TGN isn't a large site by any means. We have a good fan base here and a good number of readers but we are nowhere near the size of sites like IGN, Kotaku, RPS (Rock, Paper, Shotgun), Gamespot, Eurogamer, and others.
So it's perhaps with this notion in mind that I still like to think we're somewhat outside the realm of being stuck to corporate policy on reviews of high profile games, feeling a need to give a high profile game a score higher than what it deserves because we were "bought off" by copious amounts of swag or freebies, or given special treatment at trade shows. In fact, I rarely get extra freebies on games. Often times, I don't get the games free either. I do, sometimes, but not often and it's those times that I do that I make a point of stating that we were given a review copy in the review itself. I also have never been to any of the industry trade shows out there. I would love to go but it's just not feasible given how much it costs to attend (travel, hotels, food, etc.).
Game review copies are often reserved for the sites that get tons of more traffic than we do. Thus, we kind of get screwed over when it comes release day and we are without a copy of the game to review for you guys. It sucks. I've begged. I've pleaded. But others take higher priority and there is really nothing I can do to change that in the short term. This isn't always the case. We do have a great number of publishers and developers who are quite accommodating on smaller titles, indie titles, and the occasional AAA release.
I almost have to take a step back at points because some of what the below video shows does hit home. Remember Jim Redner and The Redner Group calling out reviewers that gave Duke Nukem Forever a low score? I have spoken directly with Jim Redner on a few occasions, both for our own review of the game and after 2K dropped The Redner Group in favor of another public relations firm. We were never on bad terms. He never said we were blacklisted because of the score we gave the game, even though while I honestly enjoyed the title, it still wasn't a super high score given in the end. We do not get review copies of games from Ubisoft or Activision as we are not important enough to warrant any time. You can imagine how this hinders us here. Heck, there are times where we don't even hear back at all on our review requests from a variety of companies. It's just silence.
Whether or not any of this has any impact on your opinion of the reviews here or not remains to be seen. It is, however, the reason that we sort of abandoned the traditional numerical scoring system. It's pointless. Either I score a game really high or I score a game really low compared to what the consensus is but so what? It's difficult to assign a numerical value to something that is so subjective.
I guess it's also a reason why I can't help but feel really annoyed when games are given "perfect" scores, especially with the frequency in which they are given out for modern titles.
No game is perfect.
No game will ever be perfect.
Yet there are countless games that are given perfect scores, but why? This video might give a good idea as to why. It's honestly one of the best videos I've seen in recent memory and there are a great number of points made here that I agree with for one reason or another.
So it's perhaps with this notion in mind that I still like to think we're somewhat outside the realm of being stuck to corporate policy on reviews of high profile games, feeling a need to give a high profile game a score higher than what it deserves because we were "bought off" by copious amounts of swag or freebies, or given special treatment at trade shows. In fact, I rarely get extra freebies on games. Often times, I don't get the games free either. I do, sometimes, but not often and it's those times that I do that I make a point of stating that we were given a review copy in the review itself. I also have never been to any of the industry trade shows out there. I would love to go but it's just not feasible given how much it costs to attend (travel, hotels, food, etc.).
Game review copies are often reserved for the sites that get tons of more traffic than we do. Thus, we kind of get screwed over when it comes release day and we are without a copy of the game to review for you guys. It sucks. I've begged. I've pleaded. But others take higher priority and there is really nothing I can do to change that in the short term. This isn't always the case. We do have a great number of publishers and developers who are quite accommodating on smaller titles, indie titles, and the occasional AAA release.
I almost have to take a step back at points because some of what the below video shows does hit home. Remember Jim Redner and The Redner Group calling out reviewers that gave Duke Nukem Forever a low score? I have spoken directly with Jim Redner on a few occasions, both for our own review of the game and after 2K dropped The Redner Group in favor of another public relations firm. We were never on bad terms. He never said we were blacklisted because of the score we gave the game, even though while I honestly enjoyed the title, it still wasn't a super high score given in the end. We do not get review copies of games from Ubisoft or Activision as we are not important enough to warrant any time. You can imagine how this hinders us here. Heck, there are times where we don't even hear back at all on our review requests from a variety of companies. It's just silence.
Whether or not any of this has any impact on your opinion of the reviews here or not remains to be seen. It is, however, the reason that we sort of abandoned the traditional numerical scoring system. It's pointless. Either I score a game really high or I score a game really low compared to what the consensus is but so what? It's difficult to assign a numerical value to something that is so subjective.
I guess it's also a reason why I can't help but feel really annoyed when games are given "perfect" scores, especially with the frequency in which they are given out for modern titles.
No game is perfect.
No game will ever be perfect.
Yet there are countless games that are given perfect scores, but why? This video might give a good idea as to why. It's honestly one of the best videos I've seen in recent memory and there are a great number of points made here that I agree with for one reason or another.
Comment