Interesting Penny Arcade Rant About Gamespy

[Griking]

We all know that it happens but I love it when its brought out in the public. Gamespy seems to be caught up in a game ranking controversy where they were modifying a review of Donkry Konga 2 apparantly because they didn't want to ruffle Nintendo's feathers.

Link (http://penny-arcade.com/view.php3)

And here's a link to the reviewer's home page where he discusses the review. link (http://www.maragos.org/index.php?p=26)

[PDorr3]

that is a funny cartoon, just shows you that not all review sites are innocent when it comes to unbiased reviews.

[evildead2099]

That's the first Penny Arcade comic that I found amusing. Thanks for the link.

[Ed Oscuro]

Is this the same Penny Arcade that has had run-ins with GameSpy over the years? Why yes, it is!

-1000 to credibility right there.

The news post, on the other hand, is interesting and informative, but stops short of making the bold accusation the comic does...so which is it? Whoever actually reads those (besides me)? Right now, I can guarantee that nobody will be able to mention GameSpy without hearing "Pfft, GameSpy got bought off." Right...

[Griking]

Is this the same Penny Arcade that has had run-ins with GameSpy over the years? Why yes, it is!

-1000 to credibility right there.

The news post, on the other hand, is interesting and informative, but stops short of making the bold accusation the comic does...so which is it? Whoever actually reads those (besides me)? Right now, I can guarantee that nobody will be able to mention GameSpy without hearing "Pfft, GameSpy got bought off." Right...

How much credibility are you looking for in a comic?

The sad thing is that if its true then the comic has more credibility than Gamespy and their review staff do.

[fishsandwich]

I rather enjoyed the cartoon... I didn't know GameSpy & Penny Arcade has a history, but it IS a cartoon and I think that GameSpy gets what they had coming if they bump up scores and add remarks. If you don't like a review, then reject it and get another one from a better source. How many people read that strip anyway? I'd never really read it before, but I went back and looked at some older comics and though quite a few were good. Not GREAT, but decent.

So what's the scoop between PA and GS?

http://www.gimpcity.com/severe/free-cat.jpg

http://www.ebaumsworld.com/freecat.html

:D



.

[Gamereviewgod]

Gamespy did what they needed to do.

Say well respected Gamespy reviewer gives a Mega Man game an 8 uut of 10. Well, Mr. Freelancer comes along and give the sequel a 2 out 10, but for all the reasons respected reviewer gave the first one. That can't happen because it's confusing to the reader. They need to be consistent.

The freelancer who spoke up had a right to, but he obviously doesn't understand why.

[portnoyd]

Ummm, this news came from the reviewer's blog, not PA.

[fishsandwich]

Gamespy did what they needed to do.

Say well respected Gamespy reviewer gives a Mega Man game an 8 uut of 10. Well, Mr. Freelancer comes along and give the sequel a 2 out 10, but for all the reasons respected reviewer gave the first one. That can't happen because it's confusing to the reader. They need to be consistent.

The freelancer who spoke up had a right to, but he obviously doesn't understand why.

You think? I disagree! If they are going to use someone's review, they should keep it intact as it was written (allowing for minor editing for spelling & bad grammar, of course.)

To add sentences that do NOT reflect the author's opinion AND bump the score up 100% is NOT cool. They should just not have used it at all instead of compromising the review AND the author.

You review a lot of stuff... what if you gave something an overall score of 5 and someone on DP said "Yo, this game is at least an "8". I liked it a lot. Change it to an "8" and add some comments that conflict with some of your other statements so it will justify the "8". Nice job otherwise!"

Would you do it?

[Promophile]

Yep they should've NOT posted the damn thing. How the hell could they think that changing it would be a good move? I swear these companies are run by idiots who don't know the first thing about PR.

[Gamereviewgod]

This happens all the time. If you read faqs on how to get along those lines, this type of thing is there and if you sign a contract, it's there too. They reserve every right to do so. Gamespy was just dumb enough to put it up first.

[Famidrive-16]

Is this the same Penny Arcade that has had run-ins with GameSpy over the years? Why yes, it is!

-1000 to credibility right there.


Hasn't PA always hated GameSpy? Or is there a different story of this?

