Duck and Cover Forum Index


Use these links, buy stuff from Amazon and help us out, nubs. Link Translator
Amazon.com | Amazon.ca | Amazon.co.uk | Amazon.de | Fishpond.co.nz
  Duck and Cover  •  FAQ  •  Search  •  Memberlist  •  Usergroups   •  Register  •  Profile  •  Log in to check your private messages  •  Log in

 Support DAC!
 Bethesda engaging in more unethical practices? View next topic
View previous topic
Post new topicReply to topic
Author Message
King of Creation
Righteous Subjugator
Righteous Subjugator


Joined: 20 Dec 2003
Posts: 5101

PostPosted: Thu Oct 21, 2010 8:19 am Reply with quoteBack to top

[ Company -> Update ] - More info on Company: Bethesda Softworks | More info on Game: Fallout: New Vegas

UPDATE: Dan Hsu reports:

Re: my Tweets, Bethesda wants to go on record that they 100% did not pressure any editorial and do not condone such activities.

We reported earlier that Bethesda was apparently engaging in some unethical marketing practices with regards to review quotes in a Fallout: New Vegas ad. Now, it looks like things have gone to the next level. Dan Hsu, former Editorial Director at 1up and now of Bitmob, has uncovered what he claims is direct review intervention by Bethesda. Here are his tweets on the matter:

One site was forced to pull its Fallout Vegas review because advertiser Bethesda was unhappy w/ score. Sad this crap still goes on.

Heard (but haven't confirmed) two more sites delaying publishing poor review scores for Fallout Vegas until Fallout ad campaign is done.

To clarify, the site's boss pulled that review because advertiser wasn't happy, against writer's wishes.

Sorry, I know how this sounds, but I can't say which site cause this guy would be fired for telling me (they'd know).

RT: JustinHaywald @bitmobshoe To be clear, 1UP has not published a review because both the reviewer and I felt he needed more time with the game.

@BenKuchera I did get a 2nd, independent confirmation on this, tho. The review was pulled by CEO, then put back up when ad campaign was over

If you work for a site and this has happened to you, let us know! If true, this is outrageous and totally reprehensible...yet not unexpected.

Thanks Willooi.

View user's profileSend private messageVisit poster's website
Username
Elite Wanderer
Elite Wanderer


Joined: 12 Jun 2010
Posts: 655

PostPosted: Thu Oct 21, 2010 9:19 am Reply with quoteBack to top

Wow not even the cunts at EA games would do stuff like this. Heck those cunts gave me a free CD key when I lost my for BF2. (yeah I did actually lose it...)


Fuck it now I'm seriously pirating the game if I'm ever going to try it.
As an aspiring journalist I feel sickened by these things, not to mention that they mock the what ever the ideal of reporting and reviewing once was in the past.


This reminds me of the good old Microsoft - Indie thing.
"Microsoft sux, microsoft is evil, microsoft does this and that".

Then apple breaks through. And it's just 10 times worse in every direction.
View user's profileSend private message
TheBearPaw
SDF!
SDF!


Joined: 25 Feb 2010
Posts: 23
Location: New Reno

PostPosted: Thu Oct 21, 2010 11:36 am Reply with quoteBack to top

Yeah, if this stuff is true, it's fucking ugly, and those Besthesda bitches should be exposed and fined.
View user's profileSend private messageSend e-mailVisit poster's website
popscythe
Elite Wanderer
Elite Wanderer


Joined: 11 Feb 2005
Posts: 692
Location: Silent Hill, Oregon

PostPosted: Thu Oct 21, 2010 1:19 pm Reply with quoteBack to top

Buy a dead franchise: Check
Make a terrible game under the new IP: Check
Hire someone to pour sugar on the feces you previously created and call it a new product: Check
Pay for good reviews of Feces: With Sugar: Check
Demand bad reviews for Feces: With Sugar be removed from websites: Check

Let me just extrapolate the next couple of moves by Bethsoft for you guys to save you some time.

