Publishers allegedly blackball EGM for negative coverage (joystiq.com)

[8th lutz]

http://www.joystiq.com/2008/01/09/publishe...ative-coverage/

 

In his latest editorial, Electronic Gaming Monthly Editor-in-chief Dan "Shoe" Hsu publicly calls out three companies that are allegedly refusing to work with the magazine due to negative reviews of their games. According to Hsu, the members of Midway's Mortal Kombat team, Sony's sports division and Ubisoft as a whole are refusing to give EGM access to early preview or review builds of their games (in the case of Ubisoft, Hsu specifically says "it seems our coverage of Assassin's Creed was the last straw").

 

As a result, Hsu says EGM readers will get "little, late, or no coverage" of these companies' games. "We won't treat these products or companies any differently, and we'll just cover them to the best of our own abilities, with or without their support," Hsu writes. "Because, after all, we're writing for you, the reader -- not them."

 

I predicted something like this going to happen with publishers pulling more of this stuff. I am not shocked at all.

[PressureCooker2600]

As a result, Hsu says EGM readers will get "little, late, or no coverage" of these companies' games. "We won't treat these products or companies any differently, and we'll just cover them to the best of our own abilities, with or without their support," Hsu writes. "Because, after all, we're writing for you, the reader -- not them."

 

 

I liked Hsu's statement. Very strong and potent. That's what I would have said if I was a professional game reviewer.

[kroogur]

Good for EGM! It's about time someone stands up to these companies as they have no problem producing lackluster titles and expecting top dollar for them.

 

In fact folks should start voicing their displeasure over the attitude these companies have send them email, snail mail, whatever it takes!

 

Would a list of contacts for these companies be a worthwhile project? To make it easier to send them our thoughts?

Edited January 9, 2008 by kroogur

[8th lutz]

Good for EGM! It's about time someone stands up to these companies as they have no problem producing lackluster titles and expecting top dollar for them.

 

In fact folks should start voicing their displeasure over the attitude these companies have send them email, snail mail, whatever it takes!

 

Would a list of contacts for these companies be a worthwhile project? To make it easier to send them our thoughts?

I think it might be a good idea. There is a chance that it would fell on deaf ears though. The other thing is by not buying games from these companies.

 

I am saying that because I don't buy any games from EA since 2005 because I didn't like the quality of games they were putting out like for Nascar. The Nascars games I bought from 2005 and prior were not great games and were buggy. Ea didn't correct the problems since they have the exclusive rights to Nascar games.

 

Not buying a game from a company because of black mailing review sites or magazines is not different not buying a games from a company for getting bad quality games like I did. The more people not buying the games, the more the company has to listen to the consumers or give them the idea they did something sometime in the past.

Edited January 9, 2008 by 8th lutz

[kroogur]

I'll give it a shot this weekend (i got a rare weekend off)

[rockman_x_2002]

If I'm not mistaken, didn't Atari do something to one of the big magazines during the Lynx days that the magazine didn't exactly find favor with, and Atari received their full wrath through negative reviews on Lynx (and later, Jaguar) games? I can't remember if it was GamePRO or EGM, but it seems like I've read something about that somewhere (maybe on here even).

 

All this just brought back memories of that. Point is, if a gaming magazine has writers and staff that's worth their salt, and if you're a game publisher/developer? You don't bite the hand that feeds you whenever the magazine expresses some amount of displeasure.

[8th lutz]

If I'm not mistaken, didn't Atari do something to one of the big magazines during the Lynx days that the magazine didn't exactly find favor with, and Atari received their full wrath through negative reviews on Lynx (and later, Jaguar) games?

Yep, Atari did something to one of the major magazines.

[Jess Ragan]

And how long did it take for them to stop laughing...?

 

I'm really getting my hate on for Assassin's Creed and its dimwit developer, Jade "Look at me, everybody!" Raymond. She's the biggest narcissist and attention whore this side of Donald Trump, and I hate the way she's been using Ubisoft's lawyers to harass anyone who even looks at her funny.

[jboypacman]

They still make EGM? Ok j/k here but am glad that one of these gaming mags are standing up to these game companies but is it a little too late for this?

 

I stop reading these type of mags a while back and have no intrest in start reading them again because of all the biase reviews they have done over the years.

 

And didnt someone get fired from one of these mags for writing reviews that told the truth about said video games recently?

[ninjarabbit]

EGM does have a history of standing up to publishers who threaten them. Acclaim and Capcom did threaten to pull adveertising form them in the 90's after EGM gave some of their games low reviews.

[Kripto]

Sadly, you really can't trust any game reviewing publication which features ads from the game companies whose products it reviews.

 

The monetary relationship is just too strong to not bias coverage. I used to write in the music technology magazine field and that was, and is, also totally poisoned by such corruption.

 

Thanks to downloadable demo and rentals, at least we can make up our own minds for many of these games.

[PressureCooker2600]

Actually...it was a senior reviewer from Gamespot that got "quietly" fired after he gave a sub-par review for Kane and Lynch. Supposedly, it was from the pressure of Eidos and all their advertising on the site.

Edited January 10, 2008 by PressureCooker2600

[dalum]

They still make EGM? Ok j/k here but am glad that one of these gaming mags are standing up to these game companies but is it a little too late for this?

 

I stop reading these type of mags a while back and have no intrest in start reading them again because of all the biase reviews they have done over the years.

 

And didnt someone get fired from one of these mags for writing reviews that told the truth about said video games recently?

 

Heh, remember when EGM was the size of a decently sized city's phone book and Computer Shopper was even bigger than that?  Now that's when there was quite the advertising power there. Those were the days....

Edited January 10, 2008 by dalum

[Atari5200]

this is why I like to get reviews from Gamefaqs.com, as long as you weed out the fanboy reviews, you can usually find the most brutal honest reviews available.

[rockman_x_2002]

Heh, remember when EGM was the size of a decently sized city's phone book and Computer Shopper was even bigger than that?  Now that's when there was quite the advertising power there. Those were the days....

 

I remember that. From 1993-1995 or so, EGM was giant. I still have some of those issues put away in a closet.