[hezeuschrist]

I understand why scores need to be altered. The scores are relative to every other review they've done and need to be consistant with the scoring of the site. If someone does a freelance review for lets say Halo 2 and scores it a perfect 10, and gives it to Gamespot, they CAN"t keep it a perfect 10. It's not inline with their rating procedures. However if they give the same review to IGN, they may very well keep it a perfect 10.

The simple fact is that the freelancer needs to keep in mind the scoring of the site they're writing for before they tac a number on it.

[zmweasel]

You think? I disagree! If they are going to use someone's review, they should keep it intact as it was written (allowing for minor editing for spelling & bad grammar, of course.)

Every magazine and website has its own editorial flavor, and some editors heavily rewrite contributors' text to create a unified "voice" (Maxim, Entertainment Weekly, GamePro). It's perfectly within their rights to do so, and freelancers agree to this process when they sign the contract.

Certain magazines also adjust individual ratings to reflect the overall opinion of the editorial staff. Rolling Stone used to do this, but I haven't read it in forever, so I'm not sure if that's still true.

When I was young and arrogant, I also railed against editors for changing my stuff, and I've come to realize how stupid I was to do so. I wonder if Nich will eventually feel the same.

-- Z.

[James]

I rather enjoyed the cartoon... I didn't know GameSpy & Penny Arcade has a history, but it IS a cartoon and I think that GameSpy gets what they had coming if they bump up scores and add remarks. If you don't like a review, then reject it and get another one from a better source. How many people read that strip anyway? I'd never really read it before, but I went back and looked at some older comics and though quite a few were good. Not GREAT, but decent.

So what's the scoop between PA and GS?

http://www.gimpcity.com/severe/free-cat.jpg

http://www.ebaumsworld.com/freecat.html

:D



.

Um, I don't know what kind of sick things you like to do but that's not funny at all, that cat could have been someone's pet!

[JJNova]

And Penny Arcade hated everything that was on the other side of the Hard|OCP fence. Henceforth, the massive delay of the Phantom.

Or you could argue that the Phantom was never going to be released anyway. Regardless, Hard|OCP was a feirce courtroom battle to just pull a video game hoax.

[Griking]

What I don't understand is if editors reserve the right and have the power to completely rewrite a person's review then what do they need that person for in the first place? If they're going to make up a person's opinion of a game then why not just make up the person as well and fabricate everything from the get go?

I know that it sounds extreme but I don't really see the difference.

I can possibly see telling a reviewer that "we have to drop your "10" score to a 9 because we don't give perfect scores out". But changeing the reviewer's actual commentary and more importantly, personal opinion of a game is just fraud to me.

[Promophile]

Its just like anime companies buying Japaneese anime and bringing it over here to air on TV, but in doing so they cut out whole episodes and violence and anything else they could mildly offend someone. They bought the rights so they can butcher it as they see fit. Why don't they just make their own anime? It would be more expensive/ take more time.

[Nes]

Anyone who finds that cat picture funny must have a serious case of antisocial personality disorder (look it up) and needs to make an appointment with a psychiatrist.

[zmweasel]

What I don't understand is if editors reserve the right and have the power to completely rewrite a person's review then what do they need that person for in the first place? If they're going to make up a person's opinion of a game then why not just make up the person as well and fabricate everything from the get go?

According to Nich, GameSpy bumped his score from 1 1/2 to 3 stars out of 5, and rewrote portions of his text. Neither of those are "fraud." The majority of GameSpy's editors obviously felt that Nich's review was flawed and overly harsh, speaking more of Nich's musical likes and dislikes than of the game itself. (Penny Arcade's comments reflect that.)

Editors don't *want* to completely revamp a writer's text, but they do want to whip it into shape, and make sure it's fair and accurate. Editors save writers from themselves. Nich obviously didn't want to be saved, so he used his blog to commit professional hari-kiri.

-- Z.

[Cmosfm]

Anyone who finds that cat picture funny must have a serious case of antisocial personality disorder (look it up) and needs to make an appointment with a psychiatrist.

You haven't been on the internet very long have you?

