Embargoed game reviews and the reward for breaking them

primesuspect

Embargoed game reviews and the reward for breaking them

chrisWhite

I guess I'm inclined to think that we would take the high ground, if anything it sets us apart from the sites that don't give a shit and developers/PR people will be more inclined to work with us in future. I can definitely see the other side to it too, it's just stupid that this even has to be a decision.

Cliff_Forster

I have a serious issue with companies that break the "street date". Its there to create fairness in competition and if online publishers do not understand that or care they should not be allowed to participate in the buisness of creating content for profit. The publisher plays a part in this and its absolutely imperative that they admonish rule breakers by striking them from the list that allows them access to future content.

lordbean

This reeks of bull remains.

BobbyDigi

"...its absolutely imperative that they admonish rule breakers by striking them from the list that allows them access to future content."

I can't say it better. Rule breakers need to be punished or there is no point in having rules.

-Bobby

johnfoster

in this case it sounds like you are getting played by the PR machine.

when I was writing reviews for DEAD TREE publications the rule was we didn't even LOOK at products for review until they were actually on the market. this was pretty standard for all magazines. it stopped the problem of having a reviewer as a potential tester for an unfinished product and a potentially bad review because of bugs.

I would think that a similar thing would true today. there's no point in having noise about something if there's no way for a publisher reap the benefit right away.

another way to look at it is so what if somebody beats the drop clock. eventually they will get dropped from the PR list because they don't play by the rules.

DocFrazier

pretty much agree with above comments.

Brandon Chesnutt

Embargoes are a very common PR practice.

Typically, the company in question (in this case, the game publisher) has their "ideal" news outlet in mind and asks the other sites to hold off until their favorite gets first crack at the story. This does work both ways, as some media outlets will only publish stories if they receive an exclusive.

However, with social media making it easier for news sites and blogs to play by their own rules, embargoes are coming under fire.

What does this mean for those in the middle of the road? They need to decide if they want to go renegade or play ball.

Brandon
@bchesnutt

John Minni

What would prevent you from only releasing the review to subscribed members and telling them that they can not link to it until after the embargo date. Then as soon as that date hits they link to you like crazy.
1. The subscribers get the review early.

2. You didn't release the review publicly until the 15th.

Any thoughts. or does that break the embargo?

Thrax

That breaks embargo.

ledbetter

I know game reviewers are a relatively new breed compared their movie counterparts, but a talented writer should have more to do with how popular a review is as opposed to when that review was released. There's a reason I trust Peter Travers when it comes whats playing on the big screen.

lordbean

Viewed from a macroscopic level, the point of having a lot of sources review a product is so that the consumer can compare the reviews to see different viewpoints of the new product. This allows consumers to make a more educated decision based on a review from someone who enjoys a similar gaming style to themselves. If you break embargo and release an early review (and other sites don't), you're subjecting people to your opinion of the game without giving them equal opportunity to consider the opinions of other reviewers. This could be very positive for initial sales if the review is good, but it could also have the opposite effect - if the embargo-breaking review is bad, and consumers have nothing else to read about the game before the embargo date, it is going to hurt sales. Possibly significantly. From this line of thought, it should be in the interest of game developers to disallow early review releases and to stick by that philosophy. In any group of reviews, there are always some that are positive.

RyanMM

@ledbetter: That would be great, but it's a long way from happening.

Gaming, and everything that goes along with it still gets zero respect. That includes gaming culture, gaming journalism (yes, it is journalism, I don't care what that effing hack Ebert says), etc. The fact that gaming revenues grow by leaps and bounds year after year while the movie and music industry have stagnated should tell you that gaming hasn't even begun to reach its peak. Sadly, gaming and all to do with it are still ostracized and downplayed by the mainstream.

UPSLynx

I hate that news like this hardly surprises me anymore.

I've only been writing on the gaming industry for a year, if even that, and I've come quick to learn that few of the big dogs play by the rules. We've gotten screwed by these bigger publications on so many occasions. Money and social status does a lot to let them get away unscathed with things like this.

People should be up in arms about this. There should be people talking about this, asking questions, and ultimately, calling for reform.

Sadly, due to the nature of the beast, I wouldn't expect a thing like that to happen anytime soon.

ardichoke

Or perhaps publishers should just punish the embargo breakers. No outcry needed.

"What's that? You broke embargo? Well, you're not getting a review copy of our next x number of games. Don't like it? Too bad, don't break embargo next time."

That would put an end to things real quick.

UPSLynx

It would end things quickly, but I think a big part of the problem is that most publishers are in cahoots with the embargo breakers. Many times, it's the big names that break, or have 'exclusives' when everyone else has seen the product too, like with us and The Saboteur.

lordbean

If you ask me, 'exclusive's are underhanded. The publisher can guarantee that the only review available of the game for a lengthy period of time is positive, which results in higher initial sales. In my opinion, this is a downright criminal use of the embargo date.