http://www.gamespot.com/features/jurassic-park-user-reviews-abused-6346288/?tag=updates%3Beditor%3Ball%3Btitle%3B8

Telltale employees pumping up their Metacritic score. Game Spot writes condescending article about it.

Why do I feel like GameSpot has already written a 3.5/10 review for the game and is just bitter that other people like it :P?

Inb4 whole thread about why gamespot sucks.

Anyway this has happened before with other companies, it is shady but I can understand why some people may choose to do it. They spend huge amounts of time developing a game only for it to be slated.

@Video_Game_King said:

Why do I feel like GameSpot has already written a 3.5/10 review for the game and is just bitter that other people like it :P?

Because it's cool to hate Gamespot.

In reality, it's a well written article that points out a terrible trend in the industry. Telltale said that it's perfectly acceptable for its staff to flood metacritic with perfect scores purely because you can google their names to figure out they work for Telltale.

The people liking this game will be a minority. It's not getting well received and the quick look on the site made me understand why. It looks awful.

I don't know why they care for User's Score... This is funny.

Edit: The game is bad. Haven't you seen the quick look?

In theory, this would be an ideal reason for interested gamers to check out GameSpot's fellow CBS Interactive property Metacritic. 

@DeeGee:

No, I read the article (a bit); I just thought that would be kinda funny. Just like the thought that the indication that something was wrong was perfect grammar. "Articulate sentences? On MY Internet? Something is wrong in the world!"

Nice article....caught red handed.

This is embarrassing for Gamespot and Telltale both.  User reviews are bogus.  Even if there are people who are intent on giving a fair opinion of a game, the mean average is always adversely affected by a bunch of people with an axe to grind as to make the whole system pointless anyways.  That Gamespot would think this story is worth posting is laughable.  And the second to last paragraph of the story is so smug and self-righteous it's cringe worthy.  On the other hand, what in the world were those employees thinking?  Nothing good can come from doing this, even if you aren't caught.

Who cares? It's a user review which means literally anyone can say what they want no matter who they work for. I mean it's a fucking user review, what idiot would even take that into consideration anyway?

@EvilTwin: I thought it was an interesting story, and you did too, seeing as how you read through the entire article and then decided to chime in.

There is, honestly, nothing wrong with giving your own game a perfect score. It's your fucking game! How can you not?

@buzz_killington:

What about them simply wanting to pump up their own score to pump up sales and get more publisher money? It simply comes off as dishonest.

@buzz_killington:

What about them simply wanting to pump up their own score to pump up sales and get more publisher money? It simply comes off as dishonest.

@Video_Game_King said:

It simply comes off as dishonest.

and tacky

@sixghost:

I was arguing more from principle than action, if that makes any sense.

When a developer starts having all their employees make multiple metacritic accounts to rate the game highly over and over, that's when it will be a story to me. This isn't a huge deal in my eyes. If they want to, they should have a right to rate it high. Also, this isn't me defending Telltale, I generally dislike their games and this Jurassic Park game looks like a monstrosidad.

Devs reviewing their own games is dumb and tacky, but anyone relying on Metacritic user reviews to make purchasing decisions is doing it wrong. This is not something to get bent out of shape about.

@sixghost said:

@Video_Game_King said:

@buzz_killington:

What about them simply wanting to pump up their own score to pump up sales and get more publisher money? It simply comes off as dishonest.

You're delusional if you think 4 random user reviews will affect this game or Telltale in any significant way.

It won't have any effect of course, but I think this is more about the moral and ideology about it, that it is alright for game developers to attempt to boost user scores on sites like Metacritic.

Oh and anyone who cares about user scores on Metacritic needs to get a reality check.

@buzz_killington said:

There is, honestly, nothing wrong with giving your own game a perfect score. It's your fucking game! How can you not?

I like this. I don't agree with it at fucking all, but the statement hints of a deeper tuth.

People actually read user reviews on Metacritic? Really?

This gets a big ol' *shrug* from me because 
A) I don't care if a dev reviews their own game. I'm sure they enjoy it. If they have every right to say a game they worked on sucked, then they can say they liked it. 
B) Metacritic user reviews are useless. They no longer serve a purpose now that angry nerds have decided to game them if they don't agree with something, regardless of game quality.
 The whole "shame on you! shaaame!" tone of that article is irritating.

@TheSouthernDandy: Shame on you!

@DeeGee said:

@Video_Game_King said:

Why do I feel like GameSpot has already written a 3.5/10 review for the game and is just bitter that other people like it :P?

Because it's cool to hate Gamespot.

In reality, it's a well written article that points out a terrible trend in the industry. Telltale said that it's perfectly acceptable for its staff to flood metacritic with perfect scores purely because you can google their names to figure out they work for Telltale.

The people liking this game will be a minority. It's not getting well received and the quick look on the site made me understand why. It looks awful.

Is it to much to ask for a open world Jurassic park game?

@EvilTwin: I thought it was an interesting story, and you did too, seeing as how you read through the entire article and then decided to chime in.

Random dev screws with Metacritic, other random dev/site complains about it.
 
Fuck Metacritic.

The critic score is what matters, not the stupid user review score.

Who cares. Metacritic user reviews are shit and no one uses them for anything.

this does not affect my love of telltale or my intent to buy the game.

I don't see why it matters.

The president is allowed to vote. I would imagine when running for re-election, he's going to be voting for himself. I don't have a problem with that.

