bit-tech.net - Exclusive Game Reviews Ethically Troubling?

DArtagnan said:

My guess would be that their review copies weren't broken.

I don't think reviewers can predict the future, nor do I think it's fair to expect that.

Click to expand...

That must be it then. The reviewers had good luck, and the fans had bad luck. Imagining anything else is unfair.

That must be it then. The reviewers had good luck, and the fans had bad luck. Imagining anything else is unfair.

Click to expand...

First of all, we don't know how many are experiencing the problem. Secondly, reviewers are most likely playing a slightly earlier version and if the problem is the actual discs (it's a hardware related error by all accounts) - then it's not unreasonable to assume that reviewers didn't experience this error. Even if it's as bad as some people suggest (30%), it's not certain that reviewers would have encountered the error- according to probability - if they DID in fact have identical versions (copies from the same master).

I certainly find it more reasonable than reviewers deliberately covering up that the game doesn't work. I've got a copy myself that works perfectly so far, and I seriously doubt it's an issue with the game itself - as the code obviously works and hardware is as good as identical across consoles.

Anyway, it's not really something we can know for sure. I wouldn't be surprised if reviewers sometimes cover up bugs or crashes to please developers - I just don't see anything remotely suggesting such is the case here.

DArtagnan said:

First of all, we don't know how...Secondly, reviewers are most likely...then it's not unreasonable to assume...Even if...it's not certain...according to probability...if they DID in fact...I've got a copy myself that works perfectly...I seriously doubt...Anyway, it's not really something we can know for sure...I just don't see anything remotely suggesting....

Click to expand...

Welcome to the world of high technology. If we had a theme song, it would be something just like that.

DArtangnan, I only asked how it could happen. If the stuff you're objecting to seems obvious to you, then I don't blame you. It seems pretty obvious to me too.

But isn't it a game reviewer's job to evaluate a game and give the reader information he can use? Wouldn't information about a game-stopping problem be valuable?

Like it or not, it's perfectly valid to wonder how reviewers missed it. Something went wrong. Why defend it? I'd like to see an end to that mindset, especially among game makers and reviewers.

Ehm, are you reading my posts?

I'm not defending anything, I'm suggesting that they probably didn't even know the problem existed and as such weren't in a position to warn people about that which they didn't know.

If they DID know, then I'll be on the offensive as well. It's simply about what I find likely - based on 100% neutral observation. I have no emotional investment either way.

I don't have any reason to suspect the reviewers were aware of problems, and I don't think Rockstar intended to release a version with the reported amount of hardware lockups. It's not like they have any special interest in deceiving people with a large number of faulty copies. Obviously the software works as intended - as at least 2 out of 3 people are playing it without issue - myself included. That STRONGLY suggests a hardware related error, and my personal guess is that something went wrong during the duplication process from gold master to DVD/BR media. Seems like a big batch came out faulty, and buyers will most likely be compensated in time.

You're implying that reviewers were fully aware of the reported problems with the release version, and apparently none of them were truthful since not a single reviewer mentions hardware lockups (at least not in the 4-5 reviews I've read so far). Interestingly enough, all the reviews I've read strongly indicate that reviewers completed the game, as they comment on what happens late in the story. I wonder how they managed to get that far with faulty copies that lock up their systems. I guess Rockstar dictated the reviews?

As I said, I have no doubt corruption is rampant in the industry - but I don't automatically assume everyone is a liar and cover-up artist.

I suppose I could demand that you quote where I implied any of that, but that's not necessary. Everything I've said is still here in this thread.

Like you, I wondered whether or not reviewers had been honest, and I'm not surprised you thought that came across in my post. I haven't actually expressed my opinion about that yet, but I can tell you that one difference between mine and yours is that I don't see the need to defend reviewers at this point or to avoid obvious questions about their reviews.

Squeek said:

I suppose I could demand that you quote where I implied any of that, but that's not necessary. Everything I've said is still here in this thread.

Like you, I wondered whether or not reviewers had been honest, and I'm not surprised you thought that came across in my post. I haven't actually expressed my opinion about that yet, but I can tell you that one difference between mine and yours is that I don't see the need to defend reviewers at this point or to avoid obvious questions about their reviews.

Click to expand...

Are you kidding me?

You've been implying reviewers were aware of the problems - all along. I can't think of a more futile endeavor than trying to prove that to you. You know what you wrote, and if you claim you never meant to imply anything of the sort, well then there's nothing to be gained by trying to demonstrate the opposite.

Furthermore, you keep insisting that my opinion of what happened is a defense of reviewers, even though I've been quite clear about that.

In effect, I see no point in continuing this exchange as it would be a waste of our time.

I suppose this question probably should have been raised on a forum where fans get together to exchange opinions and discuss games, one where it's tolerable for opinion to be reserved.

Whatever the cause turns out to be, I imagine it will be identified soon and that there will be an explaination offered along with a solution. I think I'll wait for that before deciding whether or not I feel reviewers ignored it.

Sorry if that rubs you the wrong way, DArtagnan.

I don't have GTA4 (no console), so I can't speak to personal observances - but I find this poll (and therefore the journalistic implications) rather dubious. I frequent a number of gaming fora and many of them are flooded with GTA4 posts...and I don't see any evidence of widespread problems. In fact, I don't really see evidence of any problems.

Tom Chick has eight hours, some reservations, but no obvious technical issues. Qt3 has nine (9!) GTA related threads currently on the first page and I haven't seen a mention of it. And so on.

Well, NeoGAF made the post about it a sticky, and it's been viewed over 90,000 times and had 1,741 responses. Half the PS3 and a quarter of the XBox customers reported it. They're also saying there's a temporary fix.

I was going to come back to this...a post about this did show up on Qt3 but the response was underwhelming - from a brief look, it looks like it might be related to multiplayer games and players with network issues. Anyway, I accept there is some issue but I still think NeoGAF has (as usual) blown it out of proportion, or I'd see outrage everywhere I turn (and I don't).