Yeah, this isn't anything new. In the case of Sony's sports division and MK, anyone with a sense of taste despises any iteration of either development division/franchise.No, my friend, Metacritic is not a reputable source. When you give everymoron the ability to review videogames/films/music, very few items are going to geta poor score.To be honest, I do sympathize with Ubisoft to a certain degree. I was baffled by their review for A.C. Itwas pedantic to say the least. Yes, it had it's quirks. It was a little repetitive, though it wasn't unbearable. There were some problems with collision, and yes, the ending was a "Ha ha! Gonna have to pony up another 60 bucks in 12-18 months if ya wanna know!" moment. But, it caught me hook, line, and sinker. Maybe my love for history (and its reinvention) renders my opinion entirely subjective. In my opinion, a stellar and innovative storyline can save a game from drowning. Their reviewseemed like smarmy self-importance on the part of romanticists. You know, because publishers/developers haven't been setting up sequels in this manner...since the introduction of something resembling a plot in video games. Regardless, reviewers are inherently subjective, and it is inevitable. For Ubisoft to react this way partially alienates all of us, and it doesn't seem like they utilized common sense in their choice to blacklist EGM. As if I and many, many, many other people didn't love A.C. and forgive it for its mistakes.
Furthermore, I don't trust any reviewers other than myself, and neither should (any of) you. They can offer insight and a little information. Trust 'em when it comes to unquestioningly stellar videogames (ya know, MGS, Halo, Mario, et cetera), and trust them when it comes to schlock crap (E.T., Bomberman Act Zero, or whatever the hell that turd is called). Everything in the middle is subject to great variation in opinion from person to person. No reviewer can tell you if you're going to like A.C., Shenmue, or Xenosaga. Only you can decide (or in the case of the Xeno series, your deity..kinda zing!)
But this is all academic nonsense, the reality is that Ubisoft is interested in profit, and thus expect appeasement from every publication where their "blockbuster" titles are concerned. They are certainly aware of the fact that they failed to sell thousands of units simply because of the EGM review, regardless of how inaccurate it might have been. It has proven hard for ALL corporations/companies to come to terms with informed consumer choices, and Ubisoft are not an exception. Ubisoft should have anticipated such a reaction and held back the release date for Q1 08. Problem is, publishers don't want a sleeper hit, they want a blockbuster hit during the holiday season.
As a counterpoint, EGM (and all other publications) have an ethical obligation concerning publishers as well. Their review must remain as impartial and objective as possible, which wasn't the case with A.C.To make a point, I am usually amused by EGM's scathing reviews - when they are warranted. The last reviewer for EGM gave A.C. a 4.5 out of 10. I could understand the first two reviews which were lukewarm - I certainly understand where they are coming from, because A.C. Did NOT live up to it's potential. But 4.5? If I worked with Ubisoft, I would be enraged by such a score. Someone has to truly be out of touch to give such a game a 4.5. Or maybe they spend their days playing Halo, music games, and Madden, in which case I can't hold their lack of intelligence and taste against them. Another zing! Likewise, a reviewer should remain aware of the current climate of their respective industry, something the final EGM reviewer did not do. Sequels are a major source of revenue in this industry, and reviewers should keep that in mind when considering the score for a video game. A.C. was always going to have a sequel. Yes, they could have ended part one more eloquently, but it happens. Everyone is not Hideo Kojima, my friends.
Anyway, I digressed. So be it.
Never forget, EGM gave A.C. lackluster scores, while throwing a straight 10 at Halo 3, and even hyped Lair beyond belief. So their opinions aren't particularly reputable anyway. Likewise, printed publications in our industry are quickly becoming dinosaurs, all the more reason why Ubisoft's reaction is absurd. Concerning Sony sports and MK? EGM readers are better off now because of the ban. Bwahahaha!
Log in to comment