[zmweasel]

Its just like anime companies buying Japaneese anime and bringing it over here to air on TV, but in doing so they cut out whole episodes and violence and anything else they could mildly offend someone. They bought the rights so they can butcher it as they see fit. Why don't they just make their own anime? It would be more expensive/ take more time.

Hmmm...not the comparison I would use. Japanese anime is (was?) edited for American consumption because of cultural differences and concerns. Magazine editors give different writers a unified "voice," fact-check, and fix grammar. Very different tasks, very different reasons.

-- Z.

[Promophile]

Yeah its not a perfect comparison, but I was meaning it more as a comparison on how they change the articles to make them more "acceptable" and have a certain flavor.

[SoulBlazer]

I still don't think it's 'right' that someone changes a reviewer's score to bring it up (or down). Re-write the article so it fits better? Happens all the time. But change the final score that you FAIRLY and HONESTLY give a game? Not right. It does'nt happen with reviews of books and movies, it should'nt happen to a game. If the reviewer can explain why he FEELS the game deserves a certain score in a game, then leave the score in there. If you want to counter-balance a bad review, ask someone else to review the game and average the scores, or post a second review instead of the first.

How many times have we looked down a list of scores on a game online and seen something like this:

GameSpot: 8.5
IGN: 4 out of 5
EGM: 3.5 out of 5
GameSpy: 2 out of 5

Happens all the time. One reviewer just did'nt like the game and gave it a lower score then everyone else. They STILL posted the review!

I can understand why the guy is pissed off, but he should have delt with it privately. Posting it on his blog for everyone (including the companies he has written for) to see is, as Zach said, commiting professional suicide.

[zmweasel]

How many times have we looked down a list of scores on a game online and seen something like this:

GameSpot: 8.5
IGN: 4 out of 5
EGM: 3.5 out of 5
GameSpy: 2 out of 5

Happens all the time. One reviewer just did'nt like the game and gave it a lower score then everyone else. They STILL posted the review!

Really? From what I've seen--and I admittedly haven't done a lot of research on this--divergent scores like your fictional example are the exception, not the rule. Most games get nearly identical scores from professional websites and magazines, and it's quite unusual for one score to be significantly higher or lower than any other. (Fanboy-run, console-specific sites tend to rate higher, for obvious reasons.)

-- Z.

[slownerveaction]

If Gamespy felt the review really needed major edits and a significant change in score, they should have either ran it uncredited ("Gamespy staff" or something similar) or not run it all. Simple as that.

[Griking]

According to Nich, GameSpy bumped his score from 1 1/2 to 3 stars out of 5, and rewrote portions of his text. Neither of those are "fraud."

In my opinion a review of a game is a person's personal opinion of a game. For Gamespy to modify the review so much that it no longer reflects the author's opinion of the game is fraud. If the review is published without the reviewer's name attached to it and Gamespy calls it their review then that's fine. but if they left the original author's name attached to the review after they completely changed his opinion of the game then that's just wrong.


The majority of GameSpy's editors obviously felt that Nich's review was flawed and overly harsh, speaking more of Nich's musical likes and dislikes than of the game itself. (Penny Arcade's comments reflect that.)

Editors don't *want* to completely revamp a writer's text, but they do want to whip it into shape, and make sure it's fair and accurate. Editors save writers from themselves. Nich obviously didn't want to be saved, so he used his blog to commit professional hari-kiri.

Perhaps its just me then but when I think of a "fair review" I tend to think that this means that I'm getting the author's honest opinion of the game and not the rewritten so that it doesn't offend version.


BTW, I remmeber a few years back Sony's movie division got into some embarassing trouble. It was revealed that Sony was attaching rave review quotes to movies from film critics that didn't exist. I remember this because they quoted a critic from a newspaper from Connecticut and I live in Connecticut. This review editing reminds me of the same kind of thing.

[zmweasel]

In my opinion a review of a game is a person's personal opinion of a game. For Gamespy to modify the review so much that it no longer reflects the author's opinion of the game is fraud. If the review is published without the reviewer's name attached to it and Gamespy calls it their review then that's fine. but if they left the original author's name attached to the review after they completely changed his opinion of the game then that's just wrong.

