PDA

View Full Version : Midway, Ubisoft, and Sony Sports pull support from EGM



Shade
01-10-2008, 01:51 PM
Wow. :eek:

http://www.1up.com/do/blogEntry?bId=8568051&publicUserId=5379799


This is a reprint of my editorial that appears in the February issue (http://www.1up.com/do/minisite?cId=3165209) of EGM. A lot of people are talking about it thanks to Video Game Media Watch (http://vgmwatch.com/?p=1137), Kotaku (http://kotaku.com/342519/3-companies-bar-egm-from-coverage-following-poor-reviews), Joystiq (http://www.joystiq.com/2008/01/09/publishers-allegedly-blackball-egm-for-negative-coverage/#comments), etc. -- so I thought I'd put the original text here for people to read.

It used to be game companies would pull advertising if they wanted to punish a magazine for unfavorable coverage. In more recent times, they're pulling the coverage as well. It's an interesting setup: Don't let us see the games, and we can't write anything bad about them. But don't let us see the games, and we can't write anything good about them, either.

Gamemakers have been taking issue with our reviews for as long as EGM's been around (almost 19 years now). It goes with the territory: Be honest and tough with your critiques, and you're going to **** just about everybody off at some point. But when I took over as editor-in-chief in 2001, I also wanted us to get more real with our previews. I was tired of the press-release rehashes our industry had become accustomed to, so I asked for more sincerity and opinions from our writers and editors. Naturally, you have to be fair -- the products aren't finished yet, after all -- but judging from reader feedback, our opinionated previews have been a hit.

Except with some game publishers, of course. Less-than-totally-positive previews don't sit well with those who are used to those press-release rehashes. Combine that with our candid reviews, and you can imagine the consequences that we have to face constantly.

For the time being, you'll get little, late, or no coverage of the following products: anything Mortal Kombat (they didn't like our reviews), anything from Sony's sports department (ditto), and now, anything from Ubisoft (it seems our coverage of Assassin's Creed was the last straw). So in case you're wondering why you're seeing so little of these games in our magazines and on our websites, now you know.

What do we do now? Nothing. We won't treat these products or companies any differently, and we'll just cover them to the best of our own abilities, with or without their support. Because, after all, we're writing for you, the reader -- not them. Posted at Wed, 09 Jan 2008 12:02:55 PST

This seems very childish to me. Talk about taking your ball and going home.

I think this is going to hurt EGM significantly as well. When you lose coverage of a lot of major game releases, you're going to be behind the competition all the time. I've been reading EGM religiously since 1991 and I'm glad I didn't re-up my subscription a couple of months ago.

This just seems like a situation that benefits nobody to me.

bellisimo
01-10-2008, 03:55 PM
reminds me of the fiasco that gamespot.com was dealing with recently with a firing of one of their editors cause the review did not please the makers of the game or something to that effect...

Lord Helmet
01-10-2008, 05:11 PM
Complete bull****. They just don't want the consumers to know about their ****ty products they expect you to pay $60 for.

I have a subscription to EGM and I will always support gaming magazines that don't suck the balls of companies and tell the damn truth.

*CoughGamespotCough*

Anthem
01-11-2008, 12:43 AM
I think this is going to hurt EGM significantly as well. When you lose coverage of a lot of major game releases, you're going to be behind the competition all the time. I've been reading EGM religiously since 1991 and I'm glad I didn't re-up my subscription a couple of months ago.
Why?

SycamoreKen
01-11-2008, 01:32 AM
This is what many movie companies are now doing with their border line or worse movies. They don't let the critics see them before release.

Shade
01-11-2008, 02:02 AM
Why?

Because their subscription service is atrocious. I can't count how many times my issue showed up extremely late or not at all, and I had a two-year subscription. Very annoying when it happens almost every month.

Will Galen
01-12-2008, 07:31 PM
As far as I'm concerned it will just hurt the game companies. The saying used to be that any publicity was good publicity.

However, game companies have been putting games out that people play once and then shelve for some reason.

I would say just about every game playing household in the US has a box full of games that they didn't play for very long.

I used to buy a couple games a month on average, but no longer. I shelved about three games in a row a few months ago and decided I wasn't going to buy anymore games just to sit on a shelf and gather dust.

I now read about games before buying, and if I can't read about them I won't buy them.