General Games Discussion

[KnightStar]

Negative Duke Reviews Could Lead to PR shit list

A third-party public relations firm tweeted last night that they would be "reviewing who gets games next time and who doesn't" based on the bad reviews pouring in about Duke Nukem Forever.

"Too many went too far with their reviews... we r reviewing who gets games next time and who doesn't based on today's venom." Jim Redner, of The Redner Group, tweeted out.

Redner later backtracked in an email sent out to an undisclosed group of publications. In that longer email (see below) Redner asked for forgiveness and called the initial email an error in judgement.

2K games told Kotaku that they don't endorse the comments made by Redner and confirmed that "The Redner Group no longer represents our products."

"We have always maintained a mutually-respectful working relationship with the press and do not condone his actions in any way," a spokesman said.

While it's unusual for a public relations company, publisher or developer to so publicly call out game critics for reviews, what isn't that unusual is the push back and internal black listing.

Kotaku made quite a splash years ago when we made public Sony's decision, delivered in an email, to blacklist us from all of their events, their games, their interviews in retaliation for publishing a reported-out rumor about the PS3 Home that turned out to be accurate. But the only thing unusual about that particular blackballing was that it was official and on the record.

We've since heard, and suspect we've been subjected to, plenty of unofficial, easily denied blackballings. It's an ugly, the ugliest part of this business. And while news reporting can sometimes spur it (I once had a executive of a company spend ten minutes shouting in my face and calling me names at a public venue because he was upset we reported on news, not rumors, but news that put his company in a bad light) it is game reviews that seem most contentious.

That's because with many companies, reviews can be directly connected to things like retailer orders and customer purchases. Sometimes they're used to determine whether a game should get a sequel or a developer or PR firm a bonus. So enough bad reviews can lead to money out of someone's pocket and that's when things get contentious.

No matter how passionate a team of developers are, no matter how mindful of their art form, their creation, at some point any big game is going to also have a person who sees the production of that game and its success as a matter purely of business, of counting beans and making money.

Should a game that does well get raked over the coals of sloppy criticism and rushed reviews? Absolutely not. But that doesn't mean that games should get a pass when a reviewer has played through the entirety of the title and found it lacking. That's the whole point of reviews, they are an expression of critical opinion.

Our job, as game critics, is not to help promote a game or make sure that it sells well. Our job, as critics, is to offer up opinion based on full knowledge of the entire game. That's pretty straight forward. If a critic plays an entire game and hates it, he or she should say so. If he or she loves it, write that. End of story.

I haven't had a chance to play beyond the initial levels of Duke Nukem Forever. But when I did play those levels I wrote up a preview saying that I suspect Duke will be entirely fan service, nothing meant to expand the game's reach or satisfy those new to the experience.

We'll be running our review next week (our policy is to wait a week after a game hits to review it). I'm not writing it, but my discussions with the reviewer lead me to believe that our reviewer won't make Redner happy either. But he's not our audience for this review, so we're OK with that.

Here's the full apology email:

Hello,

I would like a quick moment of your time to humbly ask for your forgiveness. I made a major error in judgment. I acted out of pure emotion without any thought to what I was saying. It is with a sad heart that I come to you now asking that you forgive me. I posted a Tweet this evening saying that I was reviewing The Redner Group's policy for future reviews of video games based on today's Duke Nukem Forever scores. I must state for the record I was acting on my behalf. 2K and all other clients had nothing to do with my comment. I want to be very clear that this came through me and was in no way affiliated with any of my clients especially my former client 2K.

Though I didn't name names, I did say that I thought some reviews had gone too far in tone. Meaning, that the tone of some of the reviews was poor. I respect the scores, it had to deal with the tone. I was unable to properly convey that in 140 characters. But that it beside the point. We are all entitled to our opinions regardless of score, tone or meaning. My response was a juvenile act on my part. I know better and my emotion got the best of me. I have worked very hard on this project. I want it to succeed. I just got upset and acted out.

I believe we are all allowed to voice our opinions and that opinions by their very nature are correct. Many of you quickly pointed out my error in judgment. For that I thank you and apologize.

I truly respect what you do. You have helped me achieve a little bit of success in this industry. I depend upon you. Your coverage is of the utmost importance to me. You have helped me secure coverage for all of the projects that I have touched. I have tried to treat you all with respect, dignity and honesty. Tonight I threw that all away, and I am extremely sorry.

