Shadow of Mordor - WB Paid for Positive Reviews

While this is obviously an issue and has been for a long time, this case is in general infested with clickbaits and naming and shaming of PewDiePie who is innocent in this case as he actually did disclose it to earn clicks. It's hypocritical and poor journalism.
Not even sure why they even brought up his name as afaik all he ever said was "I enjoyed the game" after the promotional video. Hardly a review unless review standards have fallen significantly lately.
 
Joined
Jan 8, 2014
Messages
474
Location
in a figment of my imagination
I don't really care if they pay for good reviews as I never base my purchase decisions on reviews. It is a pretty shi**y practice though.

As for the game I thought it was good but got too repetitive. Kudos for the nemesis system though, It's probably the most innovative gameplay mechanic I've seen in some time.
 
As for the game I thought it was good but got too repetitive. Kudos for the nemesis system though, It's probably the most innovative gameplay mechanic I've seen in some time.

It was something new yes but I wasn't all that impressed with it or even the game after around 30 hours. It felt very repetitive and boring.
 
Joined
Oct 8, 2009
Messages
4,425
Location
UK
It was something new yes but I wasn't all that impressed with it or even the game after around 30 hours. It felt very repetitive and boring.

It definitely could have used more work and I hope they expand and improve it in SOM2 but most RPG's these days feel like just more of the same so it was a bit of fresh air for me. Until as you said the rest of the game mechanics become so repetitive.
 
Not even sure why they even brought up his name as afaik all he ever said was "I enjoyed the game" after the promotional video. Hardly a review unless review standards have fallen significantly lately.
That is the title that states reviews.

It is about getting a positive return from influencers like streamers, video makers etc And a vanguard genius like PewDiePie does more to favour the sales by pushing his like it, had fun with it than a thoughtful, especially toward the crowd of the i like it, I have fun with it who are influenced by a man they can relate as a bro.

These guys want to make money off playing video products. At the end of the year, there is going to be the product that brought them $ 3000 over three days (roughly 10 hour play per day) and that other products that brought them $300 over 7 days (same hours per day)

The good product for a streamer is the one that allows them to get their show act togehter and pump in the donation train.
Streamers do their product selection on that criterion.

For devs, it matters most to design the kind of products streamers are in need of. When devs achieve that, streamers go to their product, have a good donation session and come naturally, without any influence, to the conclusion that they like it, that the product is fun, that they enjoy it. They do not even enjoy the product itself, they enjoy making money out of it.


Shadow of Mordor (it was reported on this site) was a very good product to work with for streamers. Massive hype that attracted viewers, smooth gameplay, low skill demand that help the streamer to push his act.
Many streamers did well when they streamed it. They were inclined to find it good.
Totally unnecessarry to buy an opinion from them since the product was well designed.

Marketing is less and less required as those guys are providing it for free.
Therefore marketing budget can be slashed down. The case was probably the result of a miscalculation by guys who thought they could justify their budget by putting people on the dole.
 
Joined
Mar 29, 2011
Messages
6,265
It is about getting a positive return from influencers like streamers, video makers etc And a vanguard genius like PewDiePie does more to favour the sales by pushing his like it, had fun with it than a thoughtful, especially toward the crowd of the i like it, I have fun with it who are influenced by a man they can relate as a bro.

If we have to start to muzzle people for having opinions such as "I liked this" or they will get hung online for their opinion, then we are we're truly fucked.
 
Joined
Jan 8, 2014
Messages
474
Location
in a figment of my imagination
New media is a funny thing and the borders are incredibly nebulous at the moment. Unfortunately or fortunately government is usually 10 years behind developments in the tech sector meaning it is the wild west right now. The rules are largely precedent based and imperfect as to what media should or shouldn't do. That is not a good thing because it is often court rulings, not settlements, that help to firm up a set of rules. Uncertainty is the death of innovation in the marketplace.

I probably should of used a different word than 'review' in the headline as it implies something formal. Mind you for a lot of people these are their reviews. The lawyers love 'influencer' as it can cover a lot of ground, all of this stuff is to generate positive impressions.

P.S Sounds like Ars has been sloppy over PewDiePie's association which is straight up bad journalism.
 
Joined
Feb 13, 2014
Messages
9,312
Location
New Zealand
The word review and pointing out PewDiePie was actually widely used, and actually believed (as can be seen on responses here too). Luckily a few people on social media, noticeably including TotalBiscuit has pointed out that these are all false allegations against PewDiePie.

It's sad cuz regardless of the truth to the claims against WB it has been in my opinion overshadowed by a lot of bad journalism where they don't do a proper research and/or make false allegations that they know will generate much more clicks.
 
Joined
Jan 8, 2014
Messages
474
Location
in a figment of my imagination
PewDiePie wrote under his video where he talks about the game "sponsored by WB".
I'm well aware that certain audiences didn't learn to read and watch only movies with dubs, but their inability to read doesn't make PewDiePie guilty.

