Review The Escapist bitch-slaps The Witcher

[Otingocni]

Well, you asked so nicely.

It got you here to post here, one way or another. And I have to say, it honestly impresses me, taking the conversation to your critics. You could have easily holed up on your blog and The Escapist, ignoring any criticisms from this angle.

Let me make this plain, most of my anger is over the Escapist, not you. I actually think you have a chance at becoming a good reviewer, at least based on this one review (so it is not that much), if you learn a few things and change your standards.

Being nice is over-rated, at least in this venue. As you can easily observe on The Escapist, forcing people into politeness forces an abundance of trivial conversation, and puts a polite facade on the nastiness that occurs regardless. I consider what I believe you would think of as crudeness to be much more honest.

By the way, an interesting association, but with my comparison on The Escapist forums; I actually do not consider criminals sociopaths. It was merely a comparison between self-deceptions, little truths make the big lies okay, that sort of thing.

To continue the conversation, on different terms now that you are present, do you honestly believe in all the defenses laid out for only playing such a small fraction of the game for what is quite clearly an official review? In a similar situation, would you once again only play a small fraction of the game? Even with the constraints you have just mentioned? Do you believe that is acceptable journalism, and why? Especially taking into account the points that Brother None has brought up?

 

[Deleted member 7219]

Well, now my account over there is banned. I only just recently made it, so it's not big loss, but all I did was call them hypocrites for inviting people to post opposing points about the review, then banning anyone who actually did so.

 

[MasPingon]

Well, here's more fuel for the fire. After considerable run-around in getting a copy of the game to run successfully on my machine (auth code mixups on the promotion company's end), my preview code expired. Atari graciously forwarded me a full copy to review. I wanted to get something to the Escapist in a timely fashion and completed the article within a week.

This was back when the game was just released. If I'd known it wasn't going to press right away, I would have taken more time with the game.

Anyway, the patch wasn't out then. So no, I didn't run it with the patch.

Oh my god, I don't have words for this. It's so fuckin tragic. This should be written in the stone somewhere

 

[Corvus.E]

I do think it would be a mistake to chalk it up to gross incompetence or malicious behavior on the part of the Escapist, though. Several events conspired to make it a rocky process this time around, that's all.

 

[Brother None]

I do think it would be a mistake to chalk it up to gross incompetence or malicious behavior on the part of the Escapist, though. Several events conspired to make it a rocky process this time around, that's all.

I would gladly believe that, if only this were the first time the Escapist embarrassed itself with shoddy journalism recently. I'm really worried about the Escapist, which I recently identified again as a "top-tier gaming site" when commenting over there.

Note that article, filled with factual mistakes and bad writing, got 369 (!) comments in a massive show of disapproval from collected readers, but that time Russ Pitts shrugged it off because he knew better than his readers. And look, exactly the same is the case here, even though I'm perfectly qualified to make criticisms of my fellow journalists.

What I told the editors then is still true now:
"Seriously, guys, what's up? I come to the Escapist for accurate information and unique views. I don't come here to see Bethesda's PR-messages relayed by an editor. There is nothing interpretive or informative about this article. Does it need to be critical? Well, I dunno, that's what I read newspapers editorials for, critical views. If it's just a PR relay, then what the hell does anyone need it for?"
Bad journalism is bad journalism, even if Mr Pitts refuses to allow such criticism on his forum.

Not to mention how just before that the Escapist had published From Black Isle to Bethesda, another badly written and factually incorrect article.

So at this point, circumstances force me to conclude the Escapist is joining the journalistic ranks of GameSpy and IGN. And no amount of Russ Pitts shouting only he has the right to judge if he's any good at his job or banning of me will really change the fact that he and his fellow editors are, and I hate to say this, turning the Escapist into pure shit.

 

[Corvus.E]

By the way, an interesting association, but with my comparison on The Escapist forums; I actually do not consider criminals sociopaths. It was merely a comparison between self-deceptions, little truths make the big lies okay, that sort of thing.

I just finished watching the last half of season six of The Sopranos, where correlations between sociopathic and fixating on being nice to kids was part of the plot development. Forgive me for making a leap there!

To continue the conversation, on different terms now that you are present, do you honestly believe in all the defenses laid out for only playing such a small fraction of the game for what is quite clearly an official review? In a similar situation, would you once again only play a small fraction of the game? Even with the constraints you have just mentioned? Do you believe that is acceptable journalism, and why? Especially taking into account the points that Brother None has brought up?

