Still playing “spot the corruption”? There’s still time, as the general embargo hasn’t lifted yet. Ding!
Ding!
Ding ding ding!
Scans of the entire thing here.
By the way, if cunts keep posting numerous anonymous comments as if they’re from several different people, we’re going to start publishing IP addresses. Especially the ones associated with Eidos.
Why does it say world exclusive review when GM already published theirs?
ReplyDeleteOh dear, it is fairly amusing when PR types attempt to post anonymously on a blog to defend their shady deals, but is so fucking indoctrinated in the world of PR bullshit that all their comments sound like an Eidos press release...
ReplyDeletePublish the IPs rammy, shame the cunts... (Says the anonymous poster...)
Er.. Rammy - isn't it after August 1st? OPM isn't out until Thursday anyhow. My 'next month' page has it down for on-sale August 6th. What's your point here?
ReplyDeleteCan't you just accept that Batman is actually a fantastic game and worthy of a 9?
Nobody cares because you already sank your argument when you first started whining about this non-story:
ReplyDelete"You see, Arkham Asylum is a decentish release that’s not quite up to par when it comes to variety and depth. This means even the most charitable outlets should settle at no more than the 80s in their verdicts, but don’t be surprised if you see a few 7s from the pseuds."
This statement is inadvertently the nearest to actual whistle-blowing you've ever come: pointing out that many magazines/sites at the shit end of the spectrum (manned by interchangeable no-name jobsworths like yourself) prejudge most games far in advance of hacking out a review.
Time and again genuinely great games get clustered 75-89% reviews because nobody has stuck their neck out and decided the game in question is "supposed" to be a big deal (or, conversely, that's it's drastically shit). This doesn't serve the reader any better than lazily dishing out inflated scores for 'event' games.
If you'd simply asked that reviewers judge the game on its merits instead of concocting an ego-stroking fantasy where nobody is allowed to disagree with you and remain 'clean', you might have avoided looking like quite such a colossal bell-end.
Yeah, RAM sounded like quite an ass when he said "here's the quality of Arkham Asylum, now nobody should go over this score because of my thoughts on this game."
ReplyDeleteI guess he has to do something to get exposure for his blog.
The game could theoretically be worthy of a 9, just like I could theoretically be a Nigerian prince who wants to share my fortune with you if you open a bank account for me to transfer funds to. Of course, if the game is really worthy of it, I'm sure there wouldn't be a review embargo with stipulations in the first place.
ReplyDeleteSo...corruption, how?
ReplyDeleteOn Eidos...or the Gaming mags? Who's the "villian" here?
Because from a business standpoint, I don't see Eidos in the wrong here.
Only you think he looks like a bell-end. You cunt. Hahaha! Bam! Me: 1 Society (you): 0 and also, you can't do any comebacks.
ReplyDelete3rd and 7th comment = Eidos.
ReplyDelete"Official" mags are worthless.
What do you mean, who's the villain? Are you a fucking imbecile? It's the magazines who bend their editorial to whore for advertising. Eidos know that a Batman cover can attract more shop floor glances, and are doing their job.
ReplyDeleteThe shill publications, aren't, by folding to their demands.
----
Anonymous quote above - "Time and again genuinely great games get clustered 75-89% reviews because nobody has stuck their neck out and decided the game in question is "supposed" to be a big deal"
Fuck you, fuck you in the ear. No one believes this, not even Eidos, or Future. There are very very few genuinely great games, that's kind of by definition right? You just have fucking low standards, like the shits who hoovered up Michael Bay's genuinely great Transformers 2.
Yet every fucking game released gets an 7/10 by default for merely being competent. Well done developers, you didn't shit your pants - here's 75%.
"Of course, if the game is really worthy of it, I'm sure there wouldn't be a review embargo with stipulations in the first place."
ReplyDeleteEmbargoes are common practice.
Out of interest, WHY are embargoes common practice?
ReplyDeleteThe only way I can see it is if the game is a shitter, then the company producing it wouldn't want anyone to know how bad it was until people have had a weekend or two to buy it, based on hype.
Surely if a game is good, then the developers would want the justified high reviews to be out as early as possible, in the hopes of higher sales.
