewers where they wrote a fairly positive review that want "ZOMG 11 out of ten! bestest game in the world ever!" only to be told to rewrite it. Only the "celebrity" reviewers get away with it because of the volume of views and hits they get outweighs the negative consequences from a pissed off publishers

Does it suck? Yes it does but at least there are plenty of honest reviewers that don't work for the publishers extended PR department and there are more and more of them, enough to cause the publishers headaches and try to shut them up like the content ID fiasco on YouTube. Like hitting them with a content ID claim to keep the review suppressed for a couple of weeks and then dropping it because they know it wont stick.

 

[N-Vee]

Pretty sure it's not bribery. Stupid yes but not bribery given they were likely trying to show off the companion app and asynchronous multiplayer that was being heavily advertised earlier in development. No they didn't need to give them he tablets but that thought probably didn't register with whoever was running the event. Don't automatically attribute malice to that which can be explained by stupidity.

 

[Adam Jensen_v1legacy]

And I bet the reviews won't mention graphical downgrade at all once the game is out. And if they do mention the graphics they will praise it. As a PC gamer this doesn't affect me at all. But I'm still not gonna buy the game until the full version has been released. I can't stand Ubisoft's DLC policy.

 

[Owyn_Merrilin]

The entire point of reviews is to have an honest assessment of whether or not something is worth buying. The games industry has a downright /nasty/ case of untrustworthy, bribed reviewers. Who then have a tendency to get upset if you suggest that maybe, you know, they've been bribed.

I agree. Reviews should be unbiased, otherwise it's called an advertisement.

But again, I ask: How would out-and-out bribing of game journalists change existing consumer habits?

Even when reviewers say a game is rubbish, people still run out in droves to buy it just because it's "the latest Assassin's Creed."

How would dishonest, paid reviewer advertisements change that?

I'd say it already has. The fact that nobody trusts professional reviews in the game industry is proof enough of that. If you look at other industries, people tend to listen to the likes of Consumer Reports, and even to film critics (if they can find one whose tastes align with theirs, anyway). In the games industry, it's all ads all the time, even in stuff labeled as unbiased reviews.

 

[JarinArenos]

Shady garbage aside, this is why audience outrage matters. We changed the conversation with that free playstation tweets debacle. Now journalists are denying they took the gift, or saying that it's going to some charitable cause, rather than treating it as business as normal in the industry, which it basically was until the last year or two.

 

[Neurotic Void Melody]

By god diddle-dy damn! Theyre in cahoots with the decepticons! Dont accept those little solders of doom.
To be honest, i would take those gifts and it wouldnt change a single opinion of the game as i have plenty of experience with others attempting to buy my acceptance. A heart of moonstone has got me this far in life and execs certainly dont tug my guilt strings any more than social groomers.

Am thinking this was an honest decision by Ubisoft that was instantly regretted as soon as they realised this looked like bribery, hence the stern denial

 

[omega 616]

Watch Dogs preview event in the UK ...Watchdogs preview event in Paris

Was it in Paris or the UK?

In any case ... for serious? A t shirt I could understand, some silly model or art work and I am ok but a nexus 7? Was cash in hand too on the nose?

 

[SecondPrize]

I'll take things no journalist would take for 400, Alex.

 

[Hairless Mammoth]

Maybe Ubisoft wanted to make sure as many reviewers as possible had a tablet for that second screen a deal? And maybe they also thought it would subconsciously make the game look better to the recipients of those tablets? This is why I started waiting a looooooonnggg time after a new game comes out to buy it. If I'm still not sure about it, then there's plenty of average people on YouTube or their own sites making low budget, honest reviews. When I think it's worth checking out, I'll wait for the price point to drop to what my mind sees as a good price. It's already been said above that this market's critics are easily corrupted. Which is sad, because every media market(or any economic or political group) has corruption. It's just extremely noticeable with games I guess.

The update is even better. "This was not in line with our PR policies. Apologies for any confusion." I don't think anyone outside Ubi was confused. If you really didn't want this to happen, maybe you should of payed closer attention on a big press event featuring your current biggest game. I'd bet they had that response ready before they started passing out the swag.

 

[Fdzzaigl]

Be very careful about "gifts" like that. The deontology of journalism in my country advises against taking stuff like that. But still, it can be hard to resist.

Definitely a PR trick though.

I know it's video games, and bringing up a big word like "Bribery" is a bit over the top.

But, seriously, what else can you call it?

They don't only do this for video games. There was an occurence I heard about a few years back where journalists attending a conference presenting plans for a big new shopping centre were given the newest version of iphone at the time.

It's really hard to turn stuff like that down of course, but that's what they're counting on.

 

[camazotz]

Stupid stunt. Now, when the game gets a glowing review it will seem like they were bought, and if the game gets a critical scathing it will seem like the reviewer is over-compensating. Ubisoft's marketing team needs an overhaul.