The video game industry is an industry that I love. I have tried to dedicate myself to this industry. Tonight I failed the industry.

With much respect, I hope that when we meet again you will be able greet me with a smile and without malice. I will gladly do the same.

I am truly sorry for what I did. I know better than that. If I have caused you any issues, now or in the past, I apologize.

Best of luck,

Jim Redner

I know that is a lot to read, it's a Kotaku article from today, that I was too afraid to post a hyperlink to due to it having a scene from Duke Nukem Forever in it with Duke standing in his strip club with a bare ass stripper in it, but I was going to ask anyone here who bothered reading this long ass post of mine.

Should reviewers be blacklisted for their opinions? Was it right of Jim Redner to threaten the reviewers?

I have spent all day reading forums on everything from Game Pro, to metacritic about the Duke Nukem Forever reviews being exceptionally harsh in nature.

When the vast majority of the opinions I see are postive in nature about DNF from the fans and all the reviews are down in the gutter should game publishers blacklist those who review their stuff? Or would it lead to further degradation of quality and unbiased (if an unbiased review even exists now) reviews for games?

I myself having played DNF to it's end today find quite a lot of the reviews to be horribly off base about DNF.

[TheOneTuttle]

sounds like someone's butthurt they made a bad game.

[TheMrDeadHead]

some game companies really react poorly to negative game reviews.
granted there's a lot of reviewers that will grandly tear apart a game, just to rack up site visits.
with with something like Duke Nukem, there was so much build-up and hype to this game, that anyone involved knew they had to get it just right.

[KnightStar]

I think that Redner got pissed off to the extent of threatening people because he sunk 12 years into Duke Nukem Forever and the reviews for it all stink.

It's not that DNF (IMHO) is a game that deserves F grades and 2 out of 5's it's that it simply didn't live up to the stupidly high hype that was placed around the game.

Hell I enjoyed it, but I advise anyone who's reading this thread and wants to buy it wait till it comes down to about 20 bucks, it's about 5-10 hours long at the very most.

That in itself knocks points in a review off to me.

I'll end by saying this, the game isn't nearly as broken as 99% of the reviewers say it is, but tuttle, yeah you're probably right thanks for reading all that.

[KnightStar]

---

TheMrDeadHead wrote:
some game companies really react poorly to negative game reviews.
granted there's a lot of reviewers that will grandly tear apart a game, just to rack up site visits.
with with something like Duke Nukem, there was so much build-up and hype to this game, that anyone involved knew they had to get it just right.

---

Excactly right, also think I'll get up fire the game up and get into the extra's where they explain the 12 year time line for DNF in detail to show everyone the development hell it went through.

[TheOneTuttle]

You're welcome?

[Figure09]

2K Games has dropped The Redner Group after this: https://twitter.com/#!/Charlie_Sin/status/81055815934541824

Good riddance. A bad game is a bad game. Threatening people to get that opinion revoked isn't going to change that.

Also: http://www.examiner.com/console-gaming-in-national/2k-games-fires
-pr-firm-after-it-threatens-press-o...

[KnightStar]

May, 1996

Version 1.3 of Duke Nukem 3D (Retail) is shipped to the game retailers world wide. Duke Nukem is a massive success that for many define an entire generataion of gaming, comceptualization and discussion of a sequel begins inside 3D Realms headquarters near, Dallas Texas

June, 1996

Duke Nukem Forever, a 2D side scrolling game produced by Kieth Schuler has development suspended in favor of prioritizing a Duke Nukem 3D add-on pack sequel.

June 1996

GT Interactive acquires the publishing rights for Duke Nukem Forever in a lisencing agreement with 3D Realms.

December 1996

The Quake 1 engine is lisenced by 3D Realms for Duke Nukem Forever, permanantly replacing the build engine. Most of the Duke Nukem 3D team lead by original Duke Nukem developers Todd Replogle and Allen H Blum III, begin research and development with the technology for the game.

April 1997

Duke Nukem  Forever is offically announced by 3D Realms with the intention to release in 1998. Likewise 3D realms also offically announces that Duke Nukem Forever will run on the Quake II engine.

May 1997

Randy Pitchford and Brian Martel, founders of Gearbox Software leave 3D realms to help form Rebel Boat Rocker and later Gearbox Software.

November 1997

Duke Nukem Forever appears on the cover of PC Gamer magazine, inside are the first screenshots ever revealed for the game.