Also, for all I know that person is show maker (not that I ever watched any video of his) and not a reviewer like Angry Joe. But some journalists, equally illiterate as those who don't read videos notes, say WB paid for reviews then name a person who's not a reviewer at all.

It's exactly what you said in one of previous posts - his name is used as clickbait by "pro" journalists. The sad thing is sister Unella is not real world person to get her hands on those journalists, otherwise at least next time they'd think before reporting nonsense.

In the end, the sentence is only about WB. I don't think the court is stupid and would for sure include everyone involved if there was a reason to.
 
Joined
Apr 12, 2009
Messages
23,459
You are all way too forgiving by half. The CSGO people were very bad, in that they appear to be actually breaking the law, and did it so obviously. It's like an extreme case. That doesn't make lesser cases not-bad because they are less bad.

A huge amount of Youtube clicks come from embedded sources and the new Youtube on TV thing. In both cases the 'further information' screen is neither visible nor clickable unless you actually go to Youtube, something most people, obviously, wont bother doing. Here's an embedded random Youtube video:



Show me where the further information is?

What PewDiePie did was the equivalent of putting crucial information into the 'smallprint'. He put it somewhere in the EULA. He did not have a desire to verbally express the situation as part of the performance nor put the smallprint onto the screen as a preface to the video. He is more than happy to take the dough and give the game a happy face.

This is a personality issue. He is still 'shady', he is just 'legally shady'.

Youtubers who take their own credibility as the most important aspect of their gaming presence, such as Angry Joe, Total Biscuit, Jim Sterling, OzzyMan Reviews, and many, many others, a list too long to mention, simply wouldn't act in this way. They would either tell WB and their cash to sod off (after all, they are paid by their viewer, why do they even need excessive greed) or they outline exactly what's going on in the actual video, upfront and unapologeticly.

See how OzzyManReviews promotes Loot Crate and even tells his fans what cut he gets (5:00 onwards):



Not one inch of shadyness there and if you don't want to watch unsolicited advertising then you can stop watching the vid right there. If you don't even know you're just watching unsolicited advertising, you can't even make a choice.

CSGO = possibly illegal + zero integrity
PewDiePie = Zero integrity
'Good' Youtubers = Integrity

Hope that makes sense.
 
Joined
Nov 1, 2014
Messages
4,762
Not sure if I understood you correctly, but check this video about paying (warning, foul language!) and WB:
https://youtu.be/eOUOzL04Byg?t=209

:D

Handle tells it. From the look of his face, guy does not seem to be one of those with a birth right to be angry as he has no permanent personal cause to be angry about.

Guy is supposed to go through products, some of them proper material to be angry about, others not.
Anger can not be a permanent feature.

Looks like a comedian whose trademark is to push angry rants.
And PC with that if he limits his targets to the usual suspects like the big, bad corps.
Corps are good, save that, since the crowdfunded movement emerged, they are no longer that good. The deal is to be founded in the crowdfunded movement.
Without checking his log, the feeling is that this guy avoids bashing crowdfunded products, as it could hurt the feelings of his audience. PCness, limiting himself to the consensual targets like the corps, even though when the corps are no longer a reference.

A guy whose trade is to sell what his audience wants to sell.

If we have to start to muzzle people for having opinions such as "I liked this" or they will get hung online for their opinion, then we are we're truly fucked.

Nobody speaks of muzzling PewDiePie. Even if that was the case, it would hardly be a case for being truly fucked. There are other cases that fits the bill for that. Guess is that it is better to pretend that muzzling PDP would be a moment of doom rather than taking into account the other ones.

Many things are an opinion. The I liked it, I have fun with it is as much an opinion as a political slogan is an opinion.

The I like it, I have fun with it is a commercial routine to validate the show performance.
People pay to watch show performers having fun with a product. The I like it is the climaxing scream confirming that the show went well. Nothing different from the Swartznegger I'll be back that came to confirm the show in movies. People went to theaters to watch that guy play his own character and the gimmick was there to crown the performance.
 
Joined
Mar 29, 2011
Messages
6,265
Show me where the further information is?

Did you actually read up on the story and watch the video yourself? Or are you just assuming a headliner on a website is 100% true and honest and not shady at all.
Should Youtubers all start putting up huge warning signs and flashing annotations on each sponsored video? PDP admitted that he should have made it more clear and for that he apologized.

I honestly can't believe that people can't load up a game and enjoy the game without being accused of bullshit because the viewers didn't bother to read the description section.
Just because someone on the internet said someone did a thing it does not make it true. It's not about being forgiving, it's about using some common sense. How did we even end up in a situation where we can judge someone who is just playing a game?

Anyway, if you want further information the PDP situation is on various gaming websites again..and since they write it this time people can actually come to realize it's true, because it's on the news!

