Top
190°

Gameplanet Black Ops Review Will Not Be Bought

Gameplanet has denied an invitation to the Call of duty: Black Ops review event, because they do not want their review compromised. As a result, their scheduled interview with Call of Duty: Black Ops' military advisor Hank Keirsey was cancelled.

Read Full Story >>
gameplanet.co.nz
Oculus Quest Giveaway! Click Here to Enter
The story is too old to be commented.
Shackdaddy8363267d ago (Edited 3267d ago )

I know which review IM listening to. :)

Glad at least one reviewing site is honest.

P.S. The fact that they are having a review event kinda pisses me off. It is basically buying good reviews. Just let the reviews give your game an unbiased score. And it REALLY pisses me off for Acti to shun this website from an interview just because they didnt give in to their bribe.

Cregan4584onYouTube3266d ago

Agreed, full credit to the sites who don't cave for free shit. Atleast some sites understand we look to them for honest reviews. Either way, I expect great reviews because they have changed A LOT to make it as fun as possible and not a shitfest like MW2.

-Alpha3266d ago (Edited 3266d ago )

It's definitely looking like a solid game. But why do you assume going to an event to review a game= caving in to something?

Activision may pay for all your services but you are NOT obliged to give them a glowing reviews if you don't feel it deserves a glowing review.

If I had the opportunity I would go to this event, get loaded, play some COD, order room service, and then review it whatever the hell I felt like reviewing it.

The best thing is that I'd likely give it a high review (the game looks fantastic), and Activision wouldn't have had to "buy" me at all, so I would have won either way.

DERKADER3266d ago

Your bought out when you get paid to write a good review. Your a sell out when free incentives influence your review. No one is forcing this site to sell out. I don't understand the point of this article. They turned down a free event just to look like their not sell outs, but that doesn't prove anything.

Shackdaddy8363266d ago (Edited 3266d ago )

Well, unfortunately I cant edit my comment now.

But now that I look at the site it just seems like one big add.

P.S. going to the event would affect your decision. If you ever read IGN's opinion of who won E3, then you would know they said MS won even though it was clear that they had one of the worst presentations at the event. But they were coaxed into saying that since everyone got a free xbox. These kind of things do matter.

TooTall193266d ago

I personally would rather read a review from someone who is playing the game in their living room and playing with both friends and strangers.

It seems like having an event would cause reviewers to rate a game higher than they would in normal conditions. That's the reason Acti is having an event in the first place.

It's business. I'm not saying it's right or wrong.

MerkinMax3266d ago

But then again, I browse through and locate their Modern Warfare 2 review in which they gave it a 9.5.

http://www.gameplanet.co.nz...

I enjoy that game a ton but their review is no different from the hype filled review done by IGN. Maybe they are trying to change?

+ Show (2) more repliesLast reply 3266d ago
badz1493266d ago (Edited 3266d ago )

...for gamers because they will get the bribed version of reviews 9/10 of the time. although MGS4 also did it and get great reviews overall, it turned out still being a great game and won many GoTY awards in 2008! but what happen for MW2 was different! it got great reviews but the game itself was short and buggy and basically just a slight upgrade from MW but worst! the game ended up selling well but got only like 1 or 2 GoTY and even then, from a highly questionable site! I'm not saying BO will be just like MW2 (although I'm not really counting on it considering there's no public beta just like MW2), but so far, BO is looking and plays too similarly to the previous 3 games in the franchise to warrant a must buy! there are games showing jumps in terms of graphics this gen on the same console like Motorstorm, Uncharted, R&C, KZ, Gears, Halo, MoH, and even RDR is looking better than GTAIV and new NFS looking better than Burnout Paradise, but CoD stays and look the same even after 3 years! that shows something and where the priority really is in Kotick's mind!

mistajeff3266d ago

major props to gameplanet

Incipio3266d ago

Major props +2 Their review deserves any attention it gets.

-Alpha3266d ago (Edited 3266d ago )

"Their review deserves any attention it gets"

Seems like that's exactly what they want.

What was stopping them from just going to the invitation and giving an honest review?

This random post is really vague. So they refused and got canceled. So what? Of course you'll get canceled if you are not attending.

It seems they just want to make their site look more valuable & credible, yet they could have easily went to the review and still have given an honest review. The immediate assumption is that Activision is the evil guy who tricks people into giving them high scores. But you aren't suddenly "bought" if you go, so why does this article try to imply that? They are no different in that they generate their own praise their own way.

Activision isn't going to force you to give great reviews. The implication may be present, but who is to say all reviewers are tricked into giving high scores?

It's not like they force you to give a review for them, do they? Surely you can write any review you wish after you leave the event.

ChronoJoe3266d ago

Yah I don't understand either.

Of course I understand that giving it a bad review will likely result in weakened relationship between publisher and journalist, but I don't see why going to the review event makes a difference. Surely they could go to the review event, and still give it a bad review... or not go and still give it a glowing review...

goflyakite3266d ago

I was going to add something, but Alpha pretty much said everything. The fact that this article was made proves his point.

Rocket Sauce3266d ago (Edited 3266d ago )

The problem is they're basically being invited to a party to review a game. Did you read the part about hotel accomodations and outdoor activities?

If I said, "Come review my game at this junket and I'll put you in a hotel room and give you tickets to Disneyland for the day," and you accepted, nobody would be able to take your review seriously.

