Support NeoGAF

[Daniel Thomas MacInnes]

It appears that Edge doesn't like Death Stranding, but they don't have the backbone or basic decency to state that officially in a review. So they keep their mouths shut in hopes of not offending anyone.

So, basically, Edge is now GamePro and GameFan. I remember being told by one GP editor, "We only review good games," for why they would never publish critical reviews. This was the attitude of the prozines, more or less, back in those days. Even magazines like EGM that were famous for handing out low scores and criticizing videogames would publish fawning praise for everything, as long as those articles were "previews."

If the Edge staff doesn't think Death Stranding is good, they should say so and state the case. Have the debate and let everyone participate. What's wrong with that? I certainly don't expect fawning praise (like GF, which would claim everthing was "the greatest videogame ever made"), and I won't throw a tantrum if the reviewers don't validate or echo my opinions. But I do expect opinions that are made and advanced.

This move is cowardly. Edge should reconsider.

 

[SLB1904]

It appears that Edge doesn't like Death Stranding, but they don't have the backbone or basic decency to state that officially in a review. So they keep their mouths shut in hopes of not offending anyone.

So, basically, Edge is now GamePro and GameFan. I remember being told by one GP editor, "We only review good games," for why they would never publish critical reviews. This was the attitude of the prozines, more or less, back in those days. Even magazines like EGM that were famous for handing out low scores and criticizing videogames would publish fawning praise for everything, as long as those articles were "previews."

If the Edge staff doesn't think Death Stranding is good, they should say so and state the case. Have the debate and let everyone participate. What's wrong with that? I certainly don't expect fawning praise (like GF, which would claim everthing was "the greatest videogame ever made"), and I won't throw a tantrum if the reviewers don't validate or echo my opinions. But I do expect opinions that are made and advanced.

This move is cowardly. Edge should reconsider.

They can't review without finishing the game. I'm pretty sure they would release a score anyway but they cant

 

[NoMoChokeSJ]

You know this game is still launching on pc this coming summer right? Still a LOT of undecided people on death stranding. The "HYPE GAUGE" doesnt mean shit if the game has legs. Look at pc darlings like dark souls for an example of how staggered releases dont mean anything for a lot of consumers.

And? I imagine it will get reviewed for PC as well at an appropriate time. I can see the reasoning for moving on in print If they missed the review boat.

 

[TylersProphecy4.0]

And? I imagine it will get reviewed for PC as well at an appropriate time. I can see the reasoning for moving on in print If they missed the review boat.

My point was, some games dont HAVE a window anymore.
Like, do you really think that someone who would hate/enjoy death stranding would feel any differently a year from now? Five years from now? The reviews will still be valid. No ones opinions are shifting on this one. Were also past the point where people are going to look at old games and avoid them simply for having shit graphics.

Tldr: a review has worth, no matter when it drops, especially in the current atmosphere of games. Death Stranding, for better or worse, ain't going nowhere. People may as well respect the job they are paid to do and give two shits.

 

[Daniel Thomas MacInnes]

They can't review without finishing the game. I'm pretty sure they would release a score anyway but they cant

That is an imaginary policy direct from the hallowed halls of the Calvinball Dept.

If we were to wait until the next issue for Edge's review, that would be fine. But the messages shown in the OP indicate that this will never happen. Edge will not write a formal review because they don't think Death Stranding is good and don't have the courage to stand by that opinion.

 

[SLB1904]

That is an imaginary policy direct from the hallowed halls of the Calvinball Dept.

If we were to wait until the next issue for Edge's review, that would be fine. But the messages shown in the OP indicate that this will never happen. Edge will not write a formal review because they don't think Death Stranding is good and don't have the courage to stand by that opinion.

What you on about?

Don't have the courage?

Is this the first game they are reviewing

Sony themselves said the game can't be reviewed without finishing.

Come here insult people without knowing shit. Some of you are just annoying

 

[Psykodad]

They can't review without finishing the game. I'm pretty sure they would release a score anyway but they cant

There is no excuse to not complete the game though, when it's your job.

They can completely trash DS if they want to, but the guy has to do a job.

His snowflake attitude and attention seeking cost Edge credibility.
It's really that simple. Lol

 

[SLB1904]

There is no excuse to not complete the game though, when it's your job.

They can completely trash DS if they want to, but the guy has to do a job.

His snowflake attitude and attention seeking cost Edge credibility.
It's really that simple. Lol

Exactly. They even have freelancers to the job.
Just get over it.

So much drama for nothing.