Unless Nich decides to compound his error by posting his submitted review for comparison to GameSpy's edited review, we won't know the extent of the editing, nor how much Nich's opinion was changed.

When Nich agreed to write the review, he also agreed to be edited. Clashing between writers and editors is commonplace; for a writer to take those clashes public is unprofessional and foolish. I did it back in the day, in a manner quite similar to Nich (except we didn't call 'em "blogs" in the '90s), and I'll always regret it.


Perhaps its just me then but when I think of a "fair review" I tend to think that this means that I'm getting the author's honest opinion of the game and not the rewritten so that it doesn't offend version.

I doubt that Nich's review was edited so as "not to offend." It was likely edited because it was unduly harsh and spent too much time lingering on Nich's musical likes and dislikes. Again, unless we see the review as submitted (which we won't), we'll never know for sure.


BTW, I remmeber a few years back Sony's movie division got into some embarassing trouble. It was revealed that Sony was attaching rave review quotes to movies from film critics that didn't exist. I remember this because they quoted a critic from a newspaper from Connecticut and I live in Connecticut. This review editing reminds me of the same kind of thing.

The fictional movie reviewer (not reviewers--you "misremember") was a creation of Sony's PR department. Nich is a real person with an apparent unwillingness to work with editors. Entirely different.

GameSpy likely didn't place a "Staff" name on the review, or assign it to another freelancer, because it thought Nich was a professional who understood the editing process. Their bad.

-- Z.

[Famidrive-16]

EGM: 3.5 out of 5


I think they rate out of 10, or they used to anyways.

btw, what the heck does that dead cat have to do with this?

[SoulBlazer]

I don't know what scale the sites and mags use -- as I said, it was just a example. ;)

And I admit that really I only go three places for reviews on games these days -- GameSpot (who I find I agree with about 90 percent of the time), GameFAQ's (for both fan reviews and summaries of proffesional scores), and here, of course. :P

Like I said, I understand editing the article, but I still don't agree with changing the score.

It DOES make me wonder how often the example given in the PA cartoon happens, though.....

[zmweasel]

It DOES make me wonder how often the example given in the PA cartoon happens, though.....

I've never heard of an attempt to bribe an editor or writer in exchange for a positive review. And I've never been offered one myself, dammit.

Some people would argue that press junkets and tchotchkes and free copies of retail games are bribery in and of themselves, but that's a whole 'nother topic.

-- Z.

[fishsandwich]

Anyone who finds that cat picture funny must have a serious case of antisocial personality disorder (look it up) and needs to make an appointment with a psychiatrist.

Hey NES and James...

Are both of you two a couple of teenagers? Squemish old ladies maybe? Ever play a few minutes of a Grand Theft Auto game or do you just play Kirby on your NES?

Seriously, do you two get out much? Ever been to a raunchy site on the web or picked up a MAD magazine or God forbid a Stuff magazine?

I know of three pussies here... the dead cat and you two.

:dance:


"that cat could have been someone's pet!"

:bawling: :bawling:


.



NEW 5/15/2005 1:01 pm EST________________________


Fine. I apologize if I offended anyone. I co-habitate with two cats myself, and two before that, and two before that, and one before that who got killed and I found him on the side of the road. I loved them all. I also loved the 5+ dogs that came before them. I certainly did not mean to piss off animal lovers. I had not expected the response that I have gotten, and I would not have posted the picture had I known so many people would be offended by it. My sense of humor is different from the norm and I sometimes forget that.

I have deleted the picture from THIS post (it shall remain on the other posts) but I have left my original response completely intact. I don't believe in editing other people's candid thoughts, much less my own.


There you have it.


*_*

,

[SoulBlazer]

I was'nt going to respond, but I think that last post pushed my button.

I killed my first cat by accident last night coming home.

And I'm not even a cat person.

Please get rid of the picture.

[Sosage]

I've never heard of an attempt to bribe an editor or writer in exchange for a positive review. And I've never been offered one myself, dammit.