May 1998

3D Realms announces a change to the Unreal engine for Duke Nukem Forever.

March 1999

3D Realms announces that Megadeth is to cover and record the theme song for Duke Nukem Forever.

November 1999

Pc Gamers infamous "Miss Me" cover story, featuring Duke Nukem Forever, hits newsstands, inside are a large number of new screenshots for Duke Nukem Forever, exposing how the game looks with the new engine.

December 1999

GT Interactive, then publised Duke Nukem games, is purcahsed by Infogrames, publishing rights for Duke Nukem Forever are transfered.

May 2000

Gathering of Developers, a publisher compromised entirely of development members (including 3D Realms) is purchased by Take-Two Interactive

December of 2000

Gathering of Developers announces the company has acquired the rights for the highly anticipated Duke Nukem Forever. Take-Two also acquires the publishing rights for the complete catalogue of already released Duke Numem including the rights to certian future products.

May 2001

At E3 2001, the highly regarded Duke Nukem Forever 10th Anniversery tralier is released. It's arguably considered to be one of the best video game trailers of all time.

(give me more time there is only 26 more parts to be typed for this so I divided it into sections)

[PenguinBoss]

Why are you even typing all this?

[KnightStar]

---

PenguinBoss wrote:
Why are you even typing all this?

---

I figured it might interest someone and maybe just explain why Redner was all bent out of shape about a 12 year project being shat all over by reviewers across the board, but well the guy deserves what he got for threatening reviewers.

Guess I was wrong nobody is interested other than me.

[KnightStar]

---

Figure09 wrote:

2K Games has dropped The Redner Group after this: https://twitter.com/#!/Charlie_Sin/status/81055815934541824

Good riddance. A bad game is a bad game. Threatening people to get that opinion revoked isn't going to change that.

Also: http://www.examiner.com/console-gaming-in-national/2k-games-fires
-pr-firm-after-it-threatens-press-o...

---

Well, got what he deserved.

I'm not trying to support such a bone headed move by him, just trying to strike up conversation about it is all.

[HakuSelphir]

lolololol

No one believed me when I said it'd be just another generic shooter.

My life is complete.

[GiantMegaDoucheX]

---

KnightStar wrote:

Should reviewers be blacklisted for their opinions? Was it right of Jim Redner to threaten the reviewers?

---

What kind of question is that? Of course they shouldn't...

They're going to be reviewed anyways. What these people are concerned about is giving early access to certain reviewers to fuel hype.

But they're not asking for reviews; They are asking for endorsement from professional reviewers to sell their product. It's complete BS.

[KnightStar]

Well my stance has been this for years.

I believe that a lot of the big game reviewers whom have been around a number of years that I have followed frequently and whom have (IMHO) been sliding in reliable reviews are payed by some of the big game publishers to give a favorable review of their stuff.

I would only say a black list of reviewers should be used if the above was ever found out to be true.

After all it's hard to be unbiased when someone is lining your pockets with money.

[KnightStar]

---

HakuSelphir wrote:
lolololol

No one believed me when I said it'd be just another generic shooter.

My life is complete.

---

Honestly, the game is a lazy piece of work that bastardizes everything Duke Nukem stood for.

It's a game that pretty much has a complex personality disorder, the Nukem franchise has always been one to poke fun at other series, but with the two guns only carry issue, the game makes fun of Halo, but directly takes that from Halo, and the regenerating health or Ego as they call it is taken from Halo and other current gen shooters.

The game could have stood some drastic improvement and to be worked on by a better team.

I'm hoping now that DNF is out, maybe it will make enough money, get enough criticism that when the admitied within the game (twice) sequel hits that they take DN, back to the roots.

Health kits, health bars, a full arsenal of guns, so on and so forth.

Still as bad as it is, I found enjoyment in it and it looks to have sold quite well. *shrugs*

[HakuSelphir]

So, basically they modernized DNF, as I predicted, made just like all of the other shooters of today, and people are pi­ssed about it. Because they didn't go old school, back when shooters were actually terrible.

DAM­N I'M GOOD AT PREDICTION!

[SilverSin]

---

KnightStar wrote:

Honestly, the game is a lazy piece of work that bastardizes everything Duke Nukem stood for.