" In theory, this would be an ideal reason for interested gamers to check out GameSpot's fellow CBS Interactive property Metacritic. Ordinarily, the online opinion aggregator can be counted on to compile review scores and links from a wealth of professional review sites, as well as assessments from other gamers who wrote up reviews on their own."
  
So is it ok for gamespot to praise and recommend people use a review aggregate site that they have a business partnership with? SOUNDS FISHY TO ME. 

@EvilTwin said:

This is embarrassing for Gamespot and Telltale both. User reviews are bogus. Even if there are people who are intent on giving a fair opinion of a game, the mean average is always adversely affected by a bunch of people with an axe to grind as to make the whole system pointless anyways. That Gamespot would think this story is worth posting is laughable. And the second to last paragraph of the story is so smug and self-righteous it's cringe worthy. On the other hand, what in the world were those employees thinking? Nothing good can come from doing this, even if you aren't caught.

...aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaand this. What's particularly sad for me, is that I've always held Telltale in such high regard for sticking to their guns even when the industry tells them the genre is done. I mean, I haven't lost all respect for them suddenly or anything, but this is still kind of a downer. It's like if you found out Valve was also a meth lab. You'll still love Valve, but you'll be disappointed with their actions.

People are acting like they murdered someone who gave their game a low score. Get the fuck out with that overly sensitive,"but it's dishonest!" shit. Gamespot and Metacritic can rot and if a developer wants to give their game a 10 so they can keep their job then so be it.

First they fuck up a fans Jurassic Jeep, now this. Fuck tell-tale games.

Not the first time this has happened and it won't be the last. Anyways who cares, it's just user reviews. No one looks at those.

Uh people actually do look at user reviews guys not everyone is a super-savvy games guy who listens to podcasts about the industry and would know what a joke user reviews are.

So basically this tells us they know they made a shitty game. 

@sixghost said:

In theory, this would be an ideal reason for interested gamers to check out GameSpot's fellow CBS Interactive property Metacritic.

what a way to start an article, lol.

It'd almost be like a Giant Bomb Quick Look starting out with a Tested site staffer saying that the game is being "tested"...or something. -_-

In all honesty, GOOD ON GAMESPOT, and more particularly, good on Sinclair for writing the article. It never felt like a pot-shot, and moreover, it was something I would expect to hear from Patrick Klepek before GS.

@Unknown_Pleasures said:

Nice article....caught red handed.

I don't think they were trying to 'hide'.

@Video_Game_King said:

@sixghost:

I was arguing more from principle than action, if that makes any sense.

did to me. I agree with what you said completely.

I don't think Telltale's actions if true are good business practices in the long run,once a company gets a rep for being deceitful it's really hard to shed.

I personally can't stand Metacritic either fwiw, and this sort of thing it encourages in the industry is a big reason why.

@Unknown_Pleasures said:

@Video_Game_King said:

It simply comes off as dishonest.

and tacky

QFT

This Metacritic shit is getting so dumb.

If I made games or movies or whatever, I'd lie my ass off in like 20 different identities on the internet about how awesome they are.

Is it really such a big deal? Can't people obviously see past the bogus user reviews anyway?

Old thread says what?

Best part is GB is know owned by Gamespot...wonder how many of these people are mad...hehe...

On another note though, doesn't the president get to vote for his self in the election...and his staff and wife and people that worked on his campaign. If I worked on something and was proud of that work why not review it favorably. Plenty of nerd rage and people rate stuff 1 if they don't like something (like DLC on disc or always no net connection). I really wish Metacritic required a verification of ownership via achievements because if you played it enough you would get at least one.

@serverfull said:

Old thread says what?

Best part is GB is know owned by Gamespot...wonder how many of these people are mad...hehe...

On another note though, doesn't the president get to vote for his self in the election...and his staff and wife and people that worked on his campaign. If I worked on something and was proud of that work why not review it favorably. Plenty of nerd rage and people rate stuff 1 if they don't like something (like DLC on disc or always no net connection). I really wish Metacritic required a verification of ownership via achievements because if you played it enough you would get at least one.

@serverfull said:

Old thread says what?

Best part is GB is know owned by Gamespot...wonder how many of these people are mad...hehe...

On another note though, doesn't the president get to vote for his self in the election...and his staff and wife and people that worked on his campaign. If I worked on something and was proud of that work why not review it favorably. Plenty of nerd rage and people rate stuff 1 if they don't like something (like DLC on disc or always no net connection). I really wish Metacritic required a verification of ownership via achievements because if you played it enough you would get at least one.

..........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................fuck.

@serverfull said:

Old thread says what?

Best part is GB is know owned by Gamespot...wonder how many of these people are mad...hehe...

On another note though, doesn't the president get to vote for his self in the election...and his staff and wife and people that worked on his campaign. If I worked on something and was proud of that work why not review it favorably. Plenty of nerd rage and people rate stuff 1 if they don't like something (like DLC on disc or always no net connection). I really wish Metacritic required a verification of ownership via achievements because if you played it enough you would get at least one.

Or I don't know, maybe something less insane. I would be perfectly fine with Metacritic killing off user reviews completely. Every time I hear about it, it's because of some sort of "abuse". It has failed to serve its purpose and I would like to see it go. Keep the critic reviews, you can probably count on those being honest at least. But the user reviews can die. If someone wants to write a user review, do it on GameSpot or wherever else people won't give a shit about the user score, as it should be.

Who the hell looks at user review anyways?