Good on them for turning it down, but they shouldn't have printed this article. It looks like they blew a good interview by being all defiant. They could have put a footnote in the review saying, "This reviewer did not attend any Activision-sponsored events," or whatevs.

JeffGUNZ3265d ago

Yeah, but they are HOSTING the even and INVITING people around the country/world. It would be a joke if they DIDN'T accommodate them. I mean if you have a party at your house, are you not going to provide food and drinks for your guests? What about your friends that flew in from accross the country, you wouldn't let them stay in your guest room? This is just being a good host. you don't invite people to a function YOU'RE HOSTING and NOT fully accommodate them.

Rocket Sauce3265d ago

I'd let my friends stay at my house, but I'm not looking for anything in return - Activision is.

It's not as if they're just being friendly, here. They're buttering up critics for good reviews. They're not flying people out from New Zealand and setting up activities for them out of the kindness of their hearts. It's payola - bribery in exchange for promotion.

+ Show (3) more repliesLast reply 3265d ago
Urmomlol3266d ago (Edited 3266d ago )

What do you guys want? A cookie? A pat on a back? A big certificate that says "thank you for doing your job?"

It's a pretty sad state of affairs when not taking a bribe somehow constitutes doing the honorable thing. What's worse is when people actually post articles that amount to little more than "HEY LOOK AT ME! LOOK AT THE GOOD THING I DID."

You do the noble thing because it's the right thing to do --not so you can shout it from the rooftops looking for recognition. I would've gladly given you your props, but this shameless self promotion is pretty sickening.

Yes you did the right thing by turning down the invitation. But you lose all credit by trying to somehow curry favor from gamers by bragging about it like this.

Esena3266d ago

Do you want recognition for posting your thoughts here? You should have just thought it in your head an not told anyone. That would have been the honorable thing to do...

They are just simply pointing out that their review won't be influenced by a review party...relax dude.

Incipio3266d ago (Edited 3266d ago )

This isn't about self-promotion...it's about EXPOSING ACTIVISION for their SHAMEFUL TACTICS.

Seriously...what the hell is wrong with you?

mistajeff3266d ago

i agree with you, but the state of games journalism is so sad these days that you can basically assume that any media outlet with a decent amount of popularity has taken the bribe. it's good to know which review you can read without having to assume that the reviewer was given 'incentive' for a positive review.

Urmomlol3266d ago (Edited 3266d ago )

I personally know five journalists who were invited to go to this event. Three of them are going because it's a cool opportunity, but they know nothing that Activision gives them will corrupt their obligation to give the public the truth. Two are not because they don't trust themselves not to be persuaded by these "gifts".

That's what it boils down to -- personal responsibility.

I give GamePlanet props for turning down the invitation --that was their choice, and if they thought it might influence their judgment, then good for you.

What I don't like, though, is this sort of self righteous preaching. It's more or less an indirect "HEY, WE'RE AWESOME BECAUSE WE WON'T BE BRIBED BUT THE REST OF YOU VIDEO GAME REVIEWERS WHO GO TO THIS EVENT SUCK."

Seriously, you can claim it's them exposing Activision's bribery or whatever you want to call it, but it's also equal parts self promotion. If you can't see that, then you're only reading what you want to read.

Incipio3266d ago (Edited 3266d ago )

U mad?

Take your little vendetta about this so-called self-promotion elsewhere.

Clearly no one here completely agrees with you.

I see it as if a publication decides to stand up not only on a personal level but PUBLICLY, they deserve a bit of attention for sticking their necks out.

And because they stuck their necks out...Activision showed their true colors when they canceled their interview with the military advisor. This is bad and needs to be seen by gamers.

@ Alpha-Male22

What? I mean that their review deserves any readers it happens to attract, not "their review deserves mass media attention"...slightly different conclusions there.

In the end...WHO FREAKING CARES if their review gets a little more attention. It gets the message out about Activision.

poopnscoop3266d ago

LOL the better question is: Incipio r u mad?

ur getting awfully worked up about some random article. u write for this web site or something bro?

C'mon, come clean. You shillin for dem?

rob60213266d ago

"What I don't like, though, is this sort of self righteous preaching. It's more or less an indirect "HEY, WE'RE AWESOME BECAUSE WE WON'T BE BRIBED BUT THE REST OF YOU VIDEO GAME REVIEWERS WHO GO TO THIS EVENT SUCK." "

I don't have a problem with giving props to any site that turns down the event - and then tells us they did. This is something that needs to be brought to light often.

To think that these game journalists are 'above' all influence and don't take any of it as part of their review is just ridiculous. I don't care who you are, every single one of us would be subjected to some kind of bias from one of these trips. The corruption is about the reviewer getting a 'next time,' and the reviewer showing his gratitude for the pleasant weekend. After all if the scores didn't show bias, they might not have these things anymore. Most people like going on trips, even if it is for a 'job.' To have someone tell us these events play no effect on their scoring of the game are people I'd call 'Self-Righteous.' I'd rather have someone tell me they know they're human and subjecting themselves to a process like this undermines their credibility.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 3266d ago
Sigh3266d ago

Respect. Just hope your upcoming review is good.

CommonCent3266d ago

The way I see it any review at launch is pure bullshit. Its the reviews that get out a few days later that hold more merit IMHO. You can only do so much in the game when you play it for only a few days, thats what Activision is banking on.

Show all comments (34)
The story is too old to be commented.