Do u think its possible that game companies will pay gamespot for a good review?

[Silent_night]

Do u think its possible for game companies like id to pay gamespot and other lead gaming sites to give their game doom 3 a high review? coz it could really increase their sales.

[Gorgon]

www.gamershell.com gave it 9.4 out of 10*

[Direwolf]

Hehe...not a new idea at all. The problem is that a major review site would destroy all their credibility by doing so, and therefore just lose money in the long run.

[The Dark Elf]

Do u think its possible for game companies like id to pay gamespot and other lead gaming sites to give their game doom 3 a high review? coz it could really increase their sales.
Course its possible, happens all the time. I used to get tons of free software if I wrote a good review. Thousands of dollars worth just for saying nice things about some products. Ok, for the most part they were actually pretty good products, the sweetner helped though.

It's just the way things are. Granted not all of them will do it, but the majority do, and its great if your the reviewer getting the freebies :)

[Direwolf]

I should specify that smaller sites do it all the freaking time. However, any large respectable ones will try to stay clear of such ridiculousness.

[The Dark Elf]

I should specify that smaller sites do it all the freaking time. However, any large respectable ones will try to stay clear of such ridiculousness.
Thats funny cause I was working for a very large respectable site, which is still going strong and in the process of merging with other large respectable sites, all of which do it.

It's the nature of the industry and the smaller sites don't do it because they don't know how without getting caught out.

[Soundwave]

I like how of all companies he mentions id. Not EA (which has already been proven of doing so), not whoever the hell made Star Wars Galaxies (they paid Game Informer to give that piece of shit a 9.5 in a review months before the game "released") or one of those companies. Had to be id.

[Javert]

Thats funny cause I was working for a very large respectable site, which is still going strong and in the process of merging with other large respectable sites, all of which do it.

It's the nature of the industry and the smaller sites don't do it because they don't know how without getting caught out.
Thats funny cause they don't seem respectable enough for you to have named them. ;)

I remember Harry Knowles of aintitcool.com being allowed a sneak peek of Star Wars: Episode II, after giving it much much praises. The film still stank with critics, but at least Harry didn't get slayed by Fox.
If you're basing Gamespot's record of some rumor that they gave Driv3r a bad rating because Rockstar paid them to, it's not the most substantial of claims. If a Gamespot lawyer really wanted to raise hell (unlikely), he can hold you for slander.

[The Dark Elf]

Thats funny cause they don't seem respectable enough for you to have named them. ;)

I remember Harry Knowles of aintitcool.com being allowed a sneak peek of Star Wars: Episode II, after giving it much much praises. The film still stank with critics, but at least Harry didn't get slayed by Fox.
If you're basing Gamespot's record of some rumor that they gave Driv3r a bad rating because Rockstar paid them to, it's not the most substantial of claims. If a Gamespot lawyer really wanted to raise hell (unlikely), he can hold you for slander.
haha, well he'd first have to find exactly where I even gave a name. Infact YOUR the one who mentioned them not me :)

As for naming them, no i wont, don't have to, don't want to, why should I lose my freebies to appease somebody on a forum. You wouldn't in my shoes :)

[Sai]

what site do you or did you work for elf?

and on a side note i've always suspected ign to do this type of thing b/c some of their reviews are soo overly optimistic and if you look on mass review sites like metacritic a lot of times ign is going to be one of the most positive reviews on the site

[Javert]

haha, well he'd first have to find exactly where I even gave a name. Infact YOUR the one who mentioned them not me :)


??? You mean the lawyer bit? I was referring to the first Gamespot post (my bad for not making it clearer). And I wouldn't "rat" on you if that's what you were worried about (ohnoes!), because I wouldn't care.

I don't think IGN is that biased. They praise when they praise, they bash when they bash. Though sometimes they err on the side of optimism (they gave BF:V and Far Cry high reviews for presentation/effort, but they realized a limited potential).

[Direwolf]

I'm actually working on the other side of the fence right now (we're the ones who give away the free stuff), and I have to say that we bag smaller, less respected sites all the time. And for the record you seem to have resisted temptation Fenric.

[The Dark Elf]

I'm actually working on the other side of the fence right now (we're the ones who give away the free stuff), and I have to say that we bag smaller, less respected sites all the time. And for the record you seem to have resisted temptation Fenric.
Well you only represent the place you work for, your not giving away freebies from other companies for other products.

resisted temptation for what?

[Direwolf]

You said you usually only said a product was good when it was, even with the freebies being tossed your way.

[The Dark Elf]

You said you usually only said a product was good when it was, even with the freebies being tossed your way.
Ohh

No the freebies helped. The more expensive they were the better the review, or if they were proper commercial licences rather than unusuable (to me) educational licences or limited ones, but if they were really dire they'd get a bad review either way since the software wouldn't be a whole lot of use to me in those cases (these were applications, never games) I was lucky though, made sure I reviewed just the stuff I was wanting, I got the software I wanted, they got the review they wanted, and in most cases the review I did was justified, so everyone was happy. Those who'd have bought things like these wouldn't ever simply go along with a review anyway, most would get themselves private demo's at the studios.

[wayne white]

do you think a certain company*cough*valve*...do pay reviewers too?

[Direwolf]

To review WHAT? :D

[The Dark Elf]

To review WHAT? :D
lol ;)

[Prince of China]

Almost all of id's games reviewed on Gamespot gain 9.0 or higher.
Except the expansion packs.

[Direwolf]

Yeah, but iD is known well for making good games. If everyone else hated them, that would be something different. (Random malcontents dont count)

[Adrien C]

Thats funny cause I was working for a very large respectable site, which is still going strong and in the process of merging with other large respectable sites, all of which do it.

Could you be more obvious ? ;)

[ACLeroK212]

It may be possible, but I don't think gamespot really does this much at all. They're generally much tougher on games in their reviews than the other major online publications.

You've gotta take the reviewers credibility into consideration though. They may bump a review up a few points for some compensation but I don't think it would ever be something like bumping a 4 or 5 game up to an 8 or 9 because that would be too obvious. Too many people count on their reviews to spend their hard earned money and if a reviewer was too biased in their review they're not gonna be too popular with the target audience. And without people taking your reviews seriously, your not gonna have much of a job for long.

[Adrien C]

True, I only trust gamespot for reviews.
T
o answer your question, company do that, but don't expect that they give them an envelope with cash, they do it by giving them a lot of free and cool stuff.

[Dr. Freeman]

haha, well he'd first have to find exactly where I even gave a name. Infact YOUR the one who mentioned them not me :)

As for naming them, no i wont, don't have to, don't want to, why should I lose my freebies to appease somebody on a forum. You wouldn't in my shoes :)

come on Elfy, hook me up buddy :) :E