Support NeoGAF

[Ristifer]

Both companies are shite and they deserve each other. A match made in heaven.

 

[StreetsofBeige]

Looking at the posts, there's two camps to previews:

1. A preview is supposed to be about promoting the game in a positive light and not grilling it

2. A preview can be whatever it wants to be. Game writer has the game and writes what they want good or bad

I go for #2. The less BS and rose coloured glasses shilling the better. But if a game site wants to be all cheery to get in their good books for ad revenue and early access code, that's on them and their business strategy

 

[March Climber]

Both companies are shite and they deserve each other. A match made in heaven.

Counterpoint: Only the IGN review team is the shite portion of IGN.

Every other team does decent work at providing good content, especially the ones providing high quality trailer and preview footage.

 

[Ristifer]

Counterpoint: Only the IGN review team is the shite portion of IGN.

Every other team does decent work at providing good content, especially the ones providing high quality trailer and preview footage.

That’s fair.

 

[Chuck Berry]

Who’s dick move was this to put fucking Batman on the store screen? That’s some real bullshit right there. Wow

 

[ReBurn]

Who’s dick move was this to put fucking Batman on the store screen? That’s some real bullshit right there. Wow

I saw that earlier when I bought Tekken. I guess they needed to use a character people could recognize to promote the game.

 

[Freelance Yakuza]

Game looks like shit
Everyone and their mothers says the game looks like shit
IGN preview says they did not like the game
Some crazy users: that was unprofessional

Lmao

 

[Chuck Berry]

I saw that earlier when I bought Tekken. I guess they needed to use a character people could recognize to promote the game.

That they kill off in the intro

 

[ManaByte]

Who’s dick move was this to put fucking Batman on the store screen? That’s some real bullshit right there. Wow

I saw that earlier when I bought Tekken. I guess they needed to use a character people could recognize to promote the game.

It rotates characters. It was Green Lantern earlier.

 

[Chuck Berry]

It rotates characters. It was Green Lantern earlier.

Just as bad and misleading lol

 

[DanielG165]

It's not. It's literal sponsored content. IGNs job is to sell product. Their business model is to secure early access to games in order to drive clicks.

I would rather an entity be honest about a lack of quality from the product they’re previewing, than them “selling” it because it’s their “business model”, thanks. Had IGN tried to sell what is clearly an extensively lackluster product to their viewers and readers, they would have come out the other side of this as extremely disingenuous and misleading.

I don’t really care what their businesses model entails in this case, and I’m sure they don’t either. A trash product is a trash product, and it is absolutely abhorrent that there are people in this thread genuinely defending WB without a hint of irony. IGN is IGN, but they’re not the ones in the wrong here.

 

[DaGwaphics]

Looking at the posts, there's two camps to previews:

1. A preview is supposed to be about promoting the game in a positive light and not grilling it

2. A preview can be whatever it wants to be. Game writer has the game and writes what they want good or bad

I go for #2. The less BS and rose coloured glasses shilling the better. But if a game site wants to be all cheery to get in their good books for ad revenue and early access code, that's on them and their business strategy

I'd generally agree.

However, it's important to figure in the fact that games aren't finished in the earlier previews, thus the devs probably expect a certain amount of leeway from those reporting on them. If journalists take to going hard on the previews, there simply won't be any as devs will want to wait and show a more polished product.

 

[Punished Miku]

Just as bad and misleading lol

The subtitle is literally "kill the Justice League." We havent seen how they take on Superman or Batman. It is theoretically possible its kinda cool.

 

[Gambit2483]

Who’s dick move was this to put fucking Batman on the store screen? That’s some real bullshit right there. Wow

Geez, this reeks of desperation.

"Hey guys! You like Batman, right?...Right?? He's in our new game, promise! Please buy it, it has Batman!"

 

[fart town usa]

IGN gave us Greg Miller.

I think we all know who the true villain is.

 

[Flabagast]

Never thought I'd see people defending WB over this. Was IGN supposed to lie in the preview to make them feel better?

Some people are just illiterate victims that will always take the side of big corps because they feel like lost children if marketing does not tell them exactly what to like.

They are weak and despicable. And you can see some of them in this thread

 

[ReBurn]

Some people are just illiterate victims that will always take the side of big corps because they feel like lost children if marketing does not tell them exactly what to like.

They are weak and despicable. And you can see some of them in this thread

Both WB and IGN (Ziff Davis) are big corps, btw. Which one are you, to use your phrasing, an illiterate victim of?

 

[CityHunter1981]

I don’t know what the problem with the IGN preview was. They said they didn’t liked what they played. It’s a fair point and belongs in a preview. Or should they just lie and say, oh wow that was just great?

Also even if they would get a code, the final review would probably not be finished in time since it’s a gaas game and they wanted to warn people not to blindly buy it.

If WB is not okay with it, they shouldn’t have forced Rocksteady to make a gaas game in the first place…

 

[SRTtoZ]

GOOD. They should have to play it like everyone else on release, especially a game like this where its made to play together.

 

[Mr Reasonable]

“Previews … neutral”

No, previews should be indicative of the final product and any issues should be highlighted, and trash should be called out.

Looking at the posts, there's two camps to previews:

1. A preview is supposed to be about promoting the game in a positive light and not grilling it

2. A preview can be whatever it wants to be. Game writer has the game and writes what they want good or bad

I'd go for a third option.

The game is unfinished, not ready to be reviewed, but parts can be experienced so journalists can explain to readers how the game is structured, the scope, the style, what players will do in the game, etc. That's what a preview is.