---

Um, no. It's one thing if you don't think the game was well done, but to call it lazy considering that it's had more development work done on it than any other game in history is some bull. Bastardizes what Duke stood for? The p!ss, pills, pvssy, and pigcops are all there. Duke never stood for health kits; it's just something you miss. Now the games that came between Duke 3D and DNF, those were bastardizations.

[SilverSin]

---

HakuSelphir wrote:
back when shooters were actually terrible.

---

[KnightStar]

Here's what I'm saying, in modernizing Duke Nukem they bastardized the game.

Duke Nukem as a franchise to me always stood for a shooter that went against what other shooters of the day were, DNF has been modernized and bastardized while all the time being two faced about other shooters and making fun of them.

I just don't think it's kosher to make fun of something you yourself just ripped off, like regenerating health and the ability to only carry two weapons.

Oh and here is my prime example of laziness, you know the Cycloid emperor you kill in the Duke Dome in Duke Nukem 3D, the same Cycloid Emperor that you fight at the beginning of Duke Nukem 3D, but you find out that Duke is just playing one of his old games?

I might want to spoiler font this....

Spoiler

The final boss of Duke Nukem Forever is the exact same Cycloid Emperor even in apperance as the one you fought at the beginning of the game! Now that's lazy right there.

I got my fun out of the game though, but still shesh, come on it could have been done better.

[lithium_green]

So the game designers want people who are looking for a good game to play to shelve out $50-$60 each and not read or listen to public opinion?  That's even worse than movies not giving critics early screenings, simply because the price is just too high.  Jim Redner's proposal is completely preposterous.

[GiantMegaDoucheX]

---

lithium_green wrote:

So the game designers want people who are looking for a good game to play to shelve out $50-$60 each and not read or listen to public opinion?  That's even worse than movies not giving critics early screenings, simply because the price is just too high.  Jim Redner's proposal is completely preposterous.

---

I don't agree with all of things game journalists say in their reviews. Some sites can be downright retarded when it comes to their process of analysis when playing a game...and those sites tend to give bigger titles better scores. Sites like IGN are notorious for not using their entire rating's scale.

Problem is Redner's proposal is to not give games to the reviewers that aren't afraid to give something a poor score if it's bad. They're only interested in getting good reviews to fuel sales.

I bet this whole thing stems from the review by Totalbiscuit. Seen here.

This was a first impressions analysis done by him days before the release of the game. He got this early access because developers know a good review by him can mean additional sellers (especially in the PC gaming market).

But, TB isn't afraid to point out problems and that is the problem...so now they are reconsidering giving early access to people like this who won't necessarily conform to hyping their own product.

Problem is, this isn't going to stop these people from reviewing the product when it's released...and people DO sometimes wait to see reviews before buying a game.

So in essence, all this will do is make skeptical buyers wait longer...gamers are not stupid. Just because a reviewer isn't getting early acess doesn't mean nobody is paying attention.

In fact, there have been a few developers that refused to give totalbiscuit copies of their game for review. Dino D-day for instance. Most of the time this is because developers know the reviewer is going to pan it...but it doesn't stop them from reviewing it inevitably.

This entire problem could be solved on both sides by not releasing bad games...

[TheMrDeadHead]

while i do agree they were pretty lazy, i do have to say i feel like a lot of people have entirely the wrong thoughts on duke nukem...

the franchise started as a just slightly more ridiculous sidescrolling shooter. it was fun, it wasn't lampooning anything. Duke 3D wasn't mocking other shooters, it was basically just another shooter, but you could look around, it was a big step forward, but not mocking anything. you still had health, floating motion, keycards, and all that crap. it wasn't mocking it's competition, it was just doing the exact same thing every other game did at the time, just like DNF is doing. it never was and never will be a particularly creative and innovative franchise. it is in the mortal kombat league of games.

it never really made fun of other shooters, except for itself, and if it did it was in a passing joke. duke nukem was funny, silly, and in general pretty fun. everyone played it because all the kids heard it had boobs and swear words in it and some of the more crafty ones had figured out how to copy CDs and so everyone has a nostalgic hard on for it. all the sequels/expansions/console ports after that were just beating the same horse to death which people got tired of.

it was never a critique of the industry, or an insightful whatever, it was a fun game full of dirty jokes, and crude humor, violence, a particularly pompous lead character, and nothing more. hell it barely had a story beyond "aliens are bad, duke kill 'em. baby"

in all honesty this game pretty much lives up perfectly to it's ancestors, the only difference is that the 12 years of hype twisted people's thoughts into expecting something better.