Fire Obsidian after blaming poor sales of Feces: With Sugar on them: Check
Release a fucking horrible "game" only on 360 that is a "reboot" of TES, which does very poorly and is essentially a god of war clone with some fable-esque elements: Check
Abandon the Fallout franchise: Check
Get sold by Zenimax to some asian mmo company: 2014

Mark my words, boys. Mark em.
View user's profileSend private message
Cimmerian Nights
Striding Hero
Striding Hero


Joined: 20 Aug 2004
Posts: 1367
Location: The Roche Motel

PostPosted: Thu Oct 21, 2010 3:18 pm Reply with quoteBack to top

If Bethesda were half as good at RPG design as they are at slimy PR...
View user's profileSend private message
crackedcorn
SDF!
SDF!


Joined: 21 Oct 2010
Posts: 1
Location: fazed.net

PostPosted: Thu Oct 21, 2010 3:56 pm Reply with quoteBack to top

popscythe wrote:
Mark my words, boys. Mark em.


If you insist...

View user's profileSend private message
TheTingler
SDF!
SDF!


Joined: 21 Oct 2010
Posts: 1

PostPosted: Thu Oct 21, 2010 4:19 pm Reply with quoteBack to top

I think you guys are overreacting somewhat. I've seen nothing but glowing reviews for New Vegas from some of the harshest sites around. Anyone know what actual site supposedly pulled their review? Was it GameSpot (if so, quelle surprise)?
View user's profileSend private message
SenisterDenister
250 Posts til Somewhere
250 Posts til Somewhere


Joined: 23 Apr 2007
Posts: 2854
Location: Cackalackyland

PostPosted: Thu Oct 21, 2010 4:21 pm Reply with quoteBack to top

Too many new people.
View user's profileSend private messageVisit poster's website
Superhaze
Hero of the Desert
Hero of the Desert


Joined: 12 Jan 2007
Posts: 1691
Location: Far north

PostPosted: Thu Oct 21, 2010 5:00 pm Reply with quoteBack to top

We are on fucking reddit. This explains so much. Hello reddit, please leave us alone. Thanks! icon_drunk
View user's profileSend private message
Cimmerian Nights
Striding Hero
Striding Hero


Joined: 20 Aug 2004
Posts: 1367
Location: The Roche Motel

PostPosted: Thu Oct 21, 2010 5:59 pm Reply with quoteBack to top

TheTingler wrote:
I think you guys are overreacting somewhat. I've seen nothing but glowing reviews for New Vegas from some of the harshest sites around. Anyone know what actual site supposedly pulled their review? Was it GameSpot (if so, quelle surprise)?

I don't think the issue here is the perceived quality of the game, it's (and the gaming media is complicit in this) the fact that the publishers and gaming mags are in bed together.

That Bethesda (a major advertiser), thinks that these mags should "play ball" in exchange for exclusive content is pretty shady, don't you think?

How is this not a conflict of interests?

Why call it a review? Call it a paid-advertisement like you see in respectable newspapers and magazines.

But don't front like it some kind of unbiased review when the publisher/advertiser can weild this much control.


Bottom line - Bethesda are afraid of their products speaking for themselves.
Wheres the demos?
What's wrong with allowing me to judge for myself?
View user's profileSend private message
Kickstand27
Desert Wanderer
Desert Wanderer


Joined: 15 Feb 2010
Posts: 516
Location: Old California Republic

PostPosted: Thu Oct 21, 2010 6:08 pm Reply with quoteBack to top

eh, its a two way street..

If a mag is willing to sugar coat for some exclusive info, or is willing to take extra cash for a good review, theyre just as guilty.

Ultimately the game will speak for its self and if its not good, those mags that painted it as such will not be looked as as credible.

Of course bethsoft is going to favor good reviews and try to grease the wheels to make it so.. it {i]is[/i] still a business, regardless of your thougts on that in relation to this or any franchise. but ultimately, its the medias job to be the media. imagine that.
View user's profileSend private messageVisit poster's website
Username
Elite Wanderer
Elite Wanderer


Joined: 12 Jun 2010
Posts: 655

PostPosted: Thu Oct 21, 2010 6:34 pm Reply with quoteBack to top

Kickstand27 wrote:
eh, its a two way street..