I also have experience writing/top editing for some “pro” organizations and I just have to say that bribe accusations in this industry is a very sticky semi-urban myth. I only call it a “semi-urban myth” because like every other writer or editor in this industry, we can only speak from personal experience. I have never accepted a bribe. I know that the peers I hold near and dear to me also do not accept bribes. I can not, however, speak for those who I do not have a working relationship with. In my little world, within my circle of peers, the bribe taking accusations are nothing more than silly statements used by reader's when their opinions don't jive with someone's article (having a difference of opinion is fine...but some people really like tossing out a bribery/corrupt statement to somehow add strength to their argument against a pro mag/site). When the accusation is directed at someone I don't personally have a relationship with, however, all I can do is wonder if maybe that author/organization are the few bad apples that are spoiling the bunch (I suspect their situation is identical to mine...but we will never really know).

My comments above don't specifically have anything to do with the thread topic, it is just something I've wanted to get off my chest in one form or another for a long time. On editing and score changing, I find it all depends on your editor. Some editors are notorious for making major edits, while a different editor at the same organization might dig your stuff and leave it mostly untouched. My worst experience was from an inexperienced editor that had a knack for changing everyone's negative articles into positive ones. Even this had more to do with ego/opinion clashing than a possible bribery scandal.

As for my 2 cents on the topic at hand, the only people who know what happened in this situation is Nich and Gamespy's editor. So...uh...“no comment”. :P


Some people would argue that press junkets and tchotchkes and free copies of retail games are bribery in and of themselves, but that's a whole 'nother topic.

I don't even want to touch this subject. It requires a 20 page essay on understanding PR, the roles people play in the PR-Editor relationship in this industry and an appreciation for editors that can handle the situation with grace. Even then, we wont get to touching the press junkets and tchotchkes until page 21. ;)

[qaotik]

You haven't been on the internet very long have you?

In my mind digitpress and rotten.com are two very different type of communities and pics like that don't belong here.


Ever play a few minutes of a Grand Theft Auto game or do you just play Kirby on your NES?

Those are games you idiot, thats a sick picture of reality from a person with no respect for any kind of life.


I say we ban this asshat now since he only seems to want to stir up shit (troll).

[Neil Koch]

I think fishsandwich posted the pic to emphasize "beating a dead cat"... anyway...

Personally, I get several DVDs a month (and now games) from online DVD shops in exchange for their right to use that review on their websites as they see fit -- which includes editing. Like zmweasel said, any time you're writing "professionally" (I hesitate to use that term in my case) you're subject to your work being altered/edited. That's part of the "game".

And I agree with zmweasel that the reviewer has shot himself in the foot. Gamespy is a pretty big site and to publically piss on them isn't exactly the smartest move if the guy wants a career as a video game reviewer.

Sometimes I do feel bad in a way when I write a really harsh review that these companies obviously can't use to sell their wares, but I've never felt any outright pressure to write something positive just because I got the DVD for free. And if a site edits my review to make it seem a little more positive, that's their perogative.

[GarrettCRW]

Unless Nich decides to compound his error by posting his submitted review for comparison to GameSpy's edited review, we won't know the extent of the editing, nor how much Nich's opinion was changed.

When Nich agreed to write the review, he also agreed to be edited. Clashing between writers and editors is commonplace; for a writer to take those clashes public is unprofessional and foolish. I did it back in the day, in a manner quite similar to Nich (except we didn't call 'em "blogs" in the '90s), and I'll always regret it.

To edit a review is one thing; to completely change the reviewer's intent is downright unethical. If anything, Nich has proven he has something sorely lacking in the media these days: integrity. I'd be pissed too if someone warped something with my name on it, too. Believe me, if this had been a misquote of a video game developer/president/other VIP that completely warped their opinion, it would have been fixed, and Gamespy would have been sucking up to said individual big time.

@fishsandwich: As a cat owner (and someone who tends to respect all life), I find that picture revolting, and your attitude towards the complaints you're getting even more so.

[Bill Loguidice]

According to Nich, GameSpy bumped his score from 1 1/2 to 3 stars out of 5, and rewrote portions of his text. Neither of those are "fraud." The majority of GameSpy's editors obviously felt that Nich's review was flawed and overly harsh, speaking more of Nich's musical likes and dislikes than of the game itself. (Penny Arcade's comments reflect that.)

