X

Sessler's Soapbox: Let Us Review Your Games!

Posted: October 19, 2010
Sessler's Soapbox: Let Us Review Your Games!
http://www.g4tv.com/videos/49371/sesslers-soapbox-let-us-review-your-games/
http://images.g4tv.com/ImageDb3/252769_LGST/soapbox-10-19-10.jpg
Video_49371
Adam talks about his frustrations with publishers who withhold their games in fear of a bad review.

Comments are Closed

  • ZeroXLegend

    If G4 is going to be incompetent about their game reviews then I would do the same as a developer. I can't speak to what companies are doing this but if I was Namco, after the joke of review you gave Tekken 6 and literally it was a joke, I wouldn't send you a copy of my game in advance.

    http://g4tv.com/games/xbox-3 60/57164/tekken-6/review/

    Clearly you didn't put the time in to the game or do any research on it and clearly there is so ridiculously pathetic Virtua Fighter biased, which still to this day boggles my mind. When you says something as dumb as "Bound was already in Tekken 3" you lose those Privileges to review the games. It's privilege not a right, and ignorant slander will get your privilege removed.

    Posted: October 20, 2010 12:29 PM
    ZeroXLegend
  • Donkeylips

    I wonder what happened with the Alone in the Dark lawsuits.

    I assume when they try to sweetn the pot with preorder giveaways day 1 price drops and hiding reviews as hiding bad games.

    Funny thing I think we'll see more of this.

    Posted: October 20, 2010 11:51 AM
    Donkeylips
  • lowkevmic

    @Ressard-Great points. But You can't name any network or site that include their own personal feelings for a product, or lack thereof, before even going in to review another product. If I am reviewing a Android phone, I'm not about to give my personal feelings about how I love my Iphone so much then begin my review. I certainly won't give my personal likes and dislikes towards a product before it's even released. As a company, why would I allow you to review my product when I've watched weeks of you praising my competition, and even bag on mine before it's in your hands to review. That's not objective, at that point it becomes opinionated. If you are a corporate network passing yourself off as a bunch of tech geeks, who have strong opinions about what products are given to you, then that's fine. But don't throw yourself in with all of the other sites, who actually approach each product without bias and with an objective view.

    You can't say they don't have a bias when time and time again, a lot of people have called them out on their love for Apple amongst other developers and franchises. It's no different from Fox News and their obvious Right Wing slant. Now I'm in no way comparing anyone over at G4 to the likes of them, but what I am saying is that a network like that is no longer objective when they have an agenda all their own. It won't help but bleed into the so called objective approach that they take when reviewing a product to be consider competition. It's pretty common knowledge amongst most iphone users, that they love their phone but have issues with AT&T as their service provider. It's not the job of a network like G4 to say that AT&T services suck. I don't want to know how a particular phone stacks up against an Iphone everytime a phone is reviewed. I want to know how is that phone based on the criteria you set for it, the Iphone isn't the criteria.

    Same goes for games. If you're reviewing, let's say, the new Castlevania game. The only thing I would like for it to be compared to if at all, would be the previous Castlevania games, not God of War. For all you know, I could be one of the few people out there who never played God of War so why would I want to know about its similarities? What if I never liked God Of War, does that mean I'm not going to like this game if they do compare? I hated Legend of Zelda, but I enjoyed Darksiders, so to see how the review was based, seemed unfair to THQ and everyone else who created the game. Because I doubt that they knew that their game had to stack up to the 20 plus year old series of Legend of Zelda.

    I understand that a review is just that, an opinion. But a review is also supposed to be treated as if the one giving the review has never even heard, or seen, or used the product in which they are reviewing. That way they are able to base everything in the review off of a clear objective. As long as the game, movie, or product meets or exceeeds that specific objective, then a good or bad review will be based off of that. When you include comparisons to a game or product you highly enjoy, despite how others may feel about it, that product that you like now becomes the objective that all others will consequently have to meet or beat, which isn't fair to that product or the consumer with the objective in mind.