So, why are there embargoes? Can anyone explain?
Maybe one of you nice Eidos chaps can enlighten me!
Well embargoes can stop people using preview code as review code so as to get a review out early. Also, there's a buzz around when games get reviewed that, ideally as a maker of games, you want when the game is actually out, not a month before or a month after when the game is available cheaper/second hand. And the ear rapist should understand that games have got low scores when arguably they deserved more. Get a score too high and you'll never hear the end of it (especially with pricks like RR still wanking them selves off over the 'net), too low and people can say you just don't understand the game which is why there are so many games out there with mid-seventies. A safe '77' is a freelancer's friend.
ReplyDeleteSpeaking from a different industry embargoes are general used when;
ReplyDeleteA.)The product is crap (though this is rare as it is too crude and most of the people making the decisions will have lost perspective by the time the thing launches in any case. You start to genuinely believe your own bullshit.)
B.) When the project director is so myopically focused on micro managing a successful launch that absolutely everything must be just so. Even positive coverage that happens before its allotted time is seen as wasted the consumer is regarded as having the memory of a goldfish.
I wonder if the guy at 86.150.130.106:host86-150-130-106.range86-150.btcentralplus.com, who keeps posting loads of anonymous Eidos-supporting comments (three that I’ve counted today alone, fact fans), thinks he’s fooling anyone.
ReplyDeleteBusted! Keep checking these logs, Mr Raider. Very amusing.
ReplyDeleteI wonder if any of the people who have posted and have played the new Batman game can understand any of Ram Raider's black helicopter paranoia? Going up against Eidos are you now, big guy? When they've actually got a pretty damned decent game? Now you're naming and shaming because you are such a rebel, eh? Internet give you power! I bet you masturbate to the Rocky theme, you absolute crevice.
ReplyDeleteAnother Eidos-glorifying multiple poster within the same IP range (host86-160-226-240.range86-160.btcentralplus.com) and physical location as the guy above? Naught but coincidence, surely?
ReplyDeleteHa! Brilliant. Well, no, I certainly don't work for Eidos yet I am looking forward to playing Arkham Asylum having played a great deal of it. If the posts aren't with you they're against you, you absolute hero. You definitely masturbate to the Rock theme.
ReplyDeleteThe word "shill" is useful shorthand for "I'm twelve and angry, please ignore me".
ReplyDeleteRAM Raider, just fyi, I don't work for Eidos. Not that you're going to identify specific comments you believe are from Eidos, when you can mendaciously pretend to your simpleton 'fans' that everyone laughing at you has a vested interest.
Hey Sherlock, not all Anonymous posters work for Eidos. You really are paranoid sometimes. Some of us just don't want anyone - you especially - knowing who we are!
ReplyDeleteIf you had taken a minute to look up the IP address you'd see it's located in Swindon. http://www.ip-adress.com/ip_tracer/86.160.226.240
Have you ever considered that there are many people that don't agree with you? Have you considered that Batman may actually be a top notch game? Heaven forbid you are wrong!
Anonymity is a great thing, isn't it? It allows (alleged) eidos staff to defend themselves from an unjustified assault by Ramraider and also allows said raider to repeatedly bite the hand that feeds without fear recrimination.
ReplyDeleteJust saying.
Maybe we should be privvy to the IP range and geopgraphic location of your posts, RR? Only seems fair.
Gareth/Chris/Jon B - if any of you read this - stop fuelling the fire on this. You're only driving traffic to his ego, erm, I mean blog
I like the fact people are using masturbation as a slur. I bet Rammy wanks - I bet he wanks *reeeeaaaaal* good.
ReplyDeleteIf you don’t like your IP addresses being posted (despite the warning), then use a fucking pseudonym. Then everyone can see that you’re a couple of blokes with axes to grind rather than fifteen rabid Eidos fans (who, frankly, don’t exist).
ReplyDeleteAnd better still, how about putting forward a valid argument about the points raised by these posts? Not once have I said that Batman is shit. Not once. You keep saying I have, so quote me. I’ve already said I’d give it an 8 which everyone, everywhere apart from in PR land, considers a decent score.
