Eidos Seek 90% Score & Cover For Arkham Asylum In Exchange For Early Review

UPDATE: We Have A Winner

Unlike our no-longer-regularly-updated blog, corruption in the games industry has so far failed to go into hibernation. In the week that Eidos has breathed its last, they’ve decided to go out with a bang by brazenly attempting to artificially hype up their forthcoming Arkham Asylum release.

Several mags have their review code already, but have to sit on their reviews until a hateful embargo expires at the end of the month. But Eidos, ever the helpful fellows that they are, have been offering a way around this embargo. If you dedicate the cover of your mag to Arkham Asylum and guarantee a score of at least 90%, Eidos will allow you to run the review early.

We know that one editor has already valiantly told Eidos to fuck off, but we can’t tell you which to protect our Anonymous Dark Knight. We also asked the usually chatty UK Officially Corrupt Xbox 360 Magazine editor Jon Hicks about it, who tellingly clammed up tighter than a nun’s cunt at the mere mention.

But what of the others? Well, there’s an exciting way to find out in the form of a game that you can play at home over the next month called “Spot The Corrupt Arkham Asylum Review”. 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 means that if you see a mag turn up within the next few weeks (ding!) that features Arkham Asylum on its cover (ding!) and gives it at least 90% (ding ding ding!), you have a winner.

Exciting…

UPDATE: We Have A Winner

Ridiculous Statements Masquerading As Games Journalism: Fallout 3

Strap your arms to your sides before you read this, or you may gouge your eyes from your skull before the paragraph’s out:

“It’s hard to pin down the problem, but there is a reason why, however intelligent we may be, we mostly read Henning Mankell ahead of Tolstoy and watch Woody Allen instead of Bergman. There comes a point in the evolution of any art form – and releases like this make any quibbling over games’ claims to such status laughable – when the supposed masters of it leave the mass audience behind. It’s probably inevitable, by no means a bad thing and mostly explainable in terms of mostly finite consumer qualities. In other words, the amount of effort, time or brains that you can bring to the table will play a large part in determining how deeply you can appreciate an artwork’s quality. If you’re not convinced by the thesis, have a look at Ulysses.”

The Daily Mail’s James O’Brien’s Fallout 3 review… sorry, thesis.

The Inexplicable Madness

Seven games journos from the Unreliable EuroGamer talk sense about Little Big Planet:

Dan Whitehead: I’m honestly quite surprised to find LBP at the top of the heap. Few games made me grind my teeth more in 2008. It looks lovely and is bursting with charm and clever ideas, and has Stephen Fry’s rich mahogany narration, but...it’s just not very good at being a platform game. Is that just me? The floaty ambience, unpredictable environments and crude checkpoint system all made it a bit of a chore to get through, as far as I’m concerned. Platforming requires precision, and that’s something that LittleBigPlanet just doesn’t have. It’s as woolly as its star.

Simon Parkin: That the responsibility for the game’s greatness rests on us and not on the developer is unusual, and for that reason the endless plaudits make me uneasy.

Tom Bramwell: I almost feel guilty that it wasn’t on my list at all, but it leaves me completely cold: the platforming is overburdened with self-conscious presentation its imprecise controls and frustrating checkpoints fail to justify, and the editor was too slow and complicated for my pathetic brain to bother with.

Kristan Reed: Pretty much everyone I’ve spoken to seems to agree that LBP makes for a fairly boring single-player experience, but becomes absolutely mesmerising in co-op with the right player. The online lag is ruinous most of the time, and the added inertia on the jump mechanic makes it needlessly fiddly when the going gets tough.

Kieron Gillen: I can’t help but wonder - if a game’s based around user-generated content, and the fact you’re on a console means that you can’t actually let gamers generate their content without half of it being deleted because it infringes some copyright or another... isn’t that just a fundamentally flawed concept?

John Walker: All I’ve read about this is that the platforming is rubbish, and you have to make your own if you want to play a decent level.

Rob Fahey: I’m surprised that this is number one… It’s not my personal favourite game of 2008.