If a mag is willing to sugar coat for some exclusive info, or is willing to take extra cash for a good review, theyre just as guilty.

Ultimately the game will speak for its self and if its not good, those mags that painted it as such will not be looked as as credible.

Of course bethsoft is going to favor good reviews and try to grease the wheels to make it so.. it {i]is[/i] still a business, regardless of your thougts on that in relation to this or any franchise. but ultimately, its the medias job to be the media. imagine that.


No they are not. It's just like saying "if a worker is willing to take that job with that shitty wage..."
In this case Bethesda is the side that pulls all the strings and holds all the aces. It's a matter of survival for the reviewer to do as they say because if they don't they do not get adds - and nobody pays for shit anymore which really benifits the big corporations.

If it was the other way around, if there were less wannabes just waiting to take X sites place and if Bethesdas future lay in the reviewers hands then the story would be different. The one with all the marbles sets the rules and its them that should be blamed.
View user's profileSend private message
Yonmanc
Hero of the Glowing Lands
Hero of the Glowing Lands


Joined: 23 Jun 2009
Posts: 2224
Location: Manchester, UK

PostPosted: Thu Oct 21, 2010 6:53 pm Reply with quoteBack to top

I stil havn't played it yet. It's a choice between new vegas, or drunkern debauchery. New Vegas can wait.
View user's profileSend private message
Manoil
Wastelander's Nightmare
Wastelander's Nightmare


Joined: 22 Feb 2006
Posts: 3673
Location: Behind your Chair

PostPosted: Thu Oct 21, 2010 7:09 pm Reply with quoteBack to top

Yonmanc wrote:
I stil havn't played it yet. It's a choice between new vegas, or drunkern debauchery. New Vegas can wait.
You still haven't made the youtube video reading off the list of words SDF can mean icon_anger
View user's profileSend private messageVisit poster's website
Yonmanc
Hero of the Glowing Lands
Hero of the Glowing Lands


Joined: 23 Jun 2009
Posts: 2224
Location: Manchester, UK

PostPosted: Thu Oct 21, 2010 7:11 pm Reply with quoteBack to top

Manoil wrote:
Yonmanc wrote:
I stil havn't played it yet. It's a choice between new vegas, or drunkern debauchery. New Vegas can wait.
You still haven't made the youtube video reading off the list of words SDF can mean icon_anger


Shit I forgot. Well, I can't record anything this weekend, I'll get to it next week (something to add to my growing video schedule).
View user's profileSend private message
Kickstand27
Desert Wanderer
Desert Wanderer


Joined: 15 Feb 2010
Posts: 516
Location: Old California Republic

PostPosted: Thu Oct 21, 2010 7:24 pm Reply with quoteBack to top

Username wrote:


No they are not. It's just like saying "if a worker is willing to take that job with that shitty wage..."
In this case Bethesda is the side that pulls all the strings and holds all the aces. It's a matter of survival for the reviewer to do as they say because if they don't they do not get adds - and nobody pays for shit anymore which really benifits the big corporations.

If it was the other way around, if there were less wannabes just waiting to take X sites place and if Bethesdas future lay in the reviewers hands then the story would be different. The one with all the marbles sets the rules and its them that should be blamed.

i think thats BS. its called journalistic integrity. if a reviewer thinks a game isnt good they should just go along and blow smoke up the readers ass to keep themselves "in the loop"? no, they shouldnt cater to the whims of devs. they are there for the readers-that should be the only peolle they pander to, unless they dont care about credibility with the very people that keep them in business.

The problem is that there are too many people that just play ball. Which is my point. bethsoft wouldnt be buying good reviews if pubs didnt sell them. make no mistake that bethsoft needs write ups. jsut like the business that pays workers the low wage need workers.. in the wage analogy, people form unions and whatnot to combat that kind of practice.

So ya, its a two way street.
View user's profileSend private messageVisit poster's website
RastaCC
SDF!
SDF!


