fumanstan

Saw this on Kotaku tonight, linked from the site Video Game Media Watch. Apparently 3 publishers were named by EGM Editor Dan Hsu as having "banned" EGM from coverage due to poor reviews. I haven't seen the latest EGM, but I imagine i'll get it soon.

Article is here:

http://vgmwatch.com/?p=1137

Pretty interesting, especially considering all the Gamespot stuff recently. Oddly enough, there's Ubisoft again. I imagine the Gamespot stuff inspired Dan to name the publishers.

This actually doesn't bother me that much (neither did the Gamespot stuff), as I imagine it happens, and has happened, all the time. But it is interesting to see what publishers are doing it.

darkside

EGM has a lower rating score because they consider 5 an average game unlike IGN that usually gives an average game a 6.5 or 7. The fact publishers dislike their scores makes me more inclined to trust EGMs reviews.

Honestly though everyone is too fixated over the number and publishers probably never read the actual reviews. A detailed review will give you the pluses and minuses of a game and at least give you some idea if it is something you will like.

I only wish I had trusted EGM when it came to Assassin's Creed. They were dead on with the issues that game had where many other reviews either downplayed the bad gameplay or flat out lied.

Demontooth

I like EGM but they really seem to be down on Nintendo.

uncle-frank

same, and i dont have the bill anymore so its just sitting on my shelf now. no point in trading it into ebgames for nothing.

Peter Skerritt

This news isn't surprising, unfortunately. Publisher pressure on the gaming media goes on all the time, but is just now coming to the forefront after Jeff Gerstmann's unfortunate termination.

It's important for gaming media to not relent to publisher pressure, if at all possible. Eventually, PR won't be able to go anywhere for pre-release coverage because all of their bridges will be burned. Eidos is already under scrutiny for their Kane & Lynch incident, and less press for struggling third-party companies like Midway and Sony's own first-party sports arm won't help their causes.

Unfortunately, in the case of print media, this will affect EGM's overall standing. Game Informer is trumping them in terms of content, and their online presence and former reputation is all that's really keeping the magazine afloat.

Spiderbite

How's that? The last several Game Informer magazines I have read were dull as dishwater and the magazine as a whole was no where near as interesting as EGM (of course this is my own opinion, but after the last several Game Informers, I find it hard to believe most readers believe the content was better if doing a side by side comparision). GI seems more advertising and puff pieces than anything else.

Peter Skerritt

GI is getting access to more exclusive content than EGM. GI broke the Ghostbusters story, for example... and now any Ubisoft game is likely going to be covered by GI or IGN.

When you are denied access to a publisher or developer, you're basically reduced to doing what hundreds of amateur online members of the gaming media do... rewrite press releases in your own words and steal news from other sites. It's worse for EGM because they're actually one of the most well-known mags out there and they're starving for breaking content as it is.

Irregardless of the level of quality that GI offers versus EGM, if GI is your source for pics and info about the new Mortal Kombat, Prince of Persia, or MLB 08 because EGM can't publish any screens or info... yikes.

Mikael79

This updated news upsets me, because it seems like so many people had already started to believe what Gamespot was spoon-feeding the masses - "Ubisoft didn't play a part in Jeff's firing" even though I feel that all of the signs pointed to the fact that they did.

kurupt

Yet another blight on, what for me, is an already irredeemably tainted industry - video game journalism (maybe it's just a microcosm of modern convergence/corporate-culture journalism as a whole).

Peter Skerritt

To be fair, Eidos-- not Ubisoft-- was the company at the center of the Gerstmann-gate controversy.

Peter Skerritt

I don't consider myself a journalist. I participate as a member of the gaming media, but I don't ask questions or conduct interviews.

I think that many other members of the gaming media are in the same position. They're not journalists, in the purest form of the word. While some of what they write is factual, a lot of the rest is opinion with roots in truths within the industry.