Perfection. Except, they’re all talking about why Little Big Planet is the Unreliable EuroGamer’s number 1 game of the year.

Excuse us while our heads explode.

RR Most Ridiculous Statement Masquerading As Games Journalism 2008: IGN Australia

Our personal favourite award threw up some gems, but fuck knows, there’s plenty out there to choose from. The winner has dropped straight from the encrusted slit of a game that’s proven to be an efficient shit magnet in its effectiveness at drawing together the assorted things cunts say – none other than the RR Most Overrated Pile Of Shite 2008 winner, Little Shit Planet. Here’s IGN Australia’s take on it:

‘On the surface, LittleBigPlanet is all about jumping and stickers and rainbows and ponies and having a good time with friends. But if you delve deeper and look past the infectiously approachable presentation, there’s something far more curious at play. LittleBigPlanet is actually all about the fundamentals of cause and effect relationships, man in his environment and how we relate to the world around us.’

“No, it isn’t. It’s a game about sackboys.”

Dan de la peche, via Facebook


The notable nominations list sees another nod to IGN, this time featuring shit-speak about GTA4:

“IGN’s GTAIV review includes such eyebrow-raising lines as:”

‘Helicopters are also very tough to control in this fashion – it’s as if Rockstar thought they were making a game about dragons.’

“What?”

‘Go to location, kill people to get to target, chase target, kill target -- it never feels repetitive.’

“Not at all! Even if it is simply the same formula repeated from its predecessors.”

Melaisis, via website


And finally, it’s only right and proper that our favourite award should include a mention of our favourite magazine:

‘Gaming magazine and website, Edge, announced at this year’s Edinburgh Interactive Festival that it has awarded its fourth Award for Innovation to Bungie’s popular Halo 3.

‘Halo 3, just as Halo 2 did before it, presents a roadmap for the way online will be integrated into videogames in the coming year,’ said Alex Wiltshire, Deputy Editor of Edge.’

“What a pile of fucking horseshit.”

Anonymous Knight, via email

Yahtzee Makes A Cock Of Himself

If you hate Ben “Yahtzee” Croshaw, yet always lose arguments about him being a cunt because Zero Punctuation is still just about good enough, this is the vid you’ve been waiting for. Game Damage, a pilot (we’ll take his word for that), basically consists of Croshaw and a couple of Australians sat on a sofa droning on about games with the verve and panache of a tramp bringing himself off in a shop doorway by poking his twice-smoked cigarette dog end against a discarded one-armed Barbie where its contour-free gash would be. For half an hour.

Here’s what one of our Anonymous Knights had to say:

“What it’s like when the punctuation is added back in. Isn’t it funny how self-awareness zips away as soon as someone gets some fans? I hate that guy.”

If you want to watch a couple of silly arseholes laughing at Yahtzee not being funny and a red on white blood splat that’s exactly the same as the designs from the press and marketing materials for Dexter, click through to the website and hit play. And then hit stop again after a couple of minutes as you realise that, yes, there really is half an hour of this shit.

Why Mainstream Press Shouldn’t Cover Games: A Ridiculous Statements Special

If you follow the blog, you might have seen some Anonymous Knights commenting on a BBC “news” story allegedly about games. The piece was apparently written by Daniel Emery (us!) and Andrew Webb, although why they felt the need to share out the literal four sentences that introduce two paragraphs of straight-up quotes is a mystery.

The quotes are from Future’s John Houlihan (we know him – he’s better than this shit) and Shiny Media’s Zara Ravinowicz (note to self: never read anything from Shiny Media, or by Zara Ravinowicz).

If you can’t be arsed to click through, an Anonymous Knight pulled out the best quote:

“You need to get a game that lasts more than an hour. With the credit crunch, people are going out less, so you need to get a decent bang for your buck. Platform or fighting games are good; just make sure it’s properly interactive.”

It’s not even worth beginning to dissect all the cuntiness crammed into that paragraph because it should all be obvious to anyone with more than two brain cells to rub together what’s wrong with it. I’m choking on my own fucking rage here just reading it back again.