Editors don't *want* to completely revamp a writer's text, but they do want to whip it into shape, and make sure it's fair and accurate. Editors save writers from themselves. Nich obviously didn't want to be saved, so he used his blog to commit professional hari-kiri.


If it's that "wrong" you just don't run it or you ask the writer for a rewrite. Or better yet, you get someone else to write it the way you want it to come out. However, having both experienced disastrous editorial rewrites as a writer (where errors were introduced) and cheesing off one writer as an editor (to fix errors), I know that these things happen. The point is to learn from it and not let it happen again through policy revamp.

[zmweasel]

To edit a review is one thing; to completely change the reviewer's intent is downright unethical. If anything, Nich has proven he has something sorely lacking in the media these days: integrity. I'd be pissed too if someone warped something with my name on it, too. Believe me, if this had been a misquote of a video game developer/president/other VIP that completely warped their opinion, it would have been fixed, and Gamespy would have been sucking up to said individual big time.

All we have is Nich's word against his editor's--whose identity I know, and won't reveal here; he's a nice guy who doesn't deserve to take any heat for simply doing his job--that the review was "warped."

My educated guess is that the editor removed the self-indulgent personal asides, as referenced in the Penny Arcade blurb, and adjusted the score upward because it reflected Nich's intense dislike of Konga 2's song selection, as opposed to flawed or mediocre gameplay mechanics. Nich got pissy and "went public," outraged that anyone would dare alter his sacred prose. (This is a common problem with web journos who aren't used to being edited at all.)

If this was a matter of integrity, Nich would have abided by the contract he signed with GameSpy, and sucked it up when his review was edited.

-- Z.

[zmweasel]

If it's that "wrong" you just don't run it or you ask the writer for a rewrite. Or better yet, you get someone else to write it the way you want it to come out. However, having both experienced disastrous editorial rewrites as a writer (where errors were introduced) and cheesing off one writer as an editor (to fix errors), I know that these things happen. The point is to learn from it and not let it happen again through policy revamp.

I assume the editor *did* ask Nich for a rewrite, which he was unwilling to supply. I also assume that the editor didn't expect Nich to self-destruct his career over the piece.

GameSpy's editors know their shit, and they never introduced any errors into my own contributions to the site, nor did they ever alter any of my scores. That's why I strongly suspect Nich's review was so far off-base that the editor was required to reshape it, which ticked Nich off.

Why wasn't it just reassigned? It takes time to get the reviewable disc back, and to send it off to someone else, and professional sites have to post their reviews when the game ships.

-- Z.

[slownerveaction]

I'm surprised nobody mentioned this, but there was a semi-official respone from GameSpy in the Gaming Age forums thread about this (emphasis added by moi):


Yeah, we should've have given the freelancer a heads-up. The editor felt it read like a music review instead of a game review and he was critiquing the music selections more than the game itself. The writer should always be consulted when his name is on a review and substantial changes to copy or scores are made. That is our policy and it was not followed. So in how we handled it, mea culpa.

But you can put any conspiracy theories to rest. We are NOT influenced by ad buys, tech licensing deals, the fact a beta was on FilePlanet or the fact a game may use GameSpy Arcade. Conspiracy theorists may not want to hear this (or believe it), but editorial integrity demands a separation of church and state.

While a few publishers may try to exert pressure over poor scores, Nintendo has never been one of them. This was a case of no communication between editor and writer. It has been addressed and the policy reinforced. We have already talked to the freelancer as well.

WarriorGSI, GameSpy Editorial Director

(Gaming Age is crawlin' with industry folks, and no one questioned whether this was a "fake" posing as GameSpy staff. It's safe to assume it's real.)

So GameSpy did mess up and go against their own policy when making substantial changes to the piece. Of course, Nich was out of line to make it public (although I doubt he wanted it to be this public).

It would appear to be no conspiracy or payola scandal, nor was it par for the course as far as editing goes. Lack of communication was the problem, and I highly doubt either party would deny that.

[fishsandwich]

I apologize for the cat. Please see my edited response above.

Here is a nice picture of happy kittens.

http://www.6ecards.com/cards/cute/cats.jpg

I am DONE now.

