Do you think game publishers pay gaming sites for positive reviews?

There's a such thing as journalistic integrity, you know.

KillerWabbit23

I used to think there was until the whole Jeff Gerstmann incident happened. Now it's hard to trust reviews these days.

[QUOTE="KillerWabbit23"]

There's a such thing as journalistic integrity, you know.

Metamania

I used to think there was until the whole Jeff Gerstmann incident happened. Now it's hard to trust reviews these days.

[QUOTE="Metamania"]

[QUOTE="KillerWabbit23"]

There's a such thing as journalistic integrity, you know.

Bozanimal

I used to think there was until the whole Jeff Gerstmann incident happened. Now it's hard to trust reviews these days.

Ha ha! But no, I used to think that reviews were made by people whose honest opinions go a long way into making purchases. But once this whole BS came to pass, it's hard to believe reviews in general.

Yes. Especially Gamespot...

lasseeb

Well I don't personally think that these companies bother paying someone like this site for instance money to review a game positive. I think more or less there might be some pressure toward some of the gamespot reviewers to give a game a better rating. Probably because the last bunch of reviewers here left because of the Jeff Gerstman incident, and he was fired. I'm sure it crosses their mind how a bad review might effect their job situation, and because of that they tend to adjust review scores accordingly. Have you noticed that when a very popular, highly advertised game comes out it never seems to get less than an 7.5. I think that this is because the game spot staff is trying to, watch their ***, so to speak cause they don't want the company to replace everyone with a fresh batch of zombie staff.

[QUOTE="lasseeb"]

Yes. Especially Gamespot...

c_moriarty

I think certain shady things happen. Not necessarily heres x amount of money give me a good review, but something along the lines of what Microsoft did with windows 7. "Hey guys can you review windows 7 for us? By the way since youre are gonna review it heres FREE computers to HELP you."

No, big sites need a good standing with many to get many to come to their sites. If someone proves that a big site is taking bribes then that site would have a huge backlash. User scores are not much better since there is no way to know who they are. They could be people that works on the game or something that hates all those type of games and never play it.

[QUOTE="A_Mobile_Doll"]

I honestly do think that some of them do.

That's my main reason for putting more weight on the user score than the critic score.

SuperFlakeman

I only pay attention to the average user score. You're right though, about the people who give outrageous scores. Many people are prone to slamming popular games that they particularly hate, while others may give a "10" if the game is simply decent.

As for the critic score, I usually don't place much weight on it.

I think it would be ignorant to think reviewers aren't a little bias in some way. I'm sure if they get a copy of a game before release and are sponsered by them in some way (gamespot is covered in sponer ads) then they take it into consideration, especially after Jeff Gerstmann got in trouble for posting negetive reviews.