Here’s the vid that goes with it, so you too can choke on your own fucking rage from the comfort of your home/office:



In other news, let’s all laugh at the man’s funny name:

“Dec. 16 (Bloomberg) -- PartyGaming Plc’s founder and former director, Anurag Dikshit, pleaded guilty to illegal Internet gambling.”

Ridiculous Statements: A Sequel

Why should only games (and films, and books, etc etc) have sequels when there’s just as much fun to be had with Ridiculous Statements Masquerading As Games Journalism? As an early Christmas present just for you, dear readers, Tim Edwards has busted out his stash of uncomfortably short sentences for a second time. So that he. Can carry on. Talking about. Far. Cry 2:

“I was crouched in waving grass, scouting a guard-post. It was dark and I felt safe. I watched a truck winding along a dirt track. I waited. A zebra wandered past. I started to sneak toward the camp. As the guards turned, I hid behind a tree. But then I got bored.”

PC Gamer’s Tim Edwards on why he likes Far Cry 2. Still.

>Run Shit-Filter v.2.0

**BEEP**BEEP**BUZZ**

THANK YOU FOR ACTIVATING THE GAMES REVIEW SHIT-FILTER TRANSLATOR PROGRAMME

PLEASE INPUT SHIT:

“Attempting to persuade catatonic big rigs around an anfractuous Gordian knot of narrow dirt roads remains a torturous exercise in futility.”

**BEEP**BEEP**WHIRR**BUZZ**

TRANSLATION:

“Driving the big vehicles is hard.”

THANK YOU FOR USING THE GAMES REVIEW SHIT-FILTER TRANSLATOR PROGRAMME SPONSORED BY EDGE

END OF LINE


***
Suggested by an Anonymous Knight regarding a dribble of semen running down the leg of Edge’s anfractuous review of Motorstorm: Pacific Rift.

Pretentious Games Journalism (And Something About MCV)

There’s an excellent piece that’s gone up on Robson’s site nicely explaining why mirthless cunts like N’Gai Croal can fuck off. If you’re still unclear about the difference between Old and New Games Journalism, then you’re probably one of those wilfully ignorant self-deluding cockwits who’ll tell anyone that listens that NGJ is nothing to do with the ramblings of the pseuds, because you are one and you’re too embarrassed to admit it. If you’re not a pseud but genuinely don’t know what makes good games writing, then read Robson’s summary.

Also for today, here’s an email we received from an Anonymous Knight who’s got a thing or two to say about the way MCV chooses who gets positive coverage. Enjoy:

Dear RAM Raider,

Over the last few weeks I have become increasingly angry as I turn the pages of MCV and I have finally broken and can keep quiet no longer.

The dirty dish rag of a magazine has run several pieces recently like “30 under 30” and “Industry Dream Teams”. Each one is populated by a denizen of grinning golums who believe that firstly they have some influence over the world around them and secondly that anyone cares. Do none of these children realise that it is their brands and products that are successful and not them? As brand or account manager on “Call of Singstar 09” please don't confuse (convince) yourself that you have anything to do with its creation and or popularity. Anyway that's not my gripe so I will continue after the jump.

Why do these media sluts get to go into the magazines pages? Well, it is certainly not by virtue of their professionalism. As an example one of those so called “Fantasy Team” members (who was an average telesales executive at the time) once offered out carnal favours to anyone prepared to give her career a boot up. She now lives with her current boss.

No, the reason they are all there is simple: Stuart. Either he likes you or your company is prepared to pay him “advertising” money. In return for a large sum of money on an annual basis Mr D will not only refrain from giving you bad press but he will ensure your employees are held up as paragons of the business world. All dressed up as the legitimate business of advertising. This is a joke as an ad in MCV must have about as much impact on your target market as a fart in hurricane. I will call it by its real name for once; protection money.