So how about packing in your miserable effort at laying down a smokescreen to mask the fact that everyone knows that there was a deal to get around the embargo, and that Eidos flat out lied about its existence? Talk about that, you crimson-slurried cunts.
What points? That an embargo condition that the game doesn't need, which would be impossible to enforce, and that you've almost certainly made up can be described as "corruption"?
ReplyDeleteThat two children's magazines who routinely hand out high scores for high profile games have treated this game no differently to anything else they've reviewed in the last decade?
And please, go on describing any comment critical of your desperate pleas for attention as "pro-Eidos", it doesn't make you look mental at all.
Have you ever wondered why only the shittest of the shit tabloid games blogs (i.e. Destructoid and VG247) reprint your nonsense?
Nobody is talking the angle of your original post seriously because it's not a point. The game would get 9s anyway, in certain publications, because not all publications follow the Ram Raider reductive guide to reviewing. It's a game that's going to get high marks, but you've said it only deserves an 8 and then implied that anyone giving it a 9 is sucking Eidos' cock. Can't you see that's problematic? What is more confusing is why you fucked off, said you'd done all you set out to do, and then returned with some ancient gripes about magazines when you've already filled your boots with such gafuffle countless times before.
ReplyDeleteYou just so need a new Drivergate that you'll invent one A deal to get around an embargo you say? Say it's not so! Quotes on adverts making it to the printers in time? FUCK ME. If it was a shit game you'd have something to bitch about. It isn't, so you don't. If Eidos only want to give out early review code to people who really like their game so fucking what? Can you honestly say that OPM and GM would not rate it highly if it weren't for the cover art? No you can't, though your often insufferable ego probably tells you otherwise. It seems that in your absence you've had a bit of a breakdown and have had to return to this blog. Look at me! Look at me! It's getting pretty old, and your rant about Eidos posting (why not, you're slagging them off with impunity)is just pathetic.
That cover deal must have seemed like mana from heaven for someone so desperate to be a deepthroat personality, but judging from the responses most people are more excited that there is a pretty damned good Batman game on the way to give a single flying rape about how magazines are covering it. You just picked a bad target. That's all... and everyone who disagrees is a cunt. Well done you.
Why was there a German review that had an 8.8 as a score, RAM? Surely your claim was that Eidos established a 9/10 as a minimum for their little scoring deal?
ReplyDeleteOnce more, you present your views as "fact". You have a tendency to make exaggerated claims, and you use words such as "this is a fact", "frankly, those don't exist", etc. Get a life, RAM.
Still the same jizz stains, Rammy? Can;t you just ban them??
ReplyDelete@lemonlips Yeah, same vocal minority.
ReplyDeleteBan them, eh? I suppose that would fit RAM's style, since his moronic readers tend to address anti-RAM users as "Eidos representatives". Keep your tendency to make unsupported claims in check, RAM (and continue to present them as "factual information", as well). You don't want to sound like an ass.
ReplyDeleteTake away the vocal minority and you get zip comments, though, eh? It's the minority that have actually played the game, you moron. Oddly, I don't live in Swindon either.
ReplyDeleteI imagine the German media is managed by a different PR company. Y'know, one in Germany with German employees who speak fluent German.
ReplyDeleteIf you're going to continually post multiple anonymous shitty Eidos-shill-PR comments, why not get your own blog?
ReplyDeleteAnd then for the same cunts to suggest that embargoes are unenforcable? Fuck off, we all know how Metacritics tumble post release - when those gagged get to have their say. It's too late though, those shills who actually buy into the exclusive reviews have already bought the thing, and those myfirstreview sites just copy+paste from the early opinions. 9's all around!
Eidos know that a Batman cover can sell titles. They know magazines rely on their advertising. They can impose and enforce embargoes. And to be honest, I don't really care about those, or this motherfucking Batman bullshit.
It's the shitty publications that fold to this asshattery that are pathetic.
Please do. Then you can just surround yourself with people who agree with you and the picture will be complete. The non vocal majority are in your head, by the way. And you have had your points addressed. You failed, lemon cock.
ReplyDeleteIt shouldn't really come as a surprise that not many people are willing to take the time to respond to your trolling after several years of increasingly desperate stunts.
