anywhere from occasionally to frequently
it's difficult to know without reviewers speaking up and it's difficult for reviewers to speak up without subjecting themselves to the abuse of power that allows publishers to do this in the first place
-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
-
We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.
Sony contacted Vice due to more critical review of The Last of Us Part II
- Thread starter dex3108
- Start date
it's difficult to know without reviewers speaking up and it's difficult for reviewers to speak up without subjecting themselves to the abuse of power that allows publishers to do this in the first place
Yeah, that's not remotely how this works. Their tone is their tone, regardless of the question of whether it's acceptable for them to make contact in the first place. And if I disliked something and expressed as much to the extent that I was allowed because of embargo restrictions and I got a message from someone that was the cordial version of "wtf?", I'd be "happy" to provide further details of the ways in which their thing sucks. Nothing about that implies that the original contact was appropriate.
In fact, the fact that he's gone so far as to describe all of this and yet pointedly not say "eh, it's no big deal" is actually rather telling. That piece of information is conspicuous by it's absence.
Just to clarify
Each difficulty of (resources, enemies, players) etc can be manually adjusted (this is not rope physics feature)
Hence I dont get the game being easy comment
Regarding the Jeff Gerstmann Kane & Lynch thing: Jeff has explained the whole story was actually the culmination of a new management team that had taken over and wasn't accustomed to apparently very common complaints and emails from publishers over review scores, which the old management had learned to ignore and defuse; the new managers first got freaked out by Sony threatening to pull ads from the site over a score (7.5) given to Ratchet & Clank: Tools of Destruction and yelled at Jeff because he was the head of reviews. Then the Kane & Lynch review happened, the managers thought it was the last straw, and canned Jeff.
You sound so naive, publishers are deliberate about who they send review copies to
See now even you're being aggressive for no reason, why? Obviously I must have missed that or I wouldn't have wasted my time typing all that out. I'm not coming at this from a bad place, sorry if you thought I was.
You can easily say this for all the people twisting this into a negative thing. And yes you can get a good idea of how this person usually talks by their reviews and their other twitter comments. Nothing he said can be deemed as negative.
Not a single person related to Vice has said what Sony did with this reviewer is problematic. If so please point it out.
Last edited:
I don't think reaching out to journalists is proper, especially directly doing so like it was described in the article.
It's possible developer and reviewers meet in some social function and discussion moves towards prior reviews, and it all is cordial and I think had that been the situation it would still be weird but not as shady. Officially reaching out to discuss a negative review is just strange, regardless of if the other party felt anything negative or not. That's how the mafia behaves, they don't even have to issue threats.
It's possible developer and reviewers meet in some social function and discussion moves towards prior reviews, and it all is cordial and I think had that been the situation it would still be weird but not as shady. Officially reaching out to discuss a negative review is just strange, regardless of if the other party felt anything negative or not. That's how the mafia behaves, they don't even have to issue threats.
do you think rob spoke to polygon for this article about a totally normal thing that always happens that isn't news worthy
please just think one time
They sent out around 100 copies of this game to be reviewed. Pretty much every significant person that reviews games. There was no picking and choosing for this game. They literally just wanted clarification. But muh internet outrage!
I think we should drop engaging with him. He's kind of set his mind on what he chooses to take from this. I am done engaging with him as well.
We have no idea about the context of the conversation but I am positive if he wanted it to come off as negative he could have easily done so yet he didn't. You should really start taking your won advice and stop piggybacking off other people's comment and never adding anything of value. If you want me to "shut up" stop replying to me or can you not control your fake outrage.
eggman doesn't know when to quit, just look at how many times he's tried to take over the world
You made a general statement about the leverage publishers have over reviewers, but now we're talking about Naughty Dog specifically?
I appear to be the only one quoting the actual article and what the reviewer said. People here are doing their best to spin it into something else.
As someone who is a manager, I worry about how my questions come off all the fucking time. I went through training that made it clear that relationships and conversations change when you become a manager. Understanding the power dynamics involved is a large part of being an effective manager. It's incredibly easy to make someone feel threatened when you have power over them, and mitigating that is hugely important.
And it's a good thing that Sony didn't make him feel threatened. By the reviewers own accord it seemed to be a pleasent conversation.