I know for a fact that one very large publisher was having a sticky time with SD as they had stopped “advertising” a couple of years back. As a result MCV never published positive stories about them and also would go out of its way to slag them off in print and in person. Recently a marketing man was dispatched from the publisher to enquire of Stuart “how much will it cost to stop slagging us off?”. The answer, “£XXX,000 PA”. They negotiated him down to around £XXX,000 and the deal was done. This is why the company’s ads can now be seen all over MCV on a weekly basis and its employees faces regularly grin out at us whilst we go for our Friday morning dumps.

My word that feels better.

Regards,

Anon.

Eidos: Paying For Review Scores

You wouldn’t believe the shit publishers pull in their quest to salvage good review scores out of games that are clearly underperforming. Publishers such as Eidos, with workmanlike shit that’s not worth your money like Tomb Raider: Underworld.

The fun started when Eidos began laying down arbitrary conditions on reviewers before they could be assigned review code.

“They insisted that whoever was reviewing Tomb Raider for each of the Future Bath mags attend a one hour demo in Wimbledon before they were allowed to take away review code. I make that over £600 in train fares and nearly 30 hours of work time wasted to be told how to play a fucking game that’s been around since the dawn of time, or to show off some new sodding mo-cap gymnastics. Ramsay’s stench is all over this.”

Reviewing is politically hard enough when you’ve got the twin spectres of PR and publishers dropping turds on your head, but it becomes even more so when Future Publishing itself joins in. So-called site takeovers are the latest in the marketing man’s armoury in his quest to make editorial sites appear more like a shop front for whatever piece of low grade shit they’re trying to hawk on that particular week.

So the world shouldn’t have really been surprised when Future’s Games Radar changed its name for the day to Tomb Radar, as the risk of shattering the impartial veneer they try to con their readers into thinking exists is easily worth weathering in return for the substantial cash amount deposited into their coffers.

Here’s what James Binns, senior money launderer at Future, had to say in the press release issued by Future as part of the bargain:

“Tomb Raider: Underworld is a great game, well worth the 9/10 scores it is picking up across gaming websites and magazines. Getting the message out there on launch day is essential in the games market and this takeover gives Eidos unprecedented cut through.”

It’s always nice to have Future’s publishing goals confirmed as putting advertising over the truth. But eagle-eyed Pat Garratt of the excellent news site Videogaming247 spotted a slight miscalculation on the part of Binns – the “9/10 scores it is picking up across websites and magazines” don’t exist.

MetaCritic, which has the game down as a painfully average 76% at the time of writing, reveals that the only editorial outlet to have given the game 9/10 is Console Monster (anyone?). Interestingly enough, the 9/10 stuck onto the end of Games Radar’s (sorry - Tomb Radar’s) review is actually in place of the less PR-friendly 86% score it was given in the mag that was the source of the review, PC Gamer.

You might think a disinformation campaign would be more than enough to save an ailing franchise that dreams of being half as good as (ironically) Uncharted: Drake’s Fortune, but you’d be wrong. As again noticed by VG247, it was revealed by Gamespot journo Guy Cocker on his Twitter page that Eidos were asking review outlets to hold back any reviews that scored the recycled crappy-camera-angled shit-fest at less than 80% until Monday. That way, all of those saps who pay their wages have several days to go out and buy it before being warned by reviewers that it’s not worth the money.

“Call from Eidos – if you’re planning on reviewing Tomb Raider Underworld at less than an 8.0, we need you to hold your review till Monday.”

Then, a miracle occurred. The PR firm representing Eidos broke with an ancient tradition held since time immemorial – they told the truth.

“We’re trying to get the Metacritic rating to be high, and the brand manager in the US that’s handling all of Tomb Raider has asked that we just manage the scores before the game is out, really, just to ensure that we don’t put people off buying the game, basically.”

After realising the earth-shattering blow they’d dealt to the turgid name of PR by telling the truth, BHPR quickly retracted the statement and tried to pretend that all of the above was nothing more than a vivid hallucination.

So what’s the moral of all this? Don’t be silly – publishers, marketers, PR husks and editorial shills don’t have any.