Why is this a big deal to me? I don't really care much about PDP and his content, I normally don't watch it..I hardly ever follow gaming channels at all. But this is a slap in the face against humanity and human rights. Let people play a fucking game without accusing them of whatever you can come up with.
Yes, paid good reviews is a shady thing but we have to come up with something better to go up against it. Not use an innocent youtuber just because he's popular. That gives us zero integrity.
 
Joined
Jan 8, 2014
Messages
474
Location
in a figment of my imagination
Journalism/journalist in gaming or otherwise doesn't have much integrity these days. Everything is bought and paid for one way or the other. Or they are pushing their own agenda or something. Its sad state to be in but I don't really give much weight to reviews from anybody these days...
 
Joined
Oct 8, 2009
Messages
4,425
Location
UK
Journalism/journalist in gaming or otherwise doesn't have much integrity these days. Everything is bought and paid for one way or the other. Or they are pushing their own agenda or something. Its sad state to be in but I don't really give much weight to reviews from anybody these days…

Don't forget the Watch reviews....
 
Joined
Oct 25, 2006
Messages
6,292
Just because someone on the internet said someone did a thing it does not make it true.

It's right that I wouldn't enjoy been thrown to media because of being accused before being judged. But that's also how it works, sort of price of celebrity.

It's such a normality that if a media wouldn't report such accusation there would be a possibility that this media is accused by some users of a sort of complicity, not legally, but in public place.

I doubt there's any solution against this sort of stuff. Even laws don't work, at least in my country, there's cases after cases and it's just not working.

For the case himself, lol, I have no indulgence for lazy sheep players, it's not have buy one more game which is a big deal, nor I have seen any protest against how bad the game is.

Myself on start I though, woo overhyped game, then didn't bother, and when the game got a Mac release I was surprised and gave it a chance, not bad and action a bit better than I though, but nothing to motivate me learn play it better or much more, as I expected. I didn't ever bother post a negative review, not my type of game and quite overhyped, but nothing awful.

I'd be tempered about that and for WB, I already learned through Bioware that haters campaigns from groups of users are a big deal for many other users, Im' not influenced by such crap, I never been for Bioware, I'll never been for WB.

EDIT: Few years ago, in my country, some relative smarter than I am explained me milk was bad, obviously some Internet hype, I laugh them gently and didn't care, some years after is milk is bad food? I doubt lol. That's Internet hyping and I'm surprised how many people fell again and again in the trap. I know they are fun talking subjects but still.
 
Joined
May 4, 2016
Messages
114
CSGO = possibly illegal + zero integrity
PewDiePie = Zero integrity
'Good' Youtubers = Integrity

Hope that makes sense.

It makes no sense.

PewDiePie can not be accused of a lack of integrity as he showed integrity on this one.

At worse, it can be argued that PDP is greedy since he took money to execute something he would have done without any financial contribution. Greed is good, though.

After watching streamers, it is possible to discern what video products fit their style and which one they are going to use to set their show.
Shadows of Mordor was good material for many streamers, including PDP.

PDP would have pushed a positive experience to his bro force whatsoever because SoM fits the requirements for that.
He would have shown a lack of integrity by doing otherwise. He did not.

The incentives he received could not have influenced his mind since his mind was already made up. He could not have sold out since he was already bought by thr qualities of the product.

Marketing must be retought. Sending a key to a video maker with an invitation to take a look at the product to determine if the video maker can make money out of a promotional show is enough.
If the product fits the bill, that is, is designed to satisfy the demand of a video maker, video makers are going to push a positive report as they make money off it, which is their goal.

For a game as hyped as SoM, it is useless as video makers are going to invest their own money to jump on the hype train.

SoM was good material to work with, allowing streamers to $250, $500 donation per day. The gameplay could have been the worst ever, as long as money is good, the product is good.

Marketing is deeply changed, there is now an army of peeps living off pushing positive experiences on their customers. They do not need to be paid.

The problem comes from people who confuse playing video products with making money playing off video products. This leads them to achieve flawed conclusions like a lack of integrity from PDP.
 
Joined
Mar 29, 2011
Messages
6,265
This site is a poor example to make a case against mainstream media.

On this site, it is highly recommended that reviews are written by people who like the product. It is told either in an official bit or somewhere.

Reports by people who like it to be read by people who desire to read reports by people who like it.

Nothing different from the main stream and the same would apply if writers were to receive money: it would buy nothing that was not provided beforehand.

Reviews are built on the same principle as stuff provided by PDP.

Contrary to what is claimed in this thread, PDP is not going to be muzzled because his job is to send positive reports of products he likes to his broforce.

Yet on this site though, by rules, it is a hard path for people who do not like it to post a report and this might lead them to be banned (censorship)

Worrying about things unlikely to happen while ignoring or downplaying things that happen.
 
Joined
Mar 29, 2011
Messages
6,265
Back
Top Bottom