Wait, people are streaming it now???
There was a stream going on yesterday I've seen a bit from.
Wait, people are streaming it now???
wow lol I wish I knew this last gen, woulda been nice to share my games with some of my more wary friends
Wait, people are streaming it now???
Wait, people are streaming it now???
"Reviewers should stop agreeing to embargoes! It hurts consumers!"
"Then you'll find out this information even later than you would if we agreed to them."
*silence*
*ten posts later*
"Reviewers should stop agreeing to embargoes! It hurts consumers!"
If critics don't agree to embargoes then you get reviews even later. How is that better? Games are never supply constrained now so dumb pre-order bonuses aside, there is literally no reason to blindly pre-order a game.
There was a stream going on yesterday I've seen a bit from.
People have been streaming for days.
Well I'll be damned.=p
I guess you never tried to find Fire Emblem Awakening on the 3DS during the month it was released.
I guess I'm naive in thinking that people would rather be able to fully trust a site's reviews that may be out later but more accurate to the retail experience than blindly trust a review that's up 1 second after the embargo date is up. I've lost track of how many times a game has been reviewed with "an awesome, fully stable online experience" which may be true because the reviewers played on their own private server pre-launch. Then, when the game is out people discover that the real servers are terrible and are basically powered by a hamster on a wheel that tires out every 2 minutes from exhaustion.
PvZ: Garden Warfare is a perfect example of this. The embargo expired and immediately reviews started popping up. The game got around a 7-8 out of 10 but everyone has found out the EA servers (as always) are completely awful. When a game like that is so dependent on the online side of things it's only as good as the servers it relies on.
At the end of the day the fact that every publisher's PR department controls the narrative shows what exactly is wrong with how things are. Everyone should go back and research every highly touted game from the past 5-10 years and read all of the overly positive preview articles then read the actual review of the game. You'll see that the gaming site were just an extension of the PR department to get the sales up.
Games must look pretty ugly in your black and white world.
The "reality of the situation" is debatable.I don't think Jason was implying that he was doing people 'favours' but just pointing out the reality of the situation.
Players/consumers WANT reviews as close to launch as possible - I want reviews as close to launch as possible.
There is no tangible way for reviewers to meet demand without agreeing to these embargoes, otherwise they won't get copies early again. So then when the next big game comes along and we're all jumping for information, we (the consumer) will have to wait even longer to find out impressions.
What do you want them to do?
What's happening?
FWIW I am a lifelong fan of South Park and love everything Trey/Matt have done. Even Cannibal the Musical.
What about BASEketball?
Game is too short. Game is a technical mess. Reviews are being held because the game sucks.
Game is too short. Game is a technical mess. Reviews are being held because the game sucks.
Oh shit no. Really?
Oh shit no. Really?
Well I'll be damned.=p
Oh shit no. Really?
He's been fishing for tidbits all weekend. He wants somebody to tell him it's gonna be okay. And they may.
...on March 4, 1200 PST.
The "reality of the situation" is debatable.
Since you're asking, I'd like journalists to refuse taking early copies with embargoes and take their time after the game is released, making people aware of it beforehand.
This would make players more worried about games released under these conditions and eventually pre-order sales would diminish, hurting publishers that make such deals.
Instead, by agreeing to all this, journalists don't lose hits on launch day, gamers see the reviews on day one and publishers manage to shut journalists up before the game is released. Journalists and publishers get what they want and make more money, but we perpetuate this stupid blind pre-order culture.
That doesn't make sense.
How are they going to warn you about a game's issues or write a day one review if they won't get to play the game until the day its released?
The game is awesome, but this game is all about going in fresh. I'm sure they didn't want spoilers to get out from early reviews. The PS3 has some stuttering issues in the city when you enter a new section sometimes that lasts for maybe a second or two(will probably be fixed in an upcoming patch), but other than that the game is everything you could want as a Southpark fan. I haven't beat the game yet, but as of now I'd rank it a 9 or 9.5 out of 10. With the heart they put into this game, it really does deserve everyone's support who's interested in it at all. There have already been so many great moments that you will want to experience and I'm not finished yet.
The "reality of the situation" is debatable.
Since you're asking, I'd like journalists to refuse taking early copies with embargoes and take their time after the game is released, making people aware of it beforehand.
This would make players more worried about games released under these conditions and eventually pre-order sales would diminish, hurting publishers that make such deals.
Instead, by agreeing to all this, journalists don't lose hits on launch day, gamers see the reviews on day one and publishers manage to shut journalists up before the game is released. Journalists and publishers get what they want and make more money, but we perpetuate this stupid blind pre-order culture.
What's going on here? /o
Reviewers didn't warn PS3 users about Skyrim being a non-functional product. Let's stop taking their side just because we have a nice guy in this thread that just so happens to be a games journalist. They are looking out for themselves and their publisher hookups, that's it.
Reviewers didn't warn PS3 users about Skyrim being a non-functional product. Let's stop taking their side just because we have a nice guy in this thread that just so happens to be a games journalist. They are looking out for themselves and their publisher hookups, that's it.
That was a problem that didn't manifest itself for everyone and when it did, it was after dozens and dozens of hours. Not really fair to call anyone out for not talking about something they never encountered.
Game is too short. Game is a technical mess. Reviews are being held because the game sucks.
Total opposite of what I've heard.
Well it happened for me after about 25 hours of gameplay, and if these reviewers are playing a huge game like Skyrim for 10 hours and calling it a day then they suck at their job period. You'd think people getting paid to play games would actually, ya know, play the game. Reminds me of the FFXIV Kotaku review where the dude got to level 30 and reviewed it. I hate to beat the 'lolgamesjournalist' horse, especially in a South Park thread so I'll just stop posting on the subject now.
Reviewers didn't warn PS3 users about Skyrim being a non-functional product. Let's stop taking their side just because we have a nice guy in this thread that just so happens to be a games journalist. They are looking out for themselves and their publisher hookups, that's it.
Take into account that they recieved 360 copies, not PS3.
The only negativity is a cryptic post from the Kotaku guy that said wait for reviews. Everyone else loves the game including myself for the most part. I really think all this journalist stuff needs to go to another thread. This shouldn't take over the discussion in this thread like it has been.
I'm on the side of whats logical. In this case I absolutely see the embargo as a necessary compromise. If you can offer a logically alternative, lets hear it.