Neoseeker : News : Eidos asks journalists to hold off on negative reviews

Eidos asks journalists to hold off on negative reviews

Lydia Sung - Friday, November 21, 2008 2:22pm (PST) Like +my favourites

Hopes for high Metacritic score

How long as it been since Jeff Gertsmann was fired from GameSpot for giving Kane & Lynch a less-than-flattering review? I haven't a clue, but it looked like Eidos is throwing their weight around again.

The publisher has hired UK PR firm Barrington Harvey to Tomb Raider Underworld review scores, and journalists are now being asked to put their negative reviews on hold. GameSpot UK writer Guy Cocker first broke the news with a post on his Twitter this Wednesday, claiming he'd been told, “If you’re planning on reviewing Tomb Raider Underworld at less than an 8.0, we need you to hold your review till Monday.”

It sounded fishy enough and sparked others to delve into the issue. A Barrington Harvey representative later confirmed Cocker's story, saying, "That’s right. We’re trying to manage the review scores at the request of Eidos.”

Barrington Harvey director Simon Byron released this statement regarding Eidos' instructions to the company:

Barrington Harvey is not in the position of telling reviewers what they can and cannot say. We love Tomb Raider and believe it merits a score of at least 8/10, but if someone disagrees that’s entirely their prerogative. No problem at all. Seriously: no problem.
Our original NDA stated that in order to receive an advance copy of the game, reviewers agreed not to post reviews ahead of 5:00pm, Wednesday 19th November 2008. Nothing else. No further obligations whatsoever.
As you can clearly see from the scores posted so far, Barrington Harvey has no issue with scores of below eight out of 10 being posted online. The Eurogamer review in questions caused “problems” in so much as it originally contained a couple of minor factual inaccuracies which, to its credit, the site has quickly rectified and addressed (without, quite rightly, changing the context of the review).
Any site, be it Gamespot or whoever, is entirely within their rights to post whatever score they want and no-one is under any sort of obligation to delay any review.
As an ex-journalist myself, I firmly believe in editorial integrity and the right to express an individual opinion. As an agency, we never - ever - make demands of the press in terms of awarding scores; at the end of the day, they are free to score as they wish.
Barrington Harvey has been working hard to ensure the launch scores of Tomb Raider Underworld are in line with our internal review predictions over the launch weekend - but to suggest that we can in some way “silence” reviews of the game is slightly overstating our influence.

Tomb Raider Underworld was released on Tuesday, November 18, in North America, and is available in Europe as of today. The game is currently available for the Xbox 360, PlayStation 3, PC, and Wii, with a PS2 edition due some time in 2009.

Source: videogaming247

Sections: Console Games, PC Games, Announcements

Related Neoseeker articles

Neoseeker's Holiday Guide 2009

October 30th, 09

Sort by date: ascending descending

0 thumbs! ^

chautemoc Nov 21, 08

If I had planned on buying this, I'd be changing my mind now. As someone on GG said..quit *bleep*ing around and make a better game.

I'd also like to again quote a commenter from VG247:

quote
God forbid we should have reviews putting people off buying the game, though. I mean, who do these people think they are? Offering opinions? On games? So that people can decide whether to buy them or not? Itâs unbelievable, the front of some people!

Seriously. Reviewers are supposed to be our mediators, not another group of PR whores. Where's your *bleep*ing integrity?

0 thumbs! ^

THM Nov 21, 08

Well, in that case, Edios is a fu@##$$ company which doesn't hold democratic principle of free speech in game reviews.

If a game is really fantastic, it doesn't matter how many bad reviews it has, players will find a way to play that game eventually.

For example, Jericho is a really good game from my opinion, but all of the fu$#$## game reviewers gave really bad reviews except the UK's PLAY Magazine.

Reading reviews is sometimes helpful to anticipate the style of gameplay and graphics, nevertheless, we do not necessarily have to totally believe the results of game reviews from myriad reviewers who do not have any qualification to review game officially but they definitely have the rights of free speech and opinions, that's all, nothing more than that. Free speech is imperative in game reviews. Edios also needs to abide by those laws.

All in all, the most important thing is that you have to decide by yourself by actually playing a game until it finishes, in so doing, your own gaming experience of that game can tell the most accurate game review straight into your very own brain and heart.

0 thumbs! ^

oni_hero Nov 21, 08

Oh god, it is the whole Metal Gear Solid shit over again! Except I think that game might have actually been good.

Seriously though, what happened to reviewers who don't bend over and take it from developers?

0 thumbs! ^

kspiess Nov 21, 08

I just love the "Barrington Harvey has been working hard to ensure the launch scores of Tomb Raider Underworld are in line with our internal review predictions over the launch weekend" line. That's classic.

They just want to make sure that the reviews for the game are in line with what they predicted the reviews were going to be. I hate to revert acronyms but I just have to say 'LOL' about that.

0 thumbs! ^

Gussimotto Nov 21, 08

People that decide weather or not they're going to buy a game based on review scores or the general public's opinion on the game make me sick. When you hear bad stuff about a video game, and you play it, you often end up thinking, oh they were right, this does suck! If you hadn't read the reviews and got that image of "crappy game" in your head, the game would be more enjoyable because it had no expectations from you, other than being playable and fun. You should decide for yourself weather or not you like a game, not let some "critic" or "reviewer" determine weather or not a game is worth your time. What makes them "reviewers" and "critics" anyways? All they do is dwell on whats wrong with a game and how its not fun. Don't we all do that ourselves, anyways?

Staff

0 thumbs! ^

RabidChinaGirl Nov 21, 08

@Gussimotto
I write reviews. Some people just don't have the time or money to waste by going through every game that looks interesting. Reviewers and critics aren't always in agreement with each other or users, and though we can provide some good background on the game in question, the ultimate decision is the reader's own. If you don't like what we do, then don't read 'em.

0 thumbs! ^

kspiess Nov 21, 08

Another thing: is a 7 really that bad? I wouldn't call a game that receives a '7' a negative review. 7 is more like 'average.'

0 thumbs! ^

Qwowner Nov 21, 08

Well, really isn't a 5 average though? I think we have a problem with the reviewing system. Really, anything above a 6 should be a rent, 7 and up either rent or buy if it's part of a series/genre you like, 8 and 9 "Totally check this out" and 10 a "BUY NOW".
For some reason now anything below an eight is looked at as being iffy, and anything below a 7 automatically sucks.
I think that reviews have become to serious. This is why I mainly check out QOTPA and Whitey the reviewer (the former more than the latter) for my reviews. These are people who just do reviews for fun, not for money, so I feel that they can more accurately portray what your reaction to the experience is.

0 thumbs! ^

chautemoc Nov 21, 08

You have a point, I think, Qwowner.
Part of the reason I think maybe a lot of people look at anything an 8 or below as iffy is because there are so many games out there, so we are sort of forced to discriminate harshly.

If you enjoy QOTPA and Whitey you would probably also dig the guys at ScrewAttack.

0 thumbs! ^

MrGrimm Nov 25, 08

Perhaps reviews shouldn't even bother with putting up scores? The only thing I care about in reviews is the text, basically, all I care about the facts. Not opinion.