Assuming you mean review embargoes, we had complete influence over Transistor's review embargo. It's our game.
Some reasons we felt a review embargo was appropriate:
- While it is unavoidable to some extent, we wanted to give at least some media outlets an equivalent and sufficiently reasonable amount of time with the game. (We still have hundreds of requests for review code that we're evaluating.)
- We want to protect our game so that it's not spoiled for people before they can play it for themselves. We've purposely withheld a lot of information about Transistor. If someone live-streamed the whole thing yesterday, we would have been sad.
- We think it's good when reviews coincide with the availability of the thing being reviewed. I hate reading reviews of things I don't have the option to buy or play (regardless of whether the review is positive).
So, my opinion is that a review embargo such as this is primarily a request for courtesy between publications getting early access to a game, but it is also somewhat self-serving (as is the act of sending out review code). We have no real leverage to enforce this embargo, being a small studio that's only released one other game. However, we respect the editorial process and have faith that publications will honor the embargo for the sake of their peers in the field, if for no other reason.
Back in my game-reviewing days we would sometimes get reviewers' guides with lists of topics we were asked not to cover or spoil, or whatever. I think that stuff is nonsense and that we have no say in those types of decisions. Publications best know what level of detail their audiences want. It's right there in the word "Editor".
Anyway some reviews should start hitting before the game comes out for those interested. I will find out what reviews this game gets no sooner than any of you.
