Unregistered
Watcher
- Joined
- November 14, 2006
- Messages
- 43
Good honest review.
- Joined
- Nov 14, 2006
- Messages
- 43
Good honest review.
Wait.
EA would probably buy it.
EA would buy anything, funny how Take Two told 'em to sod off.
Wait.
WAIT A SECOND.
Do you mean to imply that Microsoft Corporation (NASDAQ:MSFT) only exists to create profit for its shareholders?
Thank you, comrade! Another bourgeois running-dog plot unmasked!
Context. You may want to find another forum niche, Mike. The site already has a Mistress of the Obvious.No ... M$ is more about the fact that the company has a long history of interjecting tedious recitations of corporate history into light-hearted exchanges of jest.
No, they don't. They're immune to criticism. Their Fallout 3 preview and Fallout: From BIS to Bethesda pieces were also filled with factual inaccuracies and caused a way bigger shitstorm than this review (the Fallout 3 preview had more than 300 comments, almost all negative).
But as Russ Pitts put it "Or perhaps I ignore questions of my journalistic integrity because I'm confident enough in my qualifications and abilities to not need reassurance from the peanut gallery that I'm doing the right thing."
You see, he's better than you, he's better than me, and he doesn't need approval from the "peanut gallery".
One would think public accountability is a journalistic standard, even amongst gaming journalists. But hey, it's the Escapist, they're better than you.
Well, here's more fuel for the fire. After considerable run-around in getting a copy of the game to run successfully on my machine (auth code mixups on the promotion company's end), my preview code expired. Atari graciously forwarded me a full copy to review. I wanted to get something to the Escapist in a timely fashion and completed the article within a week.
This was back when the game was just released. If I'd known it wasn't going to press right away, I would have taken more time with the game.
Anyway, the patch wasn't out then. So no, I didn't run it with the patch.
Whether to review a patched (and them which patch?) or unpatched version of a game is a controversy in and of itself. I think that reviewers should review what is actually released. If the company releases a buggy, incomplete mess they deserve a bad review. Maybe it would get companies to do a little more QA before release.