Official X-Box magazine caught lying in review.

[MartyG]

I think what most are worried about are the assertions these practices may extend over to respected multiformat publications such as GamesTM or Edge. Especially here.

Indeed - which is why I pointed it out. I'm surprised that Strider or Mart haven't posted anything on it. Maybe it's true after all

[IcePak]

He probably played it for five minutes, got bored and went and did something else. Then at the last minute before he had to get his copy in on time he made up the review based on the ramblings on internet forums, other people's reviews, and possibly experience with the original Headhunter.

[martTM]

I think the big issue here is what people consider to be 'finished' code. Obviously, there's no way on earth that the majority of magazines are ever going to review boxed, as you'd buy them versions of games unless a) they're reviewing them incredibly late or b) it's an import game. However, just because it's not boxed, doesn't make the code unfinished. Publishers regularly provide post-submission code for review which, considering it's been approved by the submission process, will then go on to become the boxed version - that's what almost always happens. The only time it doesn't and even earlier code gets provided is when mags fight for exclusives, as the only way you're going to get something before your competitors is to get something that's further into the production schedule. Of course, it's at that point that the line gets blurry... technically, things that aren't quite 'polished' should be pointed out in case they're in the finished code. But then, an exclusive review should theoretically be one that gets a top score... ooh, the moral dilemma. Or not, as the case may be.

From personal experience on gamesTM, we've never reviewed code of anything before the submission stage... but then, that may be because we've never attempted to secure 'exclusive' reviews purely for the purpose of splashing it across the cover of the mag in a desperate attempt to push the sales up. I can understand the predicament that some mags put themselves in, but again it's all up to the common sense of the reader; the fact that everyone's scaremongering now because the concept of not reviewing boxed code makes mags look like a bunch of liars really does surprise me, considering I thought many people were aware as to how the magazine process actually works.

As for the stuff posted about the Headhunter review though... well, I'm biting my tongue, if only because it makes me angry that someone's clearly trying to turn things around and pin the blame on the developers when he's been caught red handed. Strange, considering that we got exactly the same code that they got... I could skip the cut-scenes in ours, even if I did have to sit through the first five seconds of it before the chance came. And the lack of bike scenes has been clear from the preview stage. Mmm... pork pies. My favourite type.

[John Beaulieu]

didn't Edge run a feature about things like this? How one reviewer played a game which actually gave the amount of time played hidden away (think it was a rpg or something), and it had been played for only a matter of minutes ... 2 page review went in the mag though

[C']

John, I think that was Gamespot review of an online RPG.

The server that they played on logged how much time they had spent playing and, like you say, the time was incredibly short.

I think Gamespot pulled the review and published an official apology. Unfortunately I cannot remember the game.

[MikeRox]

so they played the Dreamcast original, easy mistake to make ;p the reviewer prolly assumed it was another sega re-release.

[Plisken]

the magazines credibility sure just tanked, i wont bother reading it again.

[John Beaulieu]

You know whats the most worrying aspect of all this - it seems that media sources can just 'apologise' for these cases - claiming them as one-offs - caused by deadlines/preview code bladdy bladdy, and yet they call into question the validity of every single review that they publish - just how can you trust a media source that has been found to be lying?

thats one of the things i like about gamesTM - regardless of if you agree with a particular score or not, you just know, because they post impressions etc in the forums, that mart and darran are passionate about games and play them as much as anyone else on the forums ... its all about trust

[MartyG]

Yes indeed - but I do note that Mart didn't actually address the comment about publishing reviews without having played the game

As has been commented on in the Xbox forum ( and no that bad taste hasn't left my mouth yet ) there are so many games released a month that, along with deadlines, how can any magazine really play them to the same sort of extent that we do? I don't think it's possible.

I'd very much like to be proven wrong though. So GTM, how long do you spend playing the games you review?

[martTM]

Personally? Jeez, I don't know... depends what's going on, although I always make sure to actually take stuff home rather than just playing it in the office. Obviously, I can only speak out of my own personal experiences but looking back over my last few reviews... (rough estimates based on my addled MK-move filled memory)

Evil Genius - four evenings straight and a Saturday... not in that order, I think.
SW Battlefront - three evenings and two solid days in the office.
Tales Of Symphonia - the game clock on my save says about 15 hours.
Headhunter - through to completion over a solid weekend.
Second Sight - ditto, over I think about four evenings.
Ham-Ham Games - completed it twice.
Vib Ripple - probably about 6-8 hours... very simple
Mario Golf Advance - finished it in just over 16 hours.

And that's just stuff for work - obviously, you've got to also take into account all the games I actually play for fun. I'm still only two thirds of the way through Riddick, made a start on Pikmin 2, on the second boss of Psi-Ops, getting into Sims 2, still slugging through TRON 2.0, quite enjoying Mortal Kombat: Deception, gone back to Mario & Luigi... and before San Andreas comes out, I'm determined to at least get a bit further on GTA III and Vice City after leaving them in limbo a long time ago.

It depends on what the game is. RPGs are obviously longer, while handheld stuff and simple, but effective action stuff can be so much easier to get through. That said, I played Burnout solidly for two weeks straight... including making myself late for work on three occasions because I didn't stop playing in time to get the bus.

Hope everyone appreciates my honesty... although I suspect someone's bound to slag me off for something ("15 hours for Tales? WTF?!").

[gossi the dog]

I'm surprised by this outcry. I remember the Official Playstation Magazine getting a world exclusive review of Star Wars Episode 1. It happened to coincide with them releasing 4 exclusive Star Wars themed covers and the release of the film in cinemas. The game was given 9 out of 10 and yet it transpired that the game was less than 50% done, wasn't released for another 6 months and turned out to be one rubbish game. The great thing was that at the time in the smallprint at the beginning of the magazine it said something along the lines that due to being the official magazine that they would never review incomplete code simply to get an exclusive like their lesser competitors did. Quality! Most of the Future magazines as far as I know still review incomplete code in order to secure exclusives.

[martTM]

Most of the Future magazines as far as I know still review incomplete code in order to secure exclusives.

But that's the problem of mags these days - with sales declining all the time, people would rather sell themselves out and cover unfinished code to secure those few extra sales than have a little integrity. The reason? Because the opinion is that the majority of the readers won't care or don't have enough smarts to realise it.

It's a careless attitude to have, but you have to offset that against success. I think the multiformat mags have the best of it (particularly EDGE and us) because it's not so important what's on the cover - we've got plenty of options, what with being multiformat and everything. But single format mags don't have that luxury and that where things start to fall apart.

But I digress. Being caught lying on an exclusive review that you've said is great when it's actually **** (but scores you kudos with the publisher) is super-bad... but why bother lying about something if you're just going to slag it off? That's just silly.

Oh, and the point about reviewing stuff without even playing it... that's just daft. How on earth can you make an informed opinion without even playing something? What makes me laugh is the comment about how we should give the guy slack because he does most of the reviews. Yeah, that's a good one - he's so busy writing loads of other things, we should let him off when he decides he'd rather make up a slating review just to save himself some time, rather than actually playing the game. I feel sorry for him, of course, but still... I believe the word is 'busted'.

[edandersen]

... I believe the word is 'busted'.

And "Haw Haw!" </nelson>

[hankwangford]

Hope everyone appreciates my honesty... although I suspect someone's bound to slag me off for something ("15 hours for Tales? WTF?!").

15 hours for Tales? WTF?! :P

[JibberX]

Tarrs the industry with the brush that all games journos are complete slackers...