 

[June]

So people are criticising Edge for not wanting to trigger Death Stranding fans whilst they are getting triggered over Edge's tweets about Death Stranding.

 

[kurisu_1974]

So people are criticising Edge for not wanting to trigger Death Stranding fans whilst they are getting triggered over Edge's tweets about Death Stranding.

No we just want them to cut down on the manufactured drama and do their job.

I have the last Edge, and it is filled to the brim with 5/10 indie and mobile shit game reviews, and then of course some indie game I never heard of which is made by one guy getting 9/10.

So in my personal case, the Death Stranding situation and the behaviour of the reviewer made me realize I might not be their target audience anymore.

 

[June]

No we just want them to cut down on the manufactured drama and do their job.

Not liking a game is not manufactured drama, and they aren't obligated to review any game. There's probably hundreds of games that Edge let go unreviewed every year, why don't you get up in arms over those too.

I have the last Edge, and it is filled to the brim with 5/10 indie and mobile shit game reviews, and then of course some indie game I never heard of which is made by one guy getting 9/10.

So?
Did they give bad and contradictory reasons for their scores, or are you just mad that they... gave different scores to different games?

 

[Psykodad]

So people are criticising Edge for not wanting to trigger Death Stranding fans whilst they are getting triggered over Edge's tweets about Death Stranding.

People want then to do their job.
Nobody really cares whether or not they like game X or Y.

 

[kurisu_1974]

Not liking a game is not manufactured drama, and they aren't obligated to review any game. There's probably hundreds of games that Edge let go unreviewed every year, why don't you get up in arms over those too.



So?
Did they give bad and contradictory reasons for their scores, or are you just mad that they... gave different scores to different games?

It was the Twitter reaction of the reviewer that created the drama, not the fact that they don't like it, I wouldn't have minded a well constructed negative Edge review, even if it was only in the next issue instead of in the current one.

Now combine that with the fact that they took the time to review 5 crappy indie games no one cares about and gave them probably well deserved low scores... now put that all together and maybe you understand how people think Edge is dropping the ball here?

 

[Kagey K]

People want then to do their job.
Nobody really cares whether or not they like game X or Y.

Print magazines have a delay on them digital doesn't, Sony imposed a regulation on them, they couldn't meet the deadline and the NDA at the same time.

They chose to do neither and you got mad, From the sounds of it they would have weighted it down anyway, so you should be happy.

 

[kurisu_1974]

The dude had three weeks of getting paid to play the game and write a review. I have a subscription to Edge to read their opinion on high profile games.

See how there's a mismatch there?

 

[June]

It was the Twitter reaction of the reviewer that created the drama, not the fact that they don't like it, I wouldn't have minded a well constructed negative Edge review, even if it was only in the next issue instead of in the current one.

Well the tweet says they're putting out a 4 page opinion piece about their 40hours in the game, so you can read that?

Now combine that with the fact that they took the time to review 5 crappy indie games no one cares about and gave them probably well deserved low scores... now put that all together and maybe you understand how people think Edge is dropping the ball here?

Maybe those indy games didn't take more than 40 hours to finish.
And/or maybe they thought DS was even worse than those indy games (based on the tweets it seems plausibe that they would have rated it lower than 5/10, if they did give a score).

 

[Psykodad]

Print magazines have a delay on them digital doesn't, Sony imposed a regulation on them, they couldn't meet the deadline and the NDA at the same time.

Yeah, and they could've just went on twitter and say the review would be in the next issue and there wouldn't be any kind if discussion.

That's all the guy had to do. It isn't hard to understand.

They chose to do neither and you got mad, From the sounds of it they would have weighted it down anyway, so you should be happy.

What makes you think I care about the score or metacritic average?

 

[kurisu_1974]

Well the tweet says they're putting out a 4 page opinion piece about their 40hours in the game, so you can read that?

Maybe those indy games didn't take more than 40 hours to finish.
And/or maybe they thought DS was even worse than those indy games (based on the tweets it seems plausibe that they would have rated it lower than 5/10, if they did give a score).

Maybe. Now we'll never know. And you know what, I haven't even read his "opinion piece" because his millenial tweeting made me completely uninterested in anything he has to say now.

Also 40 hours in 3 weeks is what? 2 hours / day not including the actual writing.

 

[Kagey K]

Yeah, and they could've just went on twitter and say the review would be in the next issue and there wouldn't be any kind if discussion.

That's all the guy had to do. It isn't hard to understand.



What makes you think I care about the score or metacritic average?