Okay, I'm going to shorthand this for right now, I need to finish up some work before my wife gets home.

I do not feel I need to apologize for the content of my article. I do not feel it is irresponsible to have posted a negative impression based on 10% of the gameplay. I do feel the article would have benefited from a) coming out when I wrote it (although that would hardly have helped, eh?) and b) not being labeled as a review.

Tangent: Man, I miss the Game Chair's progressive reviews. I wish other sites would follow suit and allow, nay encourage, their reviewers to take their time with games.

Now, if I copied the text of the marketing copy into my review to cover for the fact that I only played 10% of it, like I have seen other prominent sites do, I feel that would have been dishonest and unethical.

kk. I'm sure I'm missing something here. I'll revisit it tomorrow.

 

[Herbert West]

I do think it would be a mistake to chalk it up to gross incompetence or malicious behavior on the part of the Escapist, though. Several events conspired to make it a rocky process this time around, that's all.

Either way something went wrong. I however agree with Otingocni- it is impressive that you're here, despite all the harsh criticism [or, to be precise, hate] you experienced.
Brother None and many other members, including me, think that a gaming journalist is... well...a journalist, and that implies certain standarts and ethics. The current state of gaming journalism causes justified outrage here and that's partly the cause of the flack you're getting.

 

[Otingocni]

Okay, fair enough, my purpose of that barrage of questions was mainly to cut through the rhetoric and establish clearly where you stand.

Actually it is a pretty sensible position, if you agree a review should be based on a more complete play-through and the article in question is more of a mislabeled early impression. I brought up the comparison (I have never watched The Sopranos, so obviously I missed that connotation) we have been talking about because it appeared you believed that because you admitted to only playing 10% of the game, it was okay to base a review of that, something which I believe is quite absurd. I do agree that it is perfectly fair to write a negative article based on your experiences, just not a review, which is a stance you seem to agree with. I still think you focused to much on negative trivialities, but we can all miss the forest for the trees, in any case it is more acceptable and not something that irks me. It is also something I think that will become less of an issue if you play more, but I could easily be wrong.

 

[Amasius]

Ok Mr. Elrod, I haven't played The Witcher yet, so I can't say how accurate your criticism of the writing, voice acting, technical problems etc. is, but I noticed some strange things in your review:

At the heart of The Witcher's design lies a rich and compelling roleplaying experience. Unfortunately, the rest of the game serves mostly to obscure this fact.

The rest of the game? So you have finished it?

Still, after spending well over 10 hours with The Witcher...

Oh, you haven't... You see the contradiction?

The marketing for The Witcher proclaims the game to be the pinnacle of storytelling in roleplaying games. Gone is the cliched struggled between good and evil, and moral ambiguity rules the day. It also promises a charismatic, unique protagonist and complex tactical, yet intuitive, combat. So what went wrong?

So you are implying that there is something wrong with the storytelling, that the story is cliched and without moral ambiguity? After 10 hours in the game? A good review would verify if the claims of the developers are justified - to often they aren't - but again after 10 hours...

The Witcher presents a typically sexist view of women... While I don't object to sexual content in games, I don't enjoy the objectification of women.

Me neither. I've seen some of the collectable cards and I think the idea is ridiculous but I've also read some of Sapkowskis translated shortstories. The medieval world he describes is harsh and sexist and so is his hero. Can you blame a developer that their game stays true to the works their game is based on? This sexism is unfortunately part of most roleplaying games and it's a tad unfair to single one out. Of course it's ok that you criticise it in your review but apart from some technical problems it seems to be your main concern for your bias against the game. Is the purpose of the game "the objectification of women" or are there also other things to write about?

It doesn't matter if you like a game after you have seen about 10 % of it. Sure, as a player you would stop playing if you don't, but as a reviewer you should try to be objectiv and judge the whole game fair. Not all of your readers share your tastes but after a good review the reader knows enough about a game to make his own opinion even if he has a very diffent taste. From your review I've learned that The Witcher is sexist and has some technical problems. The latter can be solved by patches and the first unfortunately probably doesn't bother all of your readers. Your review hasn't much substance and therefore it's a bad review.