Plenty of games come in very hot and are reviewed before a day one patch amid assurances from publishers that crashes and other issues will be fixed by launch so please ignore those problems, thankyouverymuch (how many reviews mentioned the Spiderman 2 crashes, disappearing character, etc?)

Moving the review window a month earlier by making a few hours at a preview event qualify for a review means that players could get an impression based on placeholders, tech problems and unfinished work.

My opinion is that WB are well within their rights to be disappointed that IGN decided it was more important to put out clickbait then to be fair to the situation. I'm all for transparency, but IGN slated an unfinished product that already has an image problem and now are trying to play the victim.

 

[MonkeyClaw36]

IGN is shit and WB games has been shit. Loll hope ign goes out of business.

So you're hoping people will lose their jobs just because you don't like them?

Wow. Just wow.... You're part of the cancel culture. That much is evident now... GTFO.

 

[ManaByte]

The subtitle is literally "kill the Justice League." We havent seen how they take on Superman or Batman. It is theoretically possible its kinda cool.

How dare the feature the villains of the game. It's so misleading.

Batman was in the Alpha.

 

[Skelterz]

I agree with you, but the hit piece they put out was unprofessional and they could have shit on the game when they put the actual review out

So let me get this straight your advocating IGN to be disingenuous until the review and essentially cosy up to WB to ensure fans buy the game on launch and they get the review codes only to then lambast a bad game in the review?

So I hear a lot about video game review companies like IGN gamespot etc shilling for big companies and giving out high scores to ensure partnership longterm and the minute they go against the grain and give an honest take about a game people have an issue with it.

Double standards honestly it’s refreshing to see a big firm like IGN be honest for a change it might save people money.

 

[violence]

Stand and be counted, for or against Suicide Squad.

 

[nbkicker]

While I do agree there is a lot of sites out there that have agendas to there reviews, it is a joke if wb invites people to play the game and no one likes it, and then says so, this is all on wb for pushing there agenda gaas game, instead of giving us a single player game in the Arkham universe. I can’t believe after coming off Arkham knight that the heads of rocksteady said oh yeah lets make a gaas looter shooter. Can wait for some Sony backed sites to see what they come out with reviews for this considering Sony has the marketing deal for this game

 

[H From Steps]

I don't get why people have to throw so much shit to this game. Just don't buy it and done. There's a lot of effort put on these projects by people who have no agency in WB's corporate decisions.

I’m gonna try it out on release and decide for myself. But I usually enjoy some games the general public hates so…

 

[Unrivaledx88]

So you're hoping people will lose their jobs just because you don't like them?

Wow. Just wow.... You're part of the cancel culture. That much is evident now... GTFO.

Why are you being soft ? Foh , ppl lose their jobs everyday .

It’s unfortunate if that were to happen but ign has been shit for yrs .
I’m sure they would all land on their feet somewhere better .

But anyway don’t try and flip this into a ppl losing there job . My post was purely about ign. But yeah it would suck for those employed by them .
Gtfo tryna attack me. Soft

 

[JackMcGunns]

We all sure this game is going to suck? It kind of reminds me of Sunset Overdrive.

 

[mckmas8808]

Stop adding a moral “framing” to what is essentially a business transaction between 2 businesses. WB doesn’t owe IGN review codes that drive revenue to IGN. Going to Twitter to create a media spectacle is both unprofessional and malicious.

It's open and honest! One day these "corporations" will realize the gatekeeping is coming to an end. They should have respected IGN's preview and worked from there.

 

[violence]

I don’t think I’ve ever seen a preview headline quite like that.

 

[ReBurn]

It's open and honest! One day these "corporations" will realize the gatekeeping is coming to an end. They should have respected IGN's preview and worked from there.

IGN is also corporate. They, and other corporate media outlets, are also engaging in gatekeeping. They are largely in control of the public's perception of games since so many people rely on gaming sites and review scores to make purchase decisions. That's why they should be striving to present information in a way that allows the reader to draw their own conclusions instead of presenting editorial and opinion as reporting.

The "we played it and we didn't like it" in the preview headline was inflammatory and irresponsible. It was designed to drive traffic based on controversy and in doing so put a preconception of the game into the reader's mind before they ever had a chance to read what the author had to say. It's completely possible that things IGN didn't like would be acceptable to the reader, but the lack of objectivity starting in the headline colored the reader's perception.

Considering how many people base their impressions on headlines without reading the associated article it was especially irresponsible. They wanted a hook to get people to open and read an article that a lot of people otherwise probably wouldn't care about, so they put a negative opinion up there. I don't blame WB for not sending review code and I don't think it was retaliation. IGN had already made their opinion clear. They didn't need a review copy.

 

[bender]

Stand and be counted, for or against Suicide Squad.

I'm Batman! /not false advertising

 

[Baki]

It's open and honest! One day these "corporations" will realize the gatekeeping is coming to an end. They should have respected IGN's preview and worked from there.

I retract the last part of my statement. You're right. That said, I still hold to the idea that 'moralizing' this interaction is the wrong take.

 

[Fbh]

I'd generally agree.

However, it's important to figure in the fact that games aren't finished in the earlier previews, thus the devs probably expect a certain amount of leeway from those reporting on them. If journalists take to going hard on the previews, there simply won't be any as devs will want to wait and show a more polished product.

I think the timing and nature of the preview are also important.

If you are previewing a game a month before it launches I do agree you should have a certain leeway in regards to technical issues, performance, bugs/crashes and things like that. We've seen a lot of cases of day 1 patches making a significant impact on that.

But I think that close to release complains about things like gameplay and structure are valid. I can't really think of any game that saw any major overhauls to the core gameplay and design from late previews to the final release.