*_*

[Ed Oscuro]

Hasn't PA always hated GameSpy? Or is there a different story of this?
I used to know more about it.

Well, folks, check this second post:

http://www.forumplanet.com/gamespy/topic.asp?fid=1422&tid=1653285&p=1

My opinion of Penny Arcade continues to sink lower and lower; they've tried to paint themselves as industry insiders, but they seem to have no understanding of the workings of the industry or appreciation for the work people put into reviewing (or much of anything outside of drawing pictures, for that matter). Note also that their news item rant only hints at a charge of being bought out.

Penny Arcade has a ton of influence; witness all the marching morons who are ever ready to talk about how they hate GameSpy; how much it sucks, and so on. I honestly have no understanding why this is the case; if voting for the Webby Awards (check my review ;O ) is any indication, people must like the layout of IGN and GameSpot more.

I think Nintendo would be well within their rights to sue those stupid asses over at PA for insinuating a bribery occured, actually, and at this point I would be pleased if it did happen.

Kudos to the [GSI] crew for taking this one lightly. I do think they should move to counter those accusations, though.

[zmweasel]

It would appear to be no conspiracy or payola scandal, nor was it par for the course as far as editing goes. Lack of communication was the problem, and I highly doubt either party would deny that.

So my guess about Nich's review talking about the music and not the gameplay was right, but my guess that the editor had asked Nich for a rewrite was wrong.

Now I'm curious to see whether GameSpy or anyone else will use Nich again after this fiasco. I certainly wouldn't.

-- Z.

[Ed Oscuro]

Sorry to keep harping on the issue, but that's at the heart of it. The reviewer's had an update on his blog for a long time (though it would serve him right not to get hired by them again for making a scandal out of this), and GSI's had their say - now I'm just waiting to see if PA does the right thing. Unlikely...

[Griking]

So my guess about Nich's review talking about the music and not the gameplay was right, but my guess that the editor had asked Nich for a rewrite was wrong.

Let me just remind everyone here that the game in question WAS Donkey Konga 2 a game where music is key to the gameplay. It's not like the guy was criticizing a game like Doom III for bad music where the music on;y adds atmosphere. I think that the music should be considered and factored into the review score for this game.


Now I'm curious to see whether GameSpy or anyone else will use Nich again after this fiasco. I certainly wouldn't.

I'm more curious to see if Gamespy learns from their errors or if they'll repeat their mistakes.

[zmweasel]

I'm more curious to see if Gamespy learns from their errors or if they'll repeat their mistakes.

The only error made by GameSpy was the editor's apparent lack of communication with Nich. There was nothing wrong with GameSpy's editing of Nich's flawed review.

-- Z.

[Ed Oscuro]

Let me just remind everyone here that the game in question WAS Donkey Konga 2 a game where music is key to the gameplay.
Nobody needed reminding, though.



Now I'm curious to see whether GameSpy or anyone else will use Nich again after this fiasco. I certainly wouldn't.
I'm more curious to see if Gamespy learns from their errors or if they'll repeat their mistakes.
Wires get crossed (and this was just one mistake, on GameSpy's part). It's common decency to try and follow things through proper channels first. Yeah, I'm one to talk, but you should give people the benefit of the doubt.

[zmweasel]

Let me just remind everyone here that the game in question WAS Donkey Konga 2 a game where music is key to the gameplay. It's not like the guy was criticizing a game like Doom III for bad music where the music on;y adds atmosphere. I think that the music should be considered and factored into the review score for this game.

Nich might despise the musical selections in Konga 2, but if he spent the majority of his review ripping on those selections to appear "hip," which seems to be the case, his review is useless to the reader. PA's mention of Nich's review touched upon this.

-- Z.

[Promophile]

Now I'm curious to see whether GameSpy or anyone else will use Nich again after this fiasco. I certainly wouldn't.

-- Z.

Unless he has some good contacts I think his days as a freelance reviewer are done for. Why destroy your career over one lousy review? Sad.

[Promophile]

Now I'm curious to see whether GameSpy or anyone else will use Nich again after this fiasco. I certainly wouldn't.

-- Z.

Unless he has some good contacts I think his days as a freelance reviewer are done for. Why destroy your career over one lousy review? Sad.