WB Refuses Review Copies unless given Paid Branding in return

[MadeManG74]

As an FYI, Shadow of Mordor on PC was given out early to a bunch of Youtube channels for brand deals. Expect lots of content on launch

I very much disapprove of this practice and hope it doesn't become commonplace. The mixed messages regarding review copies are troubling.

The message we got was "we can give you prerelease code but only if you do this paid brand deal". We refused, naturally.

http://www.gamesreviews.com/news/09/totalbiscuit-reveals-shadow-mordor-code-branding-deal/


This is also coming off the heels that Bungie was unhappy that reviewers reviewed Destiny on release date, instead of waiting for a few weeks, the whole Gamer Gate BS and the general feeling amongst gamers that reviews had long since become paid PR pieces.


How bad will this get, and will it continue to be the standard? Do people even care about reviews anymore? Do bad reviews hurt films at all for example, or is it all about that advertising money?

[JRcade19]

I know I generally don't care for reviews anymore from most publications.

I wait for someone along the likes of TotalBiscuit, Nerd3, Rock Paper Shotgun, Darkside of Gaming to give pointers before I hunker down on a purchase.

The PCGamingWiki also helps.

[TruthEnigma]

It's a case of needing to find what sites/channels/publications you trust. I'll happily read reviews from Edge and have a fair idea that it is an honest opinion.

However, it does feel like we are coming close to a breaking point with this stuff, where a standard will finally be implemented by most places. Youtube and blog sites in particular still feel like the wild west with this.

[George]

I think everyone is fear mongering on these companies, we don't know the exact terms and if they really are for 'reviews'. Like that British critic said, he doesn't do reviews but is forced to asked for review copies to do his 'WTF Is...' segments, where he basically tells you what the game is. Personally, most of these guys that do YouTube are entertainers, so them doing 'let's play' of Shadow of Mordor for money is going to be what it sounds like, them making stupid jokes while playing the game. Should they get a brand deal and make money on top? Sure why not, as long as they aren't forced to make up lies about the game while doing let's play and honestly they don't have to. I think the game lends itself well for 'Let's Play' fanbase.

Now if they paid for a review score, then that is shit. I can see why people are freaking out at this aspect and honestly, any review that doesn't mention obvious criticism, like how repetitive the single player is, is really doing themsevles a disfavor in the long run.

I'm looking at the game's promotional image and IGN, Polygon and Joystiq all have their reviews on the cover the game. Do you think that is a brand deal as well?

Funny we just talked to the Joystiq managing editor the other day about PSO, I would have been tempted to ask her about that off the air if I knew about the story.

Either way, I'm not 100% against it, it just depends on the context and what they are paying for. Entertainment videos like Conan's Clueless Gamer doesn't bother me, fake review scores do.

[TruthEnigma]

With Youtube, that's where the line seems to be coming down. If it's a let's play, as long as you make it clear it's paid promotion then who cares. If it's a review, I don't care how strong you think you are, you will be adversely affected by that.

With web sites, they should be held to the same standards that print publications are held to (and don't always meet). You mention Joystiq and they have their policy on all remuneration on their site, in that they refuse to accept any gifts, paid trips, money, or anything else. This should be the policy of all web sites or publications. If you are supposed to be a journalist, you need to act like one.