    Posted: October 20, 2010 11:43 AM
    lowkevmic
  • Greenlanturn9669

    Adam I am glad you brought this to my atention cause this was somthing that always bothered me when I dont see a review for a game that i pre-order and either see no review for it or only one site has a review and all they have is praise( cause that only makes me suspisious)

    Posted: October 20, 2010 11:33 AM
    Greenlanturn9669
  • venromero

    @ business_casual_gamer: developers only have something to fear if the game is bad. if its a good game then the reviews will boost initial sales. if devs are in buisness to make good games then they need to get with it, and if publishers are in it to make money then they need to make sure a good product is put out. good reviews = good publicity. 'nuff said

    Posted: October 20, 2010 10:47 AM
    venromero
  • venromero

    thank you adam! i always figured an game that wasnt reviewed before launch was like a bad movie not getting reviewed before release, and now i know!

    Posted: October 20, 2010 10:40 AM
    venromero
  • ODSTPrivate

    I was completely aware of this system but you can't really blame people to try and delay bad reviews that might effect the product. Like any business profit is important and something stands in the way of making as money as possible the solution is to prevent that from happening. I don't disagree with Adam Sessler's Soapbox it's just business.

    Posted: October 20, 2010 10:35 AM
    ODSTPrivate
  • Bowmanganie

    Just tell us, "We could not get a pre-release copy of this game for review," and then let US decide if that fact is important or not. Don't worry, we'll connect the dots.

    Posted: October 20, 2010 10:33 AM
  • CptMurphy

    Hmm. I think recently, this site has been posting reviews much quicker than other sites by far.

    Posted: October 20, 2010 10:24 AM
    CptMurphy
  • Ressard

    I wasn't sure how it was going to turn out at first, but once again: Nothing but net for "the Sess"!

    Posted: October 20, 2010 9:49 AM
  • BloodySinz

    Adam...you ROCK!!!! I completely agree with you on this issue. I always come to G4 to look for my game reviews and game related videos and if a certain game isn't up BIG F'n DEAL!!!!. I'll wait till it does. I will always be a loyal G4 and Adam Sessler fan, you sir have given me many laughs over the years and I THANK YOU!!!!

    Posted: October 20, 2010 9:25 AM
    BloodySinz
  • lowkevmic

    This is probably one of the few time where I am going to have to disagree with Adam. I understand the frustration of not being able to review a game for whatever reason. But at the same time, despite what everyone else may think, G4 do show bias towards certain developers and franchises.

    Case and point, I watched an episode of Feedback where Abbie Heppe expressed how much of a die hard Zelda fan she is, and how she isn't too fond of games that have some of those same puzzle and adventure elements in their games. Fast forward a few weeks later, the game Darksiders came out and anyone who played the game knows that it has a really dark feel to it with a Zelda vibe. Abbie Heppe reviewed the game, and gave it a 2/5. I wanted to make sure that she wasn't the only one who didn't like the game, so I checked with other sites for their review on the game. IGN gave the game an 8/10, in fact at least 4 other sites gave this game an average score of 8/10. Yet G4 was the only site that scored this game on a bias and had a person who openly admitted to a loyalty to Zelda, previous to her review of the game.

    Another example involves God Of War III. Of course they love this franchise so they gave it the expected 5/5. But there were a few games to come out since after the review, one of which was Dante's Inferno. This was another game that scored pretty high amongst other gaming sites, yet G4 spent the entire review comparing and contrasting the game to GOW3, and in fact they still do now with just about any action/adventure game that has any character wielding a weapon other than a sword and is killing the undead. Which in my opinion is extremely unfair to a developer when G4 has already made it clear that if your game isn't as good or better than God of War, be ready for a below average score. Instead of just reviewing a game from an objective point of view.

    One thing G4 has that other sites don't is a network television channel dedicated to the views and opinions of G4. If they like and respect what you do they will promote you, even if your game is just okay(remember Brutal Legend??). But if for any reason they aren't too crazy about you product they will be sure to let the world know, with little jokes and remarks. Like the way Kevin Pereira and Chris Hardwick love to gush over Apple products, but is always quick to have some sort of smartass remark whenever a Widows product is shown. I mean Kevin had some pretty cynical remarks regarding the Windows 7 phones which aren't even out yet, let alone up for review.