I think he knew he was giving it a bad score and didn't want to get Kane and Lynched,. They were protecting thier livelihood.

 

[Psykodad]

I think he knew he was giving it a bad score and didn't want to get Kane and Lynched,. They were protecting thier livelihood.

Or he just wanted to draw attention because everybody else did manage to beat the game in 3 weeks.

Incompetence at it's finest, the game is dead easy to begin with.

 

[Kagey K]

Or he just wanted to draw attention because everybody else did manage to beat the game in 3 weeks.

Incompetence at it's finest, the game is dead easy to begin with.

Sure, we can go with that, in the end it doesn't matter much, the people that want to buy it bought it, those that didn't, didn't.

so why is this still a discussion?

 

[Psykodad]

Sure, we can go with that, in the end it doesn't matter much, the people that want to buy it bought it, those that didn't, didn't.

so why is this still a discussion?

No idea, you are also keeping it alive right now.

 

[Kagey K]

No idea, you are also keeping it alive right now.

I haven't been here in days, I only responded to you because you were the one keeping it going.
as far as I'm concerned it should have been on page 4 last week, but you kept bumping it and I was curious why.

We can keep it on the top post all day, if you like.

 

[Psykodad]

I haven't been here in days, I only responded to you because you were the one keeping it going.
as far as I'm concerned it should have been on page 4 last week, but you kept bumping it and I was curious why.

And I merely responded to someone else today. See how it works?

 

[kurisu_1974]

Sure, we can go with that, in the end it doesn't matter much, the people that want to buy it bought it, those that didn't, didn't.

so why is this still a discussion?

I have no eggs in this basket except I'm re-evaluating the value of having an Edge subscription, but that's not only because of this at all, just a part of it.

The reason the thread is being kept alive is because of these weird assumptions and invalid conclusions about people criticizing Edge's stunt by people like you and Joon who seem hell bent on finding excuses for Edge's actions, because...? You guys hate the game too and love trolling?

 

[Kagey K]

And I merely responded to someone else today. See how it works?

Recap me on what they posted and what you responded to.....

For those that are just joining.

 

[Psykodad]

Recap me on what they posted and what you responded to.....

For those that are just joining.

It's right here for you to read back.

 

[Kagey K]

It's right here for you to read back.

Figured, thanks for playing.

Next time don't waste my time.

 

[Psykodad]

Figured, thanks for playing.

Next time don't waste my time.

There isn't much to figure.
There's an entire thread.

 

[Terce]

Can you 2 get a room?

 

[Nester99]

I wish reviews had a tag line with hours played and if they completed or not. I would discount MOST reviews without completion. Sure you can have an opinion after a few hours. But for professional (lol) paid reviews I want a higher standard.

 

[tassletine]

Ive been with Edge from the start . This is the game from the poster boy of the PS generation and EDGE doesn't want to face the outcry IGN had with its low score . You really think EDGE didn't score it because they didn't finish it ... LOL

Sure, you can make that story up if you want.

You do realise that IGN are huge and EDGE are a print magazine? The backlash is going to be tiny in comparison.

And you should know, as you read the magazine, definitely, definitely read the magaizne, that they absolutely delight in tearing down criticism and handing back snarky criticism in their letters page.
This is water off a ducks back.

 

[tassletine]

Does it speak to the entire publication if they enable such behaviour? It's the same argument as saying that his lack of a review is as much a review itself. The publications lack of action in enforcing it's own reputation is as much a statement on it's lack of care for that reputation. Why would I trust an outlet that cares so little about it's own status that they're willing to jeopardize future revenue for what is seen as supporting this type of behaviour from it's employees. A print outlet no less, which is an industry that is in absolutely abysmal shape right now.

Put it this way; let's say Trump gets elected again next year and the New Yorker, which is known for it's political articles, decides to have one of it's editors tweet out that they're not going to cover the story because they can't be bothered. Would that be in any way damaging to their reputation?

You justify it because you like their writing, criticism and attitude. They have a very strong personality as a publication and part of that attitude is what they did here.
EDGE review very few games (usually under 6-10 an issue) and as far as I know have never promised a review for anything. That's not their main source of income, or why most people read the magazine.

So, your comparison to The New Yorker is off -- If you were complaining about a reviewer in the New yorker falling asleep during a film or something, that would be comparable -- but Edge is more about analysis than hard scores or deadlines -- And the piece they wrote contains that analysis.

