ilaskey Posted June 23, 2015 Share Posted June 23, 2015 I wrote for various UK magazines over the years and the general impression I got was that over here, the editorial team and advertising teams were mostly kept separate. The editors rejected any attempts by advertising to influence reviews eg "X games company will do a double page spread for 3 months if we do a good review of x". As the magazine market started dying this was less rigorously enforced though and I know a number of people who left the industry as a result of the level of influence being applied. By and large, reviewers were proud of being 100% honest in their reviews. On the other hand, the US side was rather different and bribes, advertising promises etc were very common and in many cases, the companies provided their own 'reviews' for publication. You could usually see the effect of this when US companies who were new to the UK tried the same thing and were nonplussed when we refused to publish their 'review' they provided. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lost Dragon Posted June 23, 2015 Share Posted June 23, 2015 Well, regarding what's come to light in the years since (and continues to do so) the claims abouut games A-Z in magazines like: ZZap64/Atari User/C.U/The Games Machine/Ultimate Future Games/Ace/Zero/Raze/C+VG....and so on and so on. No, i should not have believed the reviews, previews, show reports, news, etc etc as seems a lot of stuff simply made up and printed as fact, early code happily reviewed, Mock-Up screens etc passed off as in-game.... You name it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mclaneinc Posted June 24, 2015 Author Share Posted June 24, 2015 My, one of my old threads returned from the dead Reviews should be treated simply as opinions, some you agree with some you don't, you must never trust your purchase on a review, I when I reviewed tried to be clinical, being overly fond of a game you are reviewing tends to make you leave out issues you have found that would matter to a person buying that game based on your words just as a dislike of a game that you personally have found not to your taste is just as bad as I was paid to be factual and impersonal regarding the game. A review for me should be synopsis, what is good, what isn't so good. Liking or dislike of a game is fine, it often proves how well a developer has done or not in other cases, the fact it emotionally hit you is good but as a reviewer you need to de-cloud before putting fingers to keys because in the end its simply your opinion. As for the corrupt side of reviews, yes it happens and always has but in most cases its easy to spot the prewritten dev review or the review that's been rewarded to review, the style of the review often gives it away compared to their usual writing style. In todays market I'd say if you are unsure then try to rent the game, what I like may vary to what you like no matter how clinical I try to be. Sadly in the cut throat market out there its not good to trust everything you read..A good game sells itself, its the others you have to worry about Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Like us on Facebook
Follow us on Twitter
AtariAge on Instagram
Watch us on YouTube
Chat on Discord
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.