Um, Gamespot?
Would Jeff say a game sux while it has ads & layout all over GB ?
It looks like GB is only giving ad space to great games so i don't think this will be a problem. There was no chance ODST, Dragon Age, or Assassins Creed was gonna suck so maybe they are playing it safe.
One thing about Giantbomb that you can bank on is they will be honest. That's been proven from the beginning.
If Jeff, Vinny or Brad doesn't like AC2, they'll probably keep their mouth shut when it comes up on the Bombcast or whatever. At the end of the day, a business partnership is more important to GiantBomb then being able to slag off the game they're advertising, and it makes it easier for everyone involved if they restrict the amount of trash they talk about the game. Though of course this doesn't apply to Ryan (or whoever is reviewing the game that is being advertised at the time), who is guaranteed to be honest.
I want to play Dragon Age less and less every time I see that damn video ad. It's gotten to the point where every time he tells me that he's a grey warden, I get less curious as to what the hell he's talking about and just want him to shut up and never show his glowing-eyed, almsot shaven face again.
" It's the inherent problem of having a 5 point scale is that 3/5 isn't terrible - it's average and 4/5 is great. However when throwing it up on Metacritic - it can look like GB is scoring low in comparison to sites that use a full 10 point or 100 point grading system. I could be wrong but weren't there some Arkham Asylum ad's on the site? Published by Eidos, folks. "Its only a problem for idiots who use metacritic. For sensible people who do like they did prior to Meta, just go to their 2 or 3 trusted review sites, this makes no difference.
" I think they said at the PAX conference that they have a lot more control over what ads go up on the site. So I doubt they are going to let something like GI Joe the game get plastered knowing in advance that the game was probably going to be trash. In the end, who cares? Its not like Jeff is going to fire himself for pissing off a sponsor. "
@fwylo said:
@Rhaknar said:" @AgentJ said:
" I think its more likely that they already knew what they would give the game before they signed up for a full-site ad. "I agree chances are they aren't going to advertise for a game that is going to bust. "
@Jimbo said:" @VWGTI said:
" I think they pick good games on purpose. "this. If anything (and thats a big IF), it almost looks like they knock the game DOWN a tad if it has an ad, at least thats what it seemed to me in the AC2 review. Im not even going to compare with the majority of other sites's scores of AC2, but Ryan only says good things about it, with one of the few complaints is the repetition of some of the open world dialogue (like people shouting money money when you throw some cash on the floor). reading the review it just felt like a 5 star, not 4. Again, i said "if anything..." "
@Bucketdeth said:" They wouldn't run the ads if they thought the game 'sucked'. Whether or not they insist on playing the final product before making that decision, or just go on best guess, I couldn't say. "
" @Jensonb said:
" I answered this on the IRC, but here it is again: Giant Bomb has the same business model as Penny Arcade. They only advertise things they like and expect us to be interested in. That way they can't be held to ransom, and the ads are less annoying and more valuable. So this situation could never arise, and with the way Giant Bomb is set up, and its history, everyone on Editorial can be trusted to tell us their honest opinions. "Yep, this was answered by Jeff at an event, I can't remember the name now. "
" Sure, but I'm not sure they're going to try to advertise a shitty game. "
@Alex_V said:
" @Black_Rose said:@Bass said:" Jeff said in the PAX panel that GB only advertises good games or something along those lines, so it's very unlikely. "That's the impression I got. I think it must be a difficult line to tread, however impartial you want your reviews to be. I sensed that the ODST review earlier this year was carefully worded to avoid offense, and there's nothing wrong with that. "
" I only say no because I don't think the team would approve of ads for games that they believe "suck." They say that they wont allow stuff that we wouldn't be interested in; something of good quality. So, it's not that i don't think jeff or ryan or whoever wouldn't give a game any star rating it deserves, its just they wont advertise it if it isn't any good. "
OK so to all the people who pretty much said that "the ads wouldnt get on the website in the first place if the GB crew thought it sucked" , does that mean that they always play and beat the game to make sure its awesome, or what ?
Lets take The Saboteur, for example.. its a new BIG game? CHECK. the GB members are interested in it? CHECK. now here's the deal :
does jeff 1. play the whole game before putting ads of it on the site, or is it enough for him to 2.see that we're interested AND watch the developers play through a single mission ? because in the second case, the game might surprise everybody by being repetitive or any other bad/shitty thing that many big-games-with-super-first-impressions had [Which is the case im asking about in this poll] .. so which one is it ?
If you tell me that YES they beat the game and make sure it gets atleast 3 stars before making a move, then lets lock this poll right away. but i dont think thats the case.. is it ?
here's an example :
@nameless_one said:
" it could happen. If Giant Bomb is taking the same approach as Penny Arcade for potential game advertisements and previewing games during their development cycles to ensure they are backing a good product, it's a step in the right direction. But it is hard to know how games are going to end up during the development cycle and sometimes games are made or broken in their final days of development (ie gta3). "
" (had to type "sux" because the title limit is so fucking unbelieveable)Jeff was fired from Gamespot because he gave a sponsored game a 6.0/10 and said it wasn't worth the price. So yeah.
Anyway, this is the first time i see an ad for a game on GB (i live in israel) not sure why these AC2 ad & layout came through, and i was watching Ryan's video review of AC2 and was wondering "say that a major game with ads and a layout all over the site, turned out to be the biggest disappointment of the decade.. would the GB staff member / reviewer actually go "And so, you guys, with a major shock i tell you do not buy this piece of trash" while the background is a massive ad/background of the game ? "
P.S. i emphasized on the game being huge because i learned that the staff dudes said they wouldnt advertise just ANY game.
i tend to think of stuff like that because we cant deny that ads or mini contests (like the ODST one) may contain relationships with developers and publishers (i understand GB and Atlus are friends now? things like that), so it all counts. Also, people change and bad days always come [and friendships usually end, etc... lolz] so what the staff says they believe in today, might change tomorrow.. its just how humans progress and it makes you think. most of you deny such solid facts about society and people because life cant be all cool and awesome if people do acknowledge the big possibility of things going bad.
Anyway, no troll included, i was actually wondering that and wanted to see what others think. I love giantbomb, its my favorite website and i got nothing against it. im not questioning jeff's editorial coverage so much as wondering if that would actually happen in those circumstances and with the relationships Giantbomb MIGHT have with that one particular publisher/dev .
P.S. If you're one of the pityful tools who put on their bloody debate uniform and fireback with anger and full seriousness, i beg of you to ignore my poll, because i, unlike you, dont tend to forget that im just a laid-back dude on the net with occasional thoughts and questions, some of which may be unwise or stupid, which dont always have to turn into a brutal deathmatch where one of us is RIGHT and the other is an IDIOT with INVALID POINTS and NO PROOFZ and all that.. the internet makes you forget that we're random flawed humans and makes you demand perfection all the time. i cant give you that and you shouldnt ask for it...
just relax and answer, thank you. "
I know this is 3 days out now but I think some people are forgetting that Jeff isn't just responsible for himself now he has the well being of other staff to think of.
I'm guessing the Giant Bomb crew operate like the Penny Arcade team, in that they at least have some play experience with the game before accepting advertising for it as their method of quality control.
Unlike most of the people here, I'm not fanatically attached to the reviewers, but I'll say probably yes. They seem to be a reasonably ok bunch of reviewers, as far as professional video game reviewers go.
Please Log In to post.
Log in to comment