They're really not in the same market as IGN (or any web based game review channel) so their revenue isn't dictated by having to finish games, getting their first etc.
Their main focus is the quality of the writing and technical accuracy, and for all we know that could have been compromised by the deadline.

 

[imsosleepy]

I wish reviews had a tag line with hours played and if they completed or not. I would discount MOST reviews without completion. Sure you can have an opinion after a few hours. But for professional (lol) paid reviews I want a higher standard.

But a game like death stranding aint an honest review witouth finishing it.

Firstly because u get so much good equipment later on that changes ALOT for u.
And it has a big focus on story

Also. Example. First u come across bt's and a reviewer can find it annoying. Write about that. But later on u can beat them easy and even use the boss to farm stuff.

Its rare companies give 3 week in advance and then they thread it with such disrespect

 

[Terce]

EDGE review very few games (usually under 6-10 an issue) and as far as I know have never promised a review for anything. That's not their main source of income, or why most people read the magazine.

So, your comparison to The New Yorker is off -- If you were complaining about a reviewer in the New yorker falling asleep during a film or something, that would be comparable -- but Edge is more about analysis than hard scores or deadlines -- And the piece they wrote contains that analysis.

Just to touch on these 2 points because I think there is a misunderstanding here. Their main source of income, and this is the case for every single print publication and most other mediums as well, is ads. Companies advertise in this publication because they feel that their audience is both large enough and contain the type of consumer who will want to purchase their product so they can reasonably expect to see a return from purchasing ad space. In order to maintain that audience, the publication needs to continue pumping out content both at the quantity that will give the audience some variety and the quality that will keep them coming back for more. By taking the position they have, the company has shown that they don't actually value their customers (who ever obviously waiting for a review of DS) or the people who pay their bills (due to flipping off their customers).

I am not one of their customers, so my opinion frankly means less in this matter, however I can say that any respect that I did have for the organization as a whole has diminished due to their handling of this. That means I am less likely to ever purchase their product in the future, thus reducing their potential customer base and presenting less of a value proposition for potential ad agencies. Now, why would I give any level of respect to a brand that is so willing to throw away their own revenue (the whole reason for them to even exist) over some whiny blogger who can't do a simple job? To say they never promised it is foolish, it's like saying apple never promised a new iPhone or Starbucks never promised more coffee. Reviews and articles are their primary product as a gaming publication and the only thing that subsequently provides them with the income to continue operation. The cost of access to the customer is basically just to cover production and logistics, the revenue comes from ads. As someone who works in publishing I have first hand experience with this.

In this regard I feel my comparison with the New Yorker is fair however I could have definitely presented a better one. How about one of those magazines that covers Apple, such as Mac Life(?). This situation would be similar to Mac Life deciding not to publish a review of the latest iPhone because the single writer who was tasked with reviewing it could only use it for a few hours because they got bored. They then took to twitter to announce this finding, while all of the other Apple related publications were releasing their own reviews. As a (hypothetical) consumer of Apple product, am I as likely to pick up the latest issue of Mac Life or would I simply turn to another publication who has taken the time to actually review the product I'm interested in? As an ad agency, am I more likely to purchase ad space in a publication that is drawing in more readers due to publishing content that their readers are interested in? As a company, am I more likely to not delegate the task of writing a review in the future to the employee who shirked his duties?

It's an interesting thing to think about and speaks to the way the we, as consumers, interact with the content and products surrounding this gaming hobby that we all enjoy so much. If this is how this individual publication decides it wants to do business, ultimately the market will decide if they are given the opportunity to continue into the future.


TL;DR - Ads are the primary revenue driver for publications. More articles/reviews + better quality writers = larger consumer base = more ads = enough money to stay in business.

 

[Team Andromeda]

Sure, you can make that story up if you want.

You do realise that IGN are huge and EDGE are a print magazine? The backlash is going to be tiny in comparison.

That's the issue, the print readership is dropping and many mags have gone out of business. Given the sales of the PS4, the readership for SONY would be higher. There's no way EDGE is going to risk upsetting the Poster boy of the Playsation Gen with a score of 3 out of 10,.
So they've chickened out and not scored it. Utterly pathetic on EDGE part

 

[Psykodad]

That's the issue, the print readership is dropping and many mags have gone out of business. Given the sales of the PS4, the readership for SONY would be higher. There's no way EDGE is going to risk upsetting the Poster boy of the Playsation Gen with a score of 3 out of 10,.
So they've chickened out and not scored it. Utterly pathetic on EDGE part

This is the real issue here.

In other words, the Edge guy wanted attention because "don't forget about us guys".