ReplyDeleteI'm sure using your anonymity to launch ad hominem attacks against talented writers and editors, or accusing Codemasters of profiteering from Colin McRae's death, or constantly whining about "pretension" while demonstrating that all you can bring to the table are clumsy sub-Charlie Brooker scatological metaphors, have all won you many well-adjusted adult fans.
Stay classy, 'RAM Raider'.
If Rammy was just looking for attention he'd, you know, reveal his actual identity.
ReplyDeleteCorruption is the cancer killing videogames, RAM Raider is the chemo curing it.
Well if a game that arguably deserves a 9 getting a 9 is corruption then the videogames industry is hardly a banana republic, is it? And if Ram Raider was not looking for attention he'd just write to MCV with multiple made-up names and be able to stir the pot without being a singular entity. Ram Raider IS his identity, and he fucking loves it. I've seen other sites where people are saying they won't be buying Batman because of this blog, hence my interest. Call that a victory if you like, but don't suggest that it's doing the industry any good.
ReplyDeleteSwindon out.
Oh FFS, you're all cunts. Even Rammy. I don't think he pulled this embargo thing out of his ass (why haven't some major publications/websites published reviews yet? for a start). Mr RR is providing something of a public service by bringing the /potential/ for your game to be receiving inflated scores to our attention -yet if places like EG, RR's best buddies right now, give it a 9 then he's proven to be full of shit and his credibility takes a hit.
ReplyDeleteIF you're so worried by this, stop posting shit in his comments and let him be hoisted by his own petard. Unless, you know, he's on to something.
What's up with all this hate on RAM Raider?
ReplyDeleteI think he's a good guy.
At least some one in the entire gaming media is even just talking about the issue of possible corruption and bias in the review process.
From what I've seen the game looks pretty good, but not a 9. Looks too simple, easy and dumbed down for my tastes, but I'm going to try out the demo, and it is conceivable that the game could get 9+ scores... 96 /100 for the first review though? RAM Raider makes a more convincing case that that was BS and called it like it probably was.
Hey i have an idea, let's make up a story about a game maker bribing people to give it good scores, even though the damn game was going to get good scores in the first fucking place!
ReplyDeletePost my fucking IP address, I couldn't care less!
I've played AA, it's easily a 9, but I've never been to this shithole site before you started up this nonsense. What's the more likely story, Eidos trying to bribe for scores it was going to get in the first place, or shithole blog cooks up Eidos hate for site hits?
Tough one!
I don't know why people think RAMMY is interested in hits. Do you see any advertising anywhere?
ReplyDeleteYeah, this game truely deserves a 96, if not more... Thats right, i was paid to say that, because everyone who says a great game is great must be payed to say it.
ReplyDeleteAll these posts that are saying this RAM guy is cool are probably just him himself doing exactly what he said edios was doing; posting lots as anon to make it look like he has followers. Cunt muscle.
Haha, "cunt muscle". There's no such word as "payed".
ReplyDeleteThere is too such a word as 'payed', it's just not the right word for that sentence.
ReplyDeleteWith the BM:AA demo now released (way before the game is actually out) I wonder how many people who have enjoyed it know that they are in the pockets of Eidos' coruption machine? Ding, ding!
The only place I can imagine "payed" is a word is the US, and they can't speak English, so fuck yourself.
ReplyDeleteThe lifeguard payed the rope out to the drowning Ram raider poster, but they were too much of a reactionary cumbucket to realise what had happened. Why fuck myself when you're here?
ReplyDeleteI have never incorrectly spelled a word as simple as "paid" before, probably because I don't have a room temperature IQ.
ReplyDeletePlease don't fuck ANYTHING.
Arkham Asylum got a 9.5 in Game Informer, oh, and it wasn't on the cover The latest Rock Band was. I guess that shows you that is just that good of a game.
ReplyDeleteYou're retarded Ram Raider. It was obvious before, but it'll be even more obvious on August 24th. Oh wait, I work for Eidos, don't I? I must!
ReplyDeleteFuck you.
"I have never incorrectly spelled a word as simple as "paid" before, probably because I don't have a room temperature IQ.
ReplyDeletePlease don't fuck ANYTHING."
