Hey guys... I just checked out this article at gameinformer..... So my question is to the giantbomb staff has it ever happened to you guys (i.e  a game publisher offering you a review copy only if you give them ***** stars or a good review).. Being very honest my game purchases are very much influenced by gamespot reviews ( Sorry Giantbomb, I am new here ) ... and what does the giantbomb community think about this?? 
maybe Jeff has something to say about it!!!

I think it's a real dick move by Ubisoft. 
 
However, I also think Assassin's Creed II is going to be a fantastic game and am not going to let this affect my decision to purchase it. This is the work of Ubisoft's business people, not the developers.

WTF Ubisoft?

Yea you can't blame the developers for what is happening. They have made they game and are not in charge of marketing or distributing the game. Obviously the staff here have very strong views on this and i don't have to go into detail as to why. The first game got very good scores and with all the improvements made i don't see why this shouldn't get the same. This doesn't suprise me though since Ubisoft reported big losses this year.

As always, there're two sides of a coin. Who knows what really happened? Maybe the magazine was denied a review-copy, and decided to be all douchebags about it? Maybe Ubisoft were just fooling around ("sure, you'll get a review-copy, if you give us highest score! wink wink")? As always, hold your horses until you know the full story.

" As always, there're two sides of a coin. Who knows what really happened? Maybe the magazine was denied a review-copy, and decided to be all douchebags about it? Maybe Ubisoft were just fooling around ("sure, you'll get a review-copy, if you give us highest score! wink wink")? As always, hold your horses until you know the full story. "

This is how early reviews work.

" Hey guys... I just checked out this article at gameinformer..... So my question is to the giantbomb staff has it ever happened to you guys (i.e  a game publisher offering you a review copy only if you give them ***** stars or a good review).. Being very honest my game purchases are very much influenced by gamespot reviews ( Sorry Giantbomb, I am new here ) ... and what does the giantbomb community think about this?? maybe Jeff has something to say about it!!! "

This would tarnish my respect for Ubisoft more than affect my purchase for the game. Like CrazyChris said though, who knows what happened. The magazine could be trying to hurt Ubisoft and then again, Ubisoft could be doing some dirty work.

It happens sometimes.

" As always, there're two sides of a coin. Who knows what really happened? Maybe the magazine was denied a review-copy, and decided to be all douchebags about it? Maybe Ubisoft were just fooling around ("sure, you'll get a review-copy, if you give us highest score! wink wink")? As always, hold your horses until you know the full story. "

So lame... Ubisoft has been getting a bigger and bigger head the last couple years. Long live Giant Bomb and impartial video game journalism!

This happens all the time, you just don't hear about it cos the offers are usually good enough to be accepted. But just giving the review copy? Of course there's backlash and they're exposed, duh, they should have thrown a moneyhat their way too. Anyway, that doesn't mean the game is bad, there was the same stuff with Batman but it was a pretty damn solid game in the end. Marketing teams and suits just don't know when to be confident in the product so always do that stuff. Buying games based on reviews is always a risk, either due to things like this or due to clueless/trolling/fanboy "critics" that are everywhere. Just wait sometime and listen to the general consensus of the media as well as the buyers.

I doubt they'd adopt this policy exclusively for 'Computer Bild Spiele' - so I'll believe it if and when other reviewers report a similar ultimatum from Ubisoft.  Not saying it's impossible (I suspect this shit goes on all the time), but I'm not gonna just take the word of some German magazine I've never heard of without corroboration or evidence.

Shit like this happens all the time.

I just don't care for some reason. The game looks good and I'm gonna buy it because I enjoyed the first game. What scores it gets in magazines and websites is unimportant to me.

ehh I don't see what is so bad about it I bet  all companies do that his time it's just a high profile game 
I'm still getting assassin's creed 2 day one

ask the podcast brother!

"Hey guys... I just checked out this article at gameinformer..... So my question is to the giantbomb staff has it ever happened to you guys (i.e  a game publisher offering you a review copy only if you give them ***** stars or a good review).. Being very honest my game purchases are very much influenced by gamespot reviews ( Sorry Giantbomb, I am new here ) ... and what does the giantbomb community think about this?? maybe Jeff has something to say about it!!! "

Every single game publishers does the same thing guys. 
 
Nothing to write home about.

" Shit like this happens all the time. "

" Eidos started the trend, and now Ubisoft is carrying the torch. It comes off as a lack of confidence, and eventually will discourage me from purchasing the product. After all, if a game's creators can't be sure of how good it is, how can I be? A shame, too, as I was really looking forward to this game. The only justification is that the scores for the last few games (yes, there was another game in the series before 2 and after 1) didn't get good scores, but still... "

Really Ubisoft? Really?! After the whole EGM fiasco, you're still up to the same bullshit?!

says allegedly.
 