 

[Smaller than Atom]

Reviewing before finishing a game is very common practice. I'd probably estimate it happens more often than not. (especially for longer games, 30+ hrs)

Proof of that?

 

[AlphaMale]

Proof of that?

This was something I recall clearly in the previous gen consoles (back when game length was all the rage). But doing a quick Google search will yield some interesting talk on this subject.

 

[Psykodad]

This was something I recall clearly in the previous gen consoles (back when game length was all the rage). But doing a quick Google search will yield some interesting talk on this subject.

Depending on the focus of the game, one would assume that for singleplayer games the reviewer would at least finish the main story (at least once if there are multiple endings).
Don't think anyone would expect a reviewer to more than that. But it should be bare minimum.

Online multiplayer games I would expect a reviewer to play at least ~20 or so hours. Seems like an acceptable amount of time, unless the game is utterly broken.

Games like COD or BF I'd assume they would play the story campaign on at least easy once and a fair amount of time in multiplayer.

Shouldn't be too much to ask for.

 

[ROMhack]

You justify it because you like their writing, criticism and attitude. They have a very strong personality as a publication and part of that attitude is what they did here.
EDGE review very few games (usually under 6-10 an issue) and as far as I know have never promised a review for anything. That's not their main source of income, or why most people read the magazine.

So, your comparison to The New Yorker is off -- If you were complaining about a reviewer in the New yorker falling asleep during a film or something, that would be comparable -- but Edge is more about analysis than hard scores or deadlines -- And the piece they wrote contains that analysis.

They're really not in the same market as IGN (or any web based game review channel) so their revenue isn't dictated by having to finish games, getting their first etc.
Their main focus is the quality of the writing and technical accuracy, and for all we know that could have been compromised by the deadline.

I'm with you here. As an irregular buyer myself, I know they put more effort into the industry side of things/analysis rather than reviews.

 

[Smaller than Atom]

This was something I recall clearly in the previous gen consoles (back when game length was all the rage). But doing a quick Google search will yield some interesting talk on this subject.

Hmm.... I would find it difficult to get through a "bad" game but if it's your job.... you're paid to do it. That makes aaaaaaallllllllll the difference. So, do your fn job jabroni! I'm in the middle of a career change and back to school in my 40s. I work at walmart to make ends meet and it helps with groceries. Do I like it? Not really. But I try my best every day and complete all tasks asked of me.

It's kinda obvious that this dude has a hidden agenda. Hes just crying like most gamers do. Sounds like there needs to be a firin' and hirin'!

I respect your reply Alphamale.

Thanks.

 

[Windle Poons]

Sorry for the bump.

I see this months EDGE (issue 346) Mr Brown is no longer editor of the magazine anymore.

 

[The Pleasure]

Sorry for the bump.

I see this months EDGE (issue 346) Mr Brown is no longer editor of the magazine anymore.

Sounds like they edged him out.

 

[Windle Poons]

Or he left based on all the vicious feedback he received following his refusal to review Death Stranding.

 

[Gold_Loot]

Sounds like they edged him out.

They sent him packing?
He walked?
This was their last strand?
I wonder how they delivered the news?

(Puns re the best)

 

[Ceallach]

It's been like 7 months since then. If that was the reason he would have left awhile ago.

Probably just financial reasons like every other industry in the world right now

 

[Yoboman]

I imagine I wouldn't keep my job for long if I suddenly stopped completing projects too

 

[Breakage]

I think his departure was already known (I remember reading about it a couple of months ago). What I have just found out today is that this woman is now the editor at Edge:

Jen Simpkins is the new editor of Edge magazine – with Nathan Brown departing to freelance in the industry - MCV/DEVELOP

"Edge remains one of the most essential gaming publications there is, and I have every intention of keeping it that way – in addition to seeing what else it's capable of."

www.mcvuk.com

Her Twitter:

Jen Simpkins (@itsJenSim) on Twitter

I'll leave you guys to draw your own conclusions.

 

[Spukc]

I think his departure was already known (I remember reading about it a couple of months ago). What I have just found out today is that this woman is now the editor at Edge:

Jen Simpkins is the new editor of Edge magazine – with Nathan Brown departing to freelance in the industry - MCV/DEVELOP

"Edge remains one of the most essential gaming publications there is, and I have every intention of keeping it that way – in addition to seeing what else it's capable of."

www.mcvuk.com

Her Twitter:

Jen Simpkins (@itsJenSim) on Twitter

I'll leave you guys to draw your own conclusions.

Simp