Sigmond's forum posts
I leave with two names that have intrigued me tonight. Josh Larson and Stephen Colvin. Goodnight...MAILER_DAEMON
Yeah goodnight Mailer. Was nice that you stopped in for a brief moment. Hope you all can get some rest tonight. Don't think I can keep the night watch going anymore myself. Though we will never forget what has happened here. I just hope when LArson and Colvin see this they'll think about releasing the full story. Though silence will probably be their blanket only making it look worse and worse as days go on.
Some of the mods don't think this is a big deal for some reason.
And of course some of the (newer) administrators are trying to calm things down.Robbie_IV
I honestly didn't think a Mod would be up with the rest of us. Ask and you shall recieve I suppose. Just feels weird that it actually happened. :shock:
[QUOTE="Sigmond"][QUOTE="Trashface"][QUOTE="CanaanJohnMarsh"][QUOTE="Sigmond"][QUOTE="dholmes19"]this is why coporate america ruins lives everydaytheultimateone
And yet we couldn't live without coroprations. Without them we'd be paying alot more then we do for alot of things that we get. It's the way of the world I suppose, but eventually it works out in some way.
That is not entirely true. Alot of corporations get to "fat" and actually lose money in the process of doing business. I used to work for Gartner (The worlds largest IT research firm) and their focus shifted from results and credibility to earnings and in the process their cost went through the roof.
The problem is simple. When you turn an artistic medium into business, you have a clash between soul and suits. The solution is to let the people who care about the art rule. Most of the time, if the art is good, so is profit. Even if the good art brings in poor profit, at least they have the respect of a cult following and the makers, reviewers, and everyone else can feel good about it instead of having a mess like this. If they have really disabled user reviews for Kane and Lynch, I may justy cancell my subscription because that means they're already trying to silence us.
Well I actually agree with the disabling of it. Because people in threads like this went off and would do 1.0 "For Jeff" reviews. I can't say I agreed with the practice myself and actually got annoyed at it, but people wanted something to do. So think of all the people in this thread doing that and wanting to do that all over the site on every Eidos game. Getting the picture now? Yeah they had no choice but to disable it for now until people calmed down and would do things in a more constructive manner then ruin game scores like that.
Dude what do you expect, people are angry so ofcourse they're going to lash out against those responsible. I completely agree with posting bad reviews for K&L. I mean when Eidos complains about a review because they advertise on the same site, they deserve this kind of publicity, and the fact that they're having to shut down sections of the site simply proves to CNET and Gamespot how much people care about this.
But you're missing the point. Reviewing a game bad because it's a bad game is one thing, but do it objectivly. Show them that we're better then them. But instead the mass community posted reviews not based on the game, but on the issue. That doesn't belong there. That's what this forum is for. So yes I agree with the decision to close the reviews down for now. That's the only course of action they could take. I mean seriously would it have been good form for those that agree with CNET to post 10s? Or maybe people like me when I first heard it that were fighting for information so they could make up their minds. Should we post 5s? I mean seriously you have to calm down and think about things. Post reviews on the game, but you don't let the outside world affect if a game is good or not. Yes it's not the best game according to some, and others enjoyed it. So murdering a score just isn't right without a good reason why the GAME is bad and not the situations surrounding it or games made by that company because all you're really doing is screwing lO over. The development studio that made the game to begin with.
[QUOTE="Sigmond"][QUOTE="THETRUEDOZAH"]nearly six figures spent, a person fired, and a reputation tarnished all for a measly videogame review. makes a person wonder how high thestakes would be if anything even remotely significant was involved.THETRUEDOZAH
How about adding the precident of buying game reviews in video game society? That seems like a pretty significant offair. In all honesty that has to count for something. What will happen now? Will developers with big bucks go out and spend all this money and you'll see roasters of GotY games coming every year? It is a significant event in video games though I don't know how many people will care outside of those of us that actually care about the industry.
you're right, i agree it is a big deal and says alot about the state of relations in corporate america. in the end though, it's still just about games. if the press is established as a business, then they are bound by their contracts to fufill their obligations to their shareholders and act in the best interests of it's owners. Obviously this move was seen to be in their best interest, i doubt they anticipated this kind of backlash, but it really goes to show that our opinion isn't really valued. they didn't have respect for their employees and audience when they made these decisions, and obviously, in taking the steps that they have to remain as quiet as possible on the situation, are confident that this matter will absolve itself in time.sadly, giventhe individual's inclination to distraction, i tend to agree with them.