    I'm not saying that all sites aren't guilty of this, but G4 is the only one that has the largest fan following and platforms like internet and a major cable network. So at this point they've sort of become the authority on how most mainstream consumers receive content pertaining to games and comics. Knowing that, G4 like to play with the idea that they are still this small fish in a big pond, so their opinion is just as small as anyone else's. But in reality, G4 has a lot of power to make or break a game. So I would understand why a developer would be a little reluctant to submit their product prior to release, because they know with one review from G4 it can make their game either a success or complete failure.

    Posted: October 20, 2010 9:24 AM
    lowkevmic
  • bolo73

    The Gaming industry as a whole needs to grow up. I am glad you stated this clearly Adam. You are not the only review source that has had this problem. Video gaming mags have posted how some companies seem to withhold there games just long enough that the magazine cannot get a review done before they publish for that month.

    Posted: October 20, 2010 8:55 AM
    bolo73
  • liarsthieves

    what he said KNOCK IT OFF yeah did U know duke is back

    Posted: October 20, 2010 8:44 AM
    liarsthieves
  • YoungIndy

    Honestly, take a look in the mirror and recognize how for years you've expressed a bias towards certain games on Xplay. Indeed, a large part of the problem with the way videogames are perceived now could also be traced back to the years of juvenile, obnoxious and crass humour in the reviews and skits on the show.

    Things have gotten better (except for the segments featuring Blair Herter, who seems to be the designated "frat boy"), but as others have pointed out in the comments, alot of us have seen you kick certain games at the beginning of your soapbox, watched you and Morgan make snide remarks about particular franchises and even genres (anime) on Xplay, and now you're surprised that certain developers have become resentful?

    I understand your point overall, and in general I'm against the culture of studios or developers not releasing games early for review, but I have to say, there seems to be a lack of self awareness about how some of your actions over the years have helped to determine how you're perceived. For years, when I saw you on Xplay, I thought you were the biggest douche bag, and it wasn't until watching you on the website that I saw you as an intelligent, articulate, serious thinker about games and the industry.

    Posted: October 20, 2010 8:38 AM
    YoungIndy
  • Kazoku002

    "They say that cat Adam is a bad mutha..."
    "SHUTCHO MOUTH!"
    "But I'm talkin' 'bout Adam..."
    "We can dig it."

    Posted: October 20, 2010 8:37 AM
    Kazoku002
  • ninenightmares

    Adam scares me now...... but hes 100% right i've been buying games acording to x-play's reviews since the beggining of xplay and i don't buy dragon ball games because of that (zing!) and every game i've bought with a 4 Adams out of 5 Morgans has never let me down. love ya' guys at G4.

    Posted: October 20, 2010 7:51 AM
    ninenightmares
  • P1rate

    G4 will never suck because they are not tools!!!

    Posted: October 20, 2010 7:04 AM
    P1rate
  • speedballfury

    I'd like to say I trust Adam more than anyone. I can understand the frustration that comes with the job. I always go to several reviewers before a game that I don't trust although this is the one site I always turn too. This might be a Feedback question but in the frustration of not being able to review a game is it always a sign of a bad game if it doesn't come out early for you guys or do you think it is truly a matter of "fear" before the product is released? I have personally enjoyed some mediocre reviewed games such as "Bionic Commando" and hated others like "Bayonetta" which got great reviews. I guess truly the question is...does it matter? .........P.S: Adam will always be the king!!!!

    Posted: October 20, 2010 6:52 AM
    speedballfury
  • obanana1

    to all the game devs and publishers you should take irrational games as a role model...why? well if you dont know why then god knows where you have been!!! two words "bioshock infinite " two years before the game release!!!! two years!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!thats enough.

    Posted: October 20, 2010 5:18 AM
    obanana1
AdChoices