Oleg

Actually it sounds like certain publishers decided not to submit review copies. I find it hard to believe anybody can ban any person (over the age of majority) or publication from purchasing video games for review purposes. Perhaps the video games magazines should act like reputable restaurant critics and pay their own way instead of soliciting freebies. Surely the added expense of buying product would be negligible and perhaps the added credibility would make up for the inevitable delay in reviews.

In somewhat related vein, I wish we could go back to the early days of Computer Gaming World when there was a computer game magazine that wasn't aimed at the mildly retarded 9 year-old market that most all of the current print game mags seem to fight over.

Peter Skerritt

The ban is for pre-release media and review copies. This means that EGM will have to buy its own review copies at retail. Since it's a magazine (whose lead time is about 4-6 weeks), this means that reviews for Ubisoft games (and presumably Sony sports titles and future Mortal Kombat games) will be delayed further. The one good thing about positive relations with publishers and/or PR is that pre-release copies of games means that reviews can be ready within a couple of days (before or after) of retail release.

This is good for EGM's journalistic integrity, but now relegates them to has-been status for these games. By the time you see EGM's review of these titles, they'll have been on store shelves for over a month and will have been scooped by every other gaming media outlet-- including us at VGT.

Ideally, review copies should be purchased from retail or rented (and possibly reimbursed by ad revenue), but this would greatly increase review times. Consumers would have zero guidance as to whether a game would be worth buying come launch day if this was to happen.

Michael Corvin

Not really. You are negating the existence of 1up.com which is a very popular brand. They can have those reviews up as just as fast as VGT.

PixyJunket

EGM.

That magazine is so epically bad. I got a subscription for free and after being disgusted with the first issue, new issues now go directly from my mailbox to the junk mail garbage bin with the ads and coupons.

Chris_D

At least it's recycled then I guess. Actually, I enjoy quite a few of the 1UP personalities through their podcasts so I think it's almost more of an issue with the content and demographic slant of the magazine itself. I use to enjoy it quite a bit when I was 14, but it's now 16 years on, and while the magazine hasn't really changed, my tastes certainly have.

Breakfast with Girls

I actually bought an issue of EGM at an airport last year. For a magazine that was more expensive than most, I was shocked at just how little actual content there was. Ten to fifteen years ago I had a subscription to CGW and it was light years better than the crap game magazines shovel out now.

Peter Skerritt

I understand that 1up can have the review ready in the same time frame as everyone else, but that is the web component. The print component of EGM would be rendered even less relevant than it is today.

fujishig

Hey, I enjoy my free sub to EGM...

I think I can live without previews/on-time reviews for Mortal Kombat games and Sony sports titles (though I recognize that MLB is considered a great game). Ubisoft is probably a bigger blow, though.

I'm a little odd, though... I'll look through the pretty pictures and I enjoy the features where they look back at released games with the developers, but the preview stuff is, as others have said, mostly just puff pieces all around. In fact, it seems that a lot of people are disappointed when some games come out because of all the pre-release hype...

LivingINClip

I personally have read EGM for probably ten years and always tend to agree with their reviews. Not really surprised to see these companies doin' this. We're getting to a point now, like movie's, where if it's a stinker or not going to meet expected hype, I think you won't even see early reviews for the products.

parrotheads4

Maybe this helps account for the over ratings I've been seeing. Reviewers feeling preasured to give a game that was slightly better than average an 8/10. Readers now need to rescale. Anything less than a 9/10 may simply be average. A game like Bioshock they may have given a 9/10 now needs a 10/10 to convey its greatness.

Michael Corvin

Right, but you stated

Last I checked VGT was ONLY a web component. Apples to apples, how would EGM be getting scooped by VGT if their web component has the review up in the same time frame? Yes, VGT would beat the magazine to the punch, but you are comparing apples to oranges.

Also, if you notice their reviewers cross over quite a bit between the two entities.

starseed1981

EGM hasn't been the same since they moved out to San Francisco. They've just been steamrolled by GI imo. Doesn't bother me at all.

Mopower

People still read magazines?

Michael Corvin

Thanks to DVDtalk's free subscriptions.