Yes I'm well aware. That's the sad part. Just like a drug company doesn't have any obligation to getting people better, only making more money for their shareholders. It's sad but there is a slightly silver lined cloud. A while back a guy posted a CNET stock image and it fell faster then you can imagine. People arn't standing for this and are fighting back for integrety. I have to say that pleases me. Though in the next few weeks.. that's what we all have to look at. We have to see how CNET reacts to this, and what's to come of GS and everything like it.
[QUOTE="CanaanJohnMarsh"][QUOTE="Sigmond"][QUOTE="dholmes19"]this is why coporate america ruins lives everydayTrashface
And yet we couldn't live without coroprations. Without them we'd be paying alot more then we do for alot of things that we get. It's the way of the world I suppose, but eventually it works out in some way.
That is not entirely true. Alot of corporations get to "fat" and actually lose money in the process of doing business. I used to work for Gartner (The worlds largest IT research firm) and their focus shifted from results and credibility to earnings and in the process their cost went through the roof.
The problem is simple. When you turn an artistic medium into business, you have a clash between soul and suits. The solution is to let the people who care about the art rule. Most of the time, if the art is good, so is profit. Even if the good art brings in poor profit, at least they have the respect of a cult following and the makers, reviewers, and everyone else can feel good about it instead of having a mess like this. If they have really disabled user reviews for Kane and Lynch, I may justy cancell my subscription because that means they're already trying to silence us.
Well I actually agree with the disabling of it. Because people in threads like this went off and would do 1.0 "For Jeff" reviews. I can't say I agreed with the practice myself and actually got annoyed at it, but people wanted something to do. So think of all the people in this thread doing that and wanting to do that all over the site on every Eidos game. Getting the picture now? Yeah they had no choice but to disable it for now until people calmed down and would do things in a more constructive manner then ruin game scores like that.
[QUOTE="Sigmond"][QUOTE="dholmes19"]this is why coporate america ruins lives everydayCanaanJohnMarsh
And yet we couldn't live without coroprations. Without them we'd be paying alot more then we do for alot of things that we get. It's the way of the world I suppose, but eventually it works out in some way.
That is not entirely true. Alot of corporations get to "fat" and actually lose money in the process of doing business. I used to work for Gartner (The worlds largest IT research firm) and their focus shifted from results and credibility to earnings and in the process their cost went through the roof.
Eh. Fair enough I can concead that point. Though when two corporations have health competition then generally it should work out for the betterment of the consumer. Though I'm tired and I don't really wanna argue theory of economics. So yeah corporations that do get too "Fat" do tend to be a problem I suppose.
guys has anyone notice that they have taken the video review down and that they have disabled the user reviews
http://uk.gamespot.com/error/knl_review.html
check
solidgamer
Very old news. They removed the video review because well it was a very negetive spin to K&L. CNET got called on it and the spin doc just stated that it was because of differences in the PS3 and XBOX versions. And for the reviews well that was because of the 1.0 review spam that was happening. Got closed around 9ish if I guess correctly last night.
nearly six figures spent, a person fired, and a reputation tarnished all for a measly videogame review. makes a person wonder how high thestakes would be if anything even remotely significant was involved.THETRUEDOZAH
How about adding the precident of buying game reviews in video game society? That seems like a pretty significant offair. In all honesty that has to count for something. What will happen now? Will developers with big bucks go out and spend all this money and you'll see roasters of GotY games coming every year? It is a significant event in video games though I don't know how many people will care outside of those of us that actually care about the industry.
Log in to comment