Good for you. Payed, however, is a word.
http://multiplayerblog.mtv.com/2009/08/14/batman-arkham-asylum-straight-jacket-stuff-that-came/
ReplyDeleteThe last thing it says is that the embargo is the 21st. To those who say Eidos didn't put an embargo, or restriction on above 9/10 I pose the following.
Why have there been reviews out that meet the criteria, yet there is an embargo on the game? Seems we know a non-9/10 review now.
Shit storm happened...
ReplyDeleteWho gives a shit anyway? What the fuck has Eidos actually released?
The game looks pretty good but shit like this shouldn't happen. I'm sure a "major publisher" like Eidos has better things to do than get into a flame war on an internet blog.
God you're really working your 15 minutes of webfame aren't you. It's fucking pathetic.
ReplyDeleteBwahahaha
ReplyDeleteGod you're really working your 15 minutes of webfame aren't you. It's fucking pathetic.-fullmetaljacket
This guy is awesomely right. Does anyone know if the GI cover this month had Batman on the cover? And I remember you saying somewhere that u cant wait until the "official mags" come out...uh one has. And it gave it a great review. Good idea though, next time a game starts getting good review early I'm blogging about how the publisher put up an embargo, and then I shall be thought of as the cunt of the year.
reading about 10 different reviews out now that give the game an average of 95%
ReplyDeleteWhats up with that Rammy? Are all those publications on the Eidos take? Or maybe you're so wrong on this one its fucking hilarious...
Hmmmmm. It seems that the Metacritic score for Arkham Asylum, based on 24 reviews, is 91%. Eidos will go bankrupt with the amount of bungs they'll have had to pay for that lot.
ReplyDeleteOr, you know, the game could actually be good and Rammy could look like a complete cunt for having had the fucking gall to effectively say "if their opinion doesn't match mine then they're corrupt".
This game is just really good, all around. Everyone is chiming in now, and the universal word is "Damn good game". Gamers are playing it and saying the same thing, and ramraider, and all his pretentious friends with Eurogamer, Edge, and the other publications full of "hardcore" posers are being exposed for the massive tools they always have been.
ReplyDeleteI stumbled upon this blog about a fortnight ago and bookmarked it, simply because I was interested to see if this Ram guy turned out to be as much of an utter plonker as he appeared to be. Turns out he is.
ReplyDeleteHis bitter rantings will scream out to be heard as long as his scurvy minions continue to worships at his phallic shaped alter, but their sad little number will not grow and only the dankest little crevices on the interweb will get to hear his future diatribes anyway.
As for the game itself, well let the scores speak for themselves. Nothing gives the vertical middle finger more effectively than the cold hard facts.
And if RamMan has never known an Eidos representative who also moonlights as the proprietor of a dryleaning business by day, then this is a first for him, because that would be me.
Does that make me an drycleaning cunt? Probably.
I miss the days of Zero magazine, because at least the shit they wrote was funny, unlike the crud writings of this RayMan dude.
I might just hang around this place long enough to see how he attempts to argue his way out of the cavenous hole he's dug for himself with this, oh hang on - he already started his backpeddle earlier when he said he'd score the game an 8! - I bet he was fucking gutted when it turned out that the game was actually really good (Eidos corruption intact or not) because that one simple fact made an utter mockery out of him and his daft blog.
Oh well, maybe he can get a job reviewing games for his local free paper, at least that would boost his readership.
Thought you and any of your readers who think you still have even an ounce of credibility left, that Batman: AA just received a Guiness world record for "The Most Critically Acclaimed Super Hero Game ever", with an average score of 91.67 from reviews around the world. This surpasses the previous record set by Marvel vs Capcom 2 on the Dreamcast.
ReplyDeleteSo just saying...besides being completely wrong on this one, you're very quick to throw the C word out at everyone who disagrees with you. Truth is Ramjob or whatever the fuck you call yourself, the only cunt I see here is you.
I think the point was that only the magazines that gave the game over 9/10 could post an early review.
ReplyDeleteWhich is a carrot on a stick to some no-doubt-cuntish magazine editors to give the game a potentially unjust high score in exchange for extra sales due to the "exclusive" review and a Batman-themed cover. Whether the game was good or not wasn't the point - do you see?