I wasn't talking about random twitter comments.
Like this is a weird line to go down, it's not like hearing someone talk on a podcast means you know things about someone, but: do you know how many hours I have listened to Rob speak on a podcast for? (Including one or two on TLOU2, already!) I imagine it was professional, but I cannot think that it was a particularly deferential response from him, lol.
Also, I said this behavior from companies:
(Patrick also posted in this very thread, but not directly about this.)
Also, just, this, lmao.
I imagine if stories came out that they were the conversation was that Sony/ND was encouraging better reviews.
Yeah, this is a good distillation. This doesn't just apply to developers and corporations either. Its hard to review games because you will get harassed if you go against the grain.
Sony, please dont.
This is gross from SONY, but I'm not surprised. Just take the glowing review average and just move on. Heaven forbid someone levies criticism against the game. I can only imagine what fanboys sent to Rob after he posted his review.
Again if it was in any way negative than I am positive Rob would have expressed that but he never did. He expressed the opposite. None of these people are saying anything that Sony did here was bad (except for that one over dramatic person), including Rob who I am sure would have said so once again when discussing it on twitter. It really is that simple. I am sure if he felt intimidated or thought it was meant to intimidiate him he would say so. He obviously has no problem expressing his opinions clearly.
User warned - Accusations of Shilling
Don't have to imagine, we have shills in this very thread!
Once again proving you are unable to provide anything of value. Some good backseat posting though, that way you don't actually have to use your head.
Didn't want to engage with you but this got me interested again. Just leaving it here
i'm not sure that i would be confident after spending two pages in a thread where everyone is telling my that i am wrong to then claim to be an arbiter of what is and isn't valuable
also please just conveniently ignore my other replies while thinking that this is an easy layup lmao
I could imagine ND is just being honest, wanting to have a more elaborate explanation on why this particular reviewer thought the way he described in his review. Having confidence in your creative output is vital, so it is understandable that you want to know where you can possibly improve.
For example, I didn't like TLOU1, UC2 and UC3 at all but UC4 is one of my top 3 games this gen and I can't even tell you why exactly. Maybe it's a certain feeling or the moment is wrong where you play the game - it is humane to be diverse or not always rigorous in your opinion or behavior.
For example, I didn't like TLOU1, UC2 and UC3 at all but UC4 is one of my top 3 games this gen and I can't even tell you why exactly. Maybe it's a certain feeling or the moment is wrong where you play the game - it is humane to be diverse or not always rigorous in your opinion or behavior.
Ahhhhh I want more people to speak up now it's intriguing
This just makes me trust reviews less and less when you have reviewers afraid to be honest as to not upset a publisher or their horde of rabid fanboys.
Agreed to a certain level that wanting to know what can be improved is a good thing. But that doesn't mean a Sony PR team contacts the said reviewer, especially when the game is close to release. It comes across as a powerplay. It's quite easy to gather all the criticism and understand what needs to be made better the next time. Doesn't have to be you personally contacting a big website to know what the game could have done better.
You even have a writer
My friend....where in the article or the Op the writer is accusing Sony of trying to change his review?
I mean....there is not mention of Sony pushing to change the review and even the Guy say that is something that happen...you also got a push square Editor saying this...
There is no article saying that Sony reach the Reviewer to change or Influence in his review .....is exactly the opposite.
What's wrong with you guys..there is no reviewer or media outlet accusing Sony....is just people in this thread talking nonsense without evidence.
My friend....where in the article or the Op the writer is accusing Sony of trying to change his review?
I mean....there is not mention of Sony pushing to change the review and even the Guy say that is something that happen...you also got a push square Editor saying this...
There is no article saying that Sony reach the Reviewer to change or Influence in his review .....is exactly the opposite.
What's wrong with you guys..there is no reviewer or media outlet accusing Sony....is just people in this thread talking nonsense without evidence.
Sorry I can't take that person seriously after they attacked Naughty Dog for being upset about death threats.
I think it's good to have reviews but I think one should just decide for themselves, after reading them and making an educated guess on whether its going to click with them or not.
Probably because I'm lacking sleep but avatar/comment combo made me laugh. It's exactly what classic sonic would say.
"please show me one single person related at all to vice that has spoken out about this!!
no wait no not *that* one"