 

[Claw]

I'm also disappointed this is coming for the Escapist. They recently reached 1 million visitors a month and I'm happy for them, but I'm starting to worry if they're not going the way of all "major" gaming sites and letting their quality control slip as they grow.

You are starting to worry? I've already stopped reading. I don't even take part in bashing the review because I'd have to read it first, and I don't want to give them even that much.

Zero Punctuation is cool though.

A journalist is nothing more or less than someone who opens oneself to an experience and then shares it.

That sounds like the New Age definition of journalism.

 

[Attrebus]

Still not sure how a review on some site diminishes the enjoyment you have with the game, but meh, whatever.

 

[Brother None]

Still not sure how a review on some site diminishes the enjoyment you have with the game, but meh, whatever.

I don't think anyone has claimed that it does, which would make your post a straw man. And not a very good one, at that.

 

[Amasius]

Still not sure how a review on some site diminishes the enjoyment you have with the game, but meh, whatever.

This is not about a certain game but about bad gaming journalism.

 

[Claw]

I loved Ultima VII, cheesy dialog and all. I have played it all the way through, including side quests, more times than I can count.

You forgot to mention the worst part of the game: The sucky realtime combat.

 

[Futile Rhetoric]

Still not sure how a review on some site diminishes the enjoyment you have with the game, but meh, whatever.

Shitty reviews of decent games result in fewer copies of those games being sold, and diminish the likelihood of decent games being made in the future (because everyone is shooting their wad over Halo 14). Now, would you kindly get the fuck out?

 

[Deleted member 7219]

Is this the guy who did those Zero Punctuation vids? If he is, maybe he should stick around so we can bring him to our side; those vids were really quite good and I'd like to see more of them. If he's just some random guy... then yeah, GTFO.

 

[Futile Rhetoric]

Is this the guy who did those Zero Punctuation vids? If he is, maybe he should stick around so we can bring him to our side; those vids were really quite good and I'd like to see more of them. If he's just some random guy... then yeah, GTFO.

Oh Matt, you kill me.

 

[Attrebus]

Still not sure how a review on some site diminishes the enjoyment you have with the game, but meh, whatever.

Shitty reviews of decent games result in fewer copies of those games being sold, and diminish the likelihood of decent games being made in the future (because everyone is shooting their wad over Halo 14). Now, would you kindly get the fuck out?

You really think anyone read a review of Halo whatever before going out and buying it? That's a bad example because regardless of what the latest Halo turned out like, people would have bought it.

This is not about a certain game but about bad gaming journalism.

Bad gaming journalism because they don't agree with you?

I don't think anyone has claimed that it does, which would make your post a straw man. And not a very good one, at that.

Then why is there 6 pages of BAWWWWWWing?

 

[Futile Rhetoric]

Bad gaming journalism because they don't agree with you?

Giggle.

Edit: Russ? Russ honey, is that you?

 

[DraQ]

This is not about a certain game but about bad gaming journalism.

Bad gaming journalism because they don't agree with you?

One 'illiterate' tag for Attrebus ASAP please.

 

[Brother None]

I think you need to actually read this thread, you missed a few things...

Bad gaming journalism because they don't agree with you?

It's been mentioned several times that's not the problem. The invested time and low accuracy are.

Then why is there 6 pages of BAWWWWWWing?

Because bad gaming journalism is bad for gaming quality.

Didn't Futile Rhetoric just explain this to you? Why ask something if you know the answer, and yes, your Halo 3 comparison is meaningless.

 

[Amasius]

This is not about a certain game but about bad gaming journalism.

Bad gaming journalism because they don't agree with you?

A mod from the TES forums trolling at the Codex, eh? Cute.

 

[Nael]

This is not about a certain game but about bad gaming journalism.

Bad gaming journalism because they don't agree with you?

A mod from the TES forums trolling at the Codex, eh? Cute.

Something tells me it's not the same guy. The Attrbus I know (yaya, I'm pegging myself as the much loathed TESF refugee) was far a more rational and insightful poster.

If it is the same guy however, that would make me very sad.

 

[Brother None]

A mod from the TES forums trolling at the Codex, eh? Cute.

I'd figure they'd demote any mod caught posting on the Codex
:codexdevil:

 

[Amasius]

A mod from the TES forums trolling at the Codex, eh? Cute.

I'd figure they'd demote any mod caught posting on the Codex
:codexdevil:

Not if he is fighting for the good cause.