http://arstechnica.com/gaming/news/2010/11/call-of-duty-black-ops-review-event-press-gifts-detailed.ars
 
I remember the week before Black Ops came out that Jeff was away on a "secret mission".  Wondering if this was where he was at.  Not saying his review is off, although to hear him talk about it on the bombcast and a few other places I was a bit surprised to see he gave it 4 stars instead of 3 but I think his review is fair.  The only reason I bring this up is that I am curious of the opinion of the GB community on this in general not really related to whether Jeff went or not, however, I did just find it curious he was gone when this event was going on I think and he was the reviewer.  Do you think its right to accept reviews from individuals who receive this kind of posh treatment?
 
Love GB, and support them in all their endeavors, just want that to be known. 

He talked about it somewhere, I can't remember. But yeah, he did.

probably, but it didn't "bump the game from 3 stars to 4 stars" because of it.. journalists go through places like this to review big games all of the time.

Yeah i'm pretty sure he went. Garnett Lee talked about going to this too on Weekend Confirmed. I'm sure there's the possibility of somethin like this maybe swaying a reviewers opinion but i'd say the more professional guys ignore all the flash and just focus on the game. 
I don't see a guy like Jeff being taken in by these sorta shenanigans.

I think he mentioned he went during one of the bombcasts, or was implying that he had gone. 

I'm pretty sure Jeff's moral integrity is not going to be affected by an event like this.  In fact, if he were influenced by it I think he would be the type of dude to be put off by them trying to "boost" the review scores and have it affect the review negatively.  But like I said, I doubt it makes any difference to him, he's one of the oldest in the "game" and has great moral integrity when it comes to reviews.

You saw his "gamertag helmet" on his desk in one of the mailbag videos, everyone who went got one. And yes they go on these fairly often, if their opinion on a game could be swayed by this sort of thing we would of heard about it before.

Sorry, the title of my thread was a bit misleading as to the opinions I was hoping to get from this post.  I really don't believe that Jeff would be swayed by such a trip.  Do you, the GB community, think that its right to have these sort of crazy ass events for people to review a game though?  Thats what I was hoping to gather as far as your opinions are concerned.  Dont you think that most reviewers would be swayed by this?  Do you think it should have to be made known to you before you read a review that they got that kind of treatment?

" Sorry, the title of my thread was a bit misleading as to the opinions I was hoping to get from this post.  I really don't believe that Jeff would be swayed by such a trip.  Do you, the GB community, think that its right to have these sort of crazy ass events for people to review a game though?  Thats what I was hoping to gather as far as your opinions are concerned.  Dont you think that most reviewers would be swayed by this?  Do you think it should have to be made known to you before you read a review that they got that kind of treatment? "

  Also, basically saying that the Blops review should have been 3 stars is pretty ignorant of the general reception of the game at large.  It's gotton tons of rave reviews.  "

If you're really into this topic, download the latest episode of TalkRader over at gamesradar.com. Around 1:25:20 or something, they start talking about the trips game journalists go on. Pretty good talk. That podcast is awesome BTW, if you don't mind a couple immature jokes and sound effects peppered throughout. Really different style than the Bombcast, but it's cool shit nonetheless.
 
As for me, I think it depends on the person. Some people are easy, others are not, and others can't be bought. Depends on who you're gonna trust really. I don't care HOW they got to play the game if I trust their judgment. They'll give it to me straight. At least the reviewers I like, anyway.

Here's the actual question/answer:
 

Did you partake in the COD:BO review event described by Game Pro in their review? If so, why no disclosure, that I saw at least, on the website? I know you have shared thoughts on events before, but the amount of pampering described seems extreme.

I went to the Black Ops review event, but I wouldn't say I agree with the descriptions of the event. The stuff you describe as "pamerping" was more like a pain in the ass. We've used disclosures on reviews in the past, and people have often found them confusing, which gave me a little pause in how we use them, plus we've addressed hw we handle event coverage several times in the past. Either way, you're right that we should probably figure out some kind of disclosure for these situations.

 

Activision shouldn't be doing this in order to sway reviews. Although I wouldn't care because I don't pay attention to review scores. I read the articles. However, it is a little disappointing that most of these reviewers left out the fact that the game is a stuttering mess. There has to be some sort of dignity when writing these reviews.

Also, follow up question:
 

Be honest. There was hookers and blow at that review event.

There haven't been any good "hookers at game industry party" rumors since E3 was in Atlanta and Eidos threw some big-ass multi-level party. The rumor was that there were "ladies" up on the top floor, and I do remember them being very selective about who could get up there. Years later I heard from someone who got up there and he said there was nothing "hookery" happening up there, just a bunch of bored "VIPs" drinking at a more private bar and being businessmen.

On another note. If they want to get their chance to review the game, then they should wait for it to come out. The best copy to review is always the retail copy. Because I've heard that most of the time, the review copies are different than the retail copy. 

It's not as good as MW2 or CoD4 campaign wise with the poor directions, but it's a tight nit game with little bugs (didn't notice anything on the PC version playing the campaign). And it's filled to the brim with content and the little details like the console and all the little details, art, and mini games hidden in it. Though they don't make a multiplayer leap from CoD4 to MW2, they rebalanced the killstreaks and perks. Along with wager matches and a currency system I think they've added enough to the multiplayer. It is definitely worthy of 4 stars. You see the beauty of the 5 star scale. 4 stars could mean 80, or it could mean 90. Publishers can't bribe you to give it a 8.9 instead of an 8.0 if you're operating off a 5 star scale with no half stars or in-betweens.