Some of you posters do seem to be getting worked up into quite a frothy lather. Quite frothy indeed.
And, to the utter shitcunt posting above me, the whole "oh I've called him RayMan or RamMan or whatever" - my dad makes "jokes" like that, and he's in his sixties. You twat.
This blog is entertaining, and informative, unlike a lot of computer gaming journalism, which is mainly a whole lot of ass-licking in return for advertising money. This is the fucking Yin to the Yang.
I knew this guy was just stirring the shit pot. Gaming Journalism Corruption is a reality, but irresponsible blogging is to.
ReplyDeleteIf RAM devulges explicit information (i.e. not these 'anonymous' informants) of corruption, I'd like to see it. Otherwise, I think he needs to step back and admit that this crusade is/was a bit premature.
Dan de la twat.
ReplyDeleteUniversally acclaimed as the greatest comic book/liscenced game, and top contender for game of the year. Average score of 91% from 37 reviewers. No corruption, just Ram Raider stupidity. You owe Eidos and Rocksteady development a public apology.
ReplyDeletedan de la peche said...
ReplyDelete"I think the point was that only the magazines that gave the game over 9/10 could post an early review"
Sorry if I don't suddenly spit out my coffee at your easy as ABC revelation, but I mean seriously - you sound like you have only just clicked on to the "how to get on in business" Chapter 1.
The simple fact is this: RainMan's rant would only flourish if the game sucked. It didn't. The byproduct of said fact is that he made himself and his apologists look like the biggest cunts of 'em all.
I couldn't give a flying fuck how the critics go about their business as long as they don't say an astoundingly shite game is a brilliant one. Turns out they rarely do.
Gamesmaster sold a few extra copies than normal and this blog erupts fire and brimstone. So fucking what? Remind me to continue taking GamesMaster's reviews with a pinch of salt next time this happens and the earth will continue to rotate as it always does.
"This blog is entertaining, and informative, unlike a lot of computer gaming journalism, which is mainly a whole lot of ass-licking in return for advertising money."
ReplyDeleteWhich is why the new (year old) post about game pricing is such a right riveting read that it has only got three comments.
"This is the fucking Yin to the Yang."
Indeed.
I don't get what the problem is here. It appears the game is a great one. Fantastic, I'll buy it.
ReplyDeleteHowever, this doesn't change the fact that a couple of mags were allowed to break the embargo, just because they were prepared to give it a score that Eidos permitted. This is not a good thing, and the quality of the game is beside the point.
This is corruption, plain and simple, and this is what Ram Raider was complaining about. What GamesMaster should have done was wait, and published their review in the next issue. Yes, they would have lost their "exclusive" but that is what happens with deadlines. It wasn't their "exclusive" in the first place.
Wow, people seem to really hate this guy.
ReplyDeleteNow I can see this sort of practice is rife (and that gaming companies are going to CONTINUALLY get away with it), I will NEVER trust a game review again. Or, for that matter, buy another gaming magazine.
If Ram's example had been a game that was not very likley to get 90+ scores then there would be some point to his post. As it is, Batman was going to get high scores and there are now a lot of 90+ reviews out there, very few 80's. Any of the many 90+ reviewing magazines could have had a cover and early review. If anything, the embargo was daft because such a good game didn't need one and so any 'story' should be one of PR paranoia rather than magazine corruption.
ReplyDeleteThis site also eludes to the fact that magazines hiked up their scores to meet Eido's demand. Clearly they didn't need to and consequently Raider has gone on to suggest that all the reviews that gave the game high accolades just did so because of the summer lull of titles, via Twitter. The correct score for the game should be no more than an 8/10, apparently. So there's us all told.
The arrogance of this blog shudders the teeth.
But what about the exclusive features?!!
ReplyDeletedan de la douchebag
ReplyDeleteI'm Batman!
ReplyDeleteHey, is this a blog read by 3 year olds? Well done, you learnt the word cunt and wank. Do you need to say it every 2 words?
ReplyDeleteOT, this sort of thing is wrong, and shouldn't be done. The annoying thing is, some of these big releases are (suprisingly) good. So, they would get the high scores. These embargoes seem stupid...
i like eidos :)
ReplyDelete