N4G Note: Embargoes, Spoilers, and Opinion Sourcing

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.

.: Embargoes
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.

.: Spoilers
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 - - or feel free to PM me directly.

N4G Site Admin & Community Manager

Create Report !X

Add Report


+ Updates (1)- Updates (1)


Changed from Pending to Approved
Community287d ago
The story is too old to be commented.
passenger77287d ago

I don't get it. People articles get banned because of very minor things, but a Turkish well established site? publish what it seems to be clearly a fake, in any case violating and embargo just for clicks and you guys decide to keep it... for the sake of opinions, if I got that right?

bolimekurac286d ago ShowReplies(5)
Septic286d ago

Was it fake though? Legit q

Christopher286d ago (Edited 286d ago )

It wasn't a fake review... Neither of the reviews posted today were fake and neither were bad reviews of the game. Even if they were, the only reason they would be removed would be for not following our guidelines.

Both sites provided proof that they owned and played the game, btw. It wasn't asked for, but it was provided nonetheless.

Ceaser9857361286d ago ShowReplies(1)
343_Guilty_Spark286d ago

Well who approves the poorly sourced articles?

wonderfulmonkeyman286d ago (Edited 286d ago )

Most if not all articles in the pending section of this site are open to public approval, right?
So I guess one answer is "whoever has an agenda that the article benefits, or an opinion the article reflects closely enough."
That or just "pretty much anyone that wants to approve them."

rpvenom286d ago

Guys, you can imagine the difficulty of having to micro manage every submission. Cut these guys a break. I'm sure they're doing the best they can and apparently it wasn't a fake so regardless, N4G has been a site I use everyday and I think we can all simply just commend them for even running a good gaming website versus others. Nothing is perfect and sometimes things slip through the crack but I'm sure they're doing the best they can. Not ass kissing, just coming from someone who tried to run their own website and business.. things happen.

Dragonscale286d ago ShowReplies(1)
Show all comments (29)
The story is too old to be commented.