Hello N4G people.
Just wanted to post this as a reminder of some items about N4G as recent submissions and likely future ones will be dealing with similar topics.
N4G does not have a policy against breaking embargoes for any website that chooses to do as such. We accept content from a source and it is up to them to deal with issues that arise from breaking any embargo on their end. An early review due to obtaining the game via an early retail release is perfectly fine here.
Our standpoint is that how you view a review should be skeptical no matter if it's before or after an embargo. But we won't create a rule to prevent news from being delivered when it's posted in this manner.
N4G allows submissions with spoilers to be posted. Typically it's obvious, especially when it's a video that with a title of '30 minutes of gameplay' or the like. Even then, the discussion of spoilers should be relevant to the video posted and not other elements (you don't give away the ending because someone posted the first 30m of gameplay).
If it is not apparent that a submission contains spoilers, we do require that contributors add "[Spoiler]" to the title.
Discussion of said spoilers are allowed in those submissions. BUT, discussion of recently released games (within 6 months of release) are not allowed otherwise. Anyone who posts spoilers in a submission, especially with the intent to spoil a game, will face a hefty restriction if not a permanent ban. There are no ***SPOILER*** tags that prevent this rule from being carried out. Just don't post spoilers of recently released games in the comments outside of submissions obviously discussing said spoilers.
.: Opinion Sourcing
We have what some would call restrictive rules regarding who may post opinion-based material, including reviews. These rules exist in order to protect the news from being cluttered by sites that are quickly set up and pump out opinion pieces in a manner and aim to get hits. We want opinion-based material from established sources only, of which there are thousands of already.
Early a hotly debated review was failed not because it was fake, not because it was before an embargo, but because it had become a site that is personal in nature. It has one active author who posts infrequently and had posted a review of God of War that he had, as proven to me directly, obtained legally and had actually played. This is the only reason it was failed.
Not meeting our requirements for opinion-based sourcing does not mean the content is necessarily fake. It just means it goes against our broad guidelines to prevent abuse from the gaming community. Whether you choose to call such fake or not is up to you, but N4G does not define it as fake just because it's before an embargo or from a personal blog.
Thank you for reading and if you have any questions, please refer to our expanded guidelines from here - http://n4g.com/user/blogpos... - or feel free to PM me directly.
N4G Site Admin & Community Manager