Joined: 21 Oct 2010
Posts: 1

PostPosted: Thu Oct 21, 2010 7:31 pm Reply with quoteBack to top

popscythe wrote:
Buy a dead franchise: Check
Make a terrible game under the new IP: Check
Hire someone to pour sugar on the feces you previously created and call it a new product: Check
Pay for good reviews of Feces: With Sugar: Check
Demand bad reviews for Feces: With Sugar be removed from websites: Check

Let me just extrapolate the next couple of moves by Bethsoft for you guys to save you some time.

Fire Obsidian after blaming poor sales of Feces: With Sugar on them: Check
Release a fucking horrible "game" only on 360 that is a "reboot" of TES, which does very poorly and is essentially a god of war clone with some fable-esque elements: Check
Abandon the Fallout franchise: Check
Get sold by Zenimax to some asian mmo company: 2014

Mark my words, boys. Mark em.


In the words of The Dude: "that's like, your opinion, man." Fallout 3 was not crap and neither is New Vegas. I will agree with you if you say that the Fallout 3 GOTY on PS3 was crap. That version of the game was mainly unplayable. Also, I don't care if a lot of it is the same. There will always be one critic that wants it the same and another one that wants it to be completely different.

P.S. why all the bile for blood? Is it really something worth getting that upset about?
View user's profileSend private message
Yonmanc
Hero of the Glowing Lands
Hero of the Glowing Lands


Joined: 23 Jun 2009
Posts: 2224
Location: Manchester, UK

PostPosted: Thu Oct 21, 2010 7:38 pm Reply with quoteBack to top

lol RastaCC is a boob. I love these new guys!
View user's profileSend private message
King of Creation
Righteous Subjugator
Righteous Subjugator


Joined: 20 Dec 2003
Posts: 5101

PostPosted: Thu Oct 21, 2010 9:54 pm Reply with quoteBack to top

Updated the news post. Hsu is reporting that Bethesda want to go on the record denying his claims. Still waiting for Bethesda's comments
View user's profileSend private messageVisit poster's website
Frater Perdurabo
Paragon
Paragon


Joined: 05 Jun 2006
Posts: 2428
Location: Vőro

PostPosted: Thu Oct 21, 2010 9:59 pm Reply with quoteBack to top

Kickstand27 wrote:
Username wrote:


No they are not. It's just like saying "if a worker is willing to take that job with that shitty wage..."
In this case Bethesda is the side that pulls all the strings and holds all the aces. It's a matter of survival for the reviewer to do as they say because if they don't they do not get adds - and nobody pays for shit anymore which really benifits the big corporations.

If it was the other way around, if there were less wannabes just waiting to take X sites place and if Bethesdas future lay in the reviewers hands then the story would be different. The one with all the marbles sets the rules and its them that should be blamed.

i think thats BS. its called journalistic integrity. if a reviewer thinks a game isnt good they should just go along and blow smoke up the readers ass to keep themselves "in the loop"? no, they shouldnt cater to the whims of devs. they are there for the readers-that should be the only peolle they pander to, unless they dont care about credibility with the very people that keep them in business.

The problem is that there are too many people that just play ball. Which is my point. bethsoft wouldnt be buying good reviews if pubs didnt sell them. make no mistake that bethsoft needs write ups. jsut like the business that pays workers the low wage need workers.. in the wage analogy, people form unions and whatnot to combat that kind of practice.

So ya, its a two way street.

Bullshit. Unlike general journalism, gaming websites and magazines are almost entirely dependant on game developers and publishers for advertising money, free components, free games etc. If the developers and publishers pull the plug, that will be a substantial loss of revenue for them.

So pretend the review goes through and Bethesda pulls the plug on that particular magazine. EA or fuckknowswho comes along and says: "Hm, this magazine caters for gamers with independent thought who have above-average intellect. That's not my target audience and the last thing I want is a negative review. Shut 'em down."

Or even worse, instead of having these sites wither in the background with their negative reviews around, why not just bully them into not publishing the review in the first place?
View user's profileSend private message
Display posts from previous:      
Post new topicReply to topic


Jump to:  



View next topic
View previous topic
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group