It's pretty obvious the magazine is trying to use it as a publicity stunt also. Im not putting it past ubisoft that something was suggested, especially in the world of magazine reviews where i think these deals are done more often. But without details this is all a bit sensationalist.

Im pretty sure this happens alot... but AC2 looks like a good game so it should be getting good review anyways

" I doubt they'd adopt this policy exclusively for 'Computer Bild Spiele' - so I'll believe it if and when other reviewers report a similar ultimatum from Ubisoft.  Not saying it's impossible (I suspect this shit goes on all the time), but I'm not gonna just take the word of some German magazine I've never heard of without corroboration or evidence. "

" I just don't care for some reason. The game looks good and I'm gonna buy it because I enjoyed the first game. What scores it gets in magazines and websites is unimportant to me. "

" This is how early reviews work. "

I had this crazy dream that Assassins Creed II took place in the near furture in like New York City and you were fighting on like monorails ,driving cars and making pipe bombs and shit. I was like Spiderman meets Assassins Creed it was dope. Also you were still the same Assassins Creed characters Enzio I think? You were just warped into the future some how. 

That's just pathetic.

"maybe Jeff has something to say about it!!! "

" @halocursed said:

"maybe Jeff has something to say about it!!! "

What are you implying? "

Portal Runner?  The last Tomb Raider?  Kane and Lynch?  Some great examples of publishers trying to influence scores.
But Ubisoft, they were one of the last ones I would expect to see this from.  But considering how a lot of us got burned by AC, and how it got good scores the first time around, reviewers will be taking a closer look at the game.
I wont let this affect if I will buy it, probably not, but will be interested to see how this shapes up.

" Portal Runner?  The last Tomb Raider?  Kane and Lynch?  Some great examples of publishers trying to influence scores. But Ubisoft, they were one of the last ones I would expect to see this from.  But considering how a lot of us got burned by AC, and how it got good scores the first time around, reviewers will be taking a closer look at the game. I wont let this affect if I will buy it, probably not, but will be interested to see how this shapes up. "

If this is true, I definitely have lost more respect for Ubisoft.
 
I still have hope for AC:2 though, I really liked the first, and if they fixed the problems they claim they have, it should be a really great game.

These kind of threads are pretty useless because it's standard for all game companies to want and ask for high scores for early reviews. It's up to the reviewers to decide whether they will be true or lie, just for an early publication.

As a member of the games press myself (though a very minor one, don't get me wrong), do NOT assume that this is "how early reviews work." I've obtained plenty of pre-release games - from the crap of Game Party 2 on the Wii to the much better Pokemon Platinum on the DS - that came with absolutely no restrictions such as, "We're only giving you this game early if you review it well." There are still plenty of developers and publishers that aren't that seedy.
 
However, it IS correct to say that this sort of thing does happen, and not just for positive reviews. I remember a case with a GTA game (San Andreas? Vice City Stories? I honestly forget) was only reviewed at IGN.com early on, while GameSpot.com had a note from then-editor Greg Kasavin (if I remember correctly) stating that Rockstar offered them exclusive first-review rights, but that that wasn't how GameSpot.com, as a website, wanted to run itself. 
 
Come to think of it, I guess it could have been another score issue, but still...
 
Point is, don't always assume that early reviews are only out early because a high review score was promised. It definitely happens - perhaps more often than not - but not always.

"then-editor Greg Kasavin (if I remember correctly) stating that Rockstar offered them exclusive first-review rights, but that that wasn't how GameSpot.com, as a website, wanted to run itself.

" @foggel said:

" @halocursed said:

"maybe Jeff has something to say about it!!! "

What are you implying? "

  

  The incident "

" @LiquidSwords said:

" @foggel said:

" @halocursed said:

"maybe Jeff has something to say about it!!! "

What are you implying? "

  

  The incident "

you know, jeff's review is exactly how i felt about K&L. i still finished it, and i didnt hate it, but it was pretty mediocre. the K&L2 teaser is funny in a completely over the top way, so maybe if they go that route this time, and fix the gameplay, it will be good. who knows... but we do know who will review that in this site, and that alone will be worth the wait :D "

" This is how early reviews work. "

Honestly, I think this is a Arkham Asylum situation.  Batman: AA did not need protection from early bad reviews, it was fairly obvious even before it released.  Likewise, I cannot fathom why Ubisoft thinks AC2 needs protecting.  It's a plainly much, much better game than the last one, and that one managed quite a few good marks despite it's flaws.

" @Sargus said:

"then-editor Greg Kasavin (if I remember correctly) stating that Rockstar offered them exclusive first-review rights, but that that wasn't how GameSpot.com, as a website, wanted to run itself.

I bet Jeff will get a pretty good laugh about this.  "

AC2 will be quality, Im confident it will, so whatever