Do Telltale pay major game reviewers to write good articles about their games
So ive been looking at some of the big game reviewers and for TNF all i am seeing is 9/10 and 8/10 ratings which they only talk about Javier and the graphic enhancements but they never talk about the long list of negatives like the general gameplay bugs, the short episodes or the flashbacks etc.
Sign in to comment in this discussion.
Comments
Don't mind me folks just waiting for the arguments that are coming. Anybody want some?
Can't find it in myself to care anymore.
Fear not, you're not the only one.
Its hard to tell but I kinda want to say yes.
Every review so far has been nothing but positive, but the thing is, the positives are like "wowie thats some nice graphics!" nothing about how it holds up to past games, nothing about how good the story is, nothing.
Mainly this one...
Or maybe the critics legitimately like the game. Did that ever occur to anyone else? It feels like backlash towards critics of BvS all over again.
If anything, I think it's pressure on the reviewers to like what's popular. As much as people like truth, they want to read people whom agree with them and the reviewer's job depends on that. Professional reviews are going to be heavily tainted in that regard. They review the game, but they also play a guessing game as to what their audience wants to read. It's always best to read into the points a reviewer is making, rather than the score they give. If one negative point bothers you particularly, then consider it a bad review.
Yes, every now and then, you see a popular game with negative reviews, but if one reviewer has that happen too many times, they will be out of a job fairly quickly.
[removed]
Doesn't matter whether they do or don't. They've basically admitted our opinions don't count for shit, so as long as they keep these guys happy, through money or whatever, who the hell cares right? As long as you get your money from us gullible fools, right Telltale? Angry beyond belief right now!
I admire them sticking to their guns...plus my favorite let's play youtubers are enjoying the hell out of it...I think this is a case of people living and breathing with their own ideas of how the game should be. There are issues...like length of episodes and not enough Clementine...but sometimes I think our love for the series is borderline so fanatical that we are unwilling to see it any other way then what we built in our minds.
Also no...TellTalegames does not have the money to pay off all those reviewers.
The main problem for me is that this is the precise reason why episodes are getting shorter and lies about what happened with the first episode being split up are happening. They don't listen to fan concerns, let alone respond to them.
I think no one is knocking Telltale for having the balls to stick to their original story, that is, if they think they can knock it out of the park in the next few episodes and win back some of the doubters and critics. What this tweet has exposed, however, is that Telltale puts more stock into the opinions of independent reviewers rather than the people who invest in their games. Even worse, they hope that future games win us back, rather than, you know, actually making a conscious effort to improve what they already have.
Reviewers gloss over the very issues we bring up on here (episode length, lack of Clementine). These opinions do not matter to Telltale. Does that not piss you off in even the slightest?
I tend to think the problem with season two is that they were too reactive to fan feedback...ie Kenny getting more than his fair share of script. It really is a damned if they do and damned if they don't situation....if the season blows chunks well it is on those writers exclusively and then TellTale will have to rethink their approach. If it comes together in the last few episodes and is truly good...there are still going to be a lot of fans who will heap hate on it and the writers.
I say let them do their thing...they fuck it up...then we can heap all the scorn they deserve. Or all the blame.
In terms of story, maybe they were too reactive, but i don t think it can be argued they were remotely reactive in terms of things like episode length and impact of choices.
Because the number of people yelling are a minuscule fraction compared to sales...user reviews...metastatic scores? Think about it from their point of view?
What reviews have you been reading? Most of the reviews I've been reading are doing the things you said they didn't. Particularly these:
Polygon's review
PC gamer's review
Nerdist's review
Trusted Review's review
Metro's review
Gamesradar's review
The Verge's review
I see it clearly from their point of view.
The reviewers are loving it and sales are doing fine. Everything is just peachy... oh, some of our fans are disappointed about the episode length and lack of Clementine... Oh well, our reviewers like it and we're getting our money in so fuck it, hope you like our next game guys
I'm no season 3 critic, but that makes my blood boil!
Your point being?
Most of the big review companies you linked all got the game by Telltale, which most likely means they were paid to put in the good word about the game.
Of course not. That myth should really die for good.
Wow. That's one hell of a strawman fallacy. The review sites getting early access to the games doesn't mean jack shit. Lots of games are given early access to critics. The same goes for television and movies too. It doesn't mean the games won't get bad reviews at all. Doesn't mean they were paid by the company to give it glowing praise. Like I said in a different comment that I posed on this thread, did anyone ever take consideration that the critics maybe just maybe actually enjoyed the game and there's no big conspiracy going on. Is that really so hard to believe?
When it seems that the giant majority of fans say they are unhappy, but every review company says they love it, and they were given the game by Telltale then yes. I wouldnt say its so far off to assume that they were paid to give a good review.
I'm going to say something very unpopular, but I think some people need to see it.
Listening to fans ≠ letting them write your story.
Even back when Telltale were active on the forum and really paid attention to fan reaction, they didn't alter story because of us. Don't take it personally, but I'm willing to bet 99% of you are worse at story writing than the people they've hired. If you don't like the story they're telling, don't buy any more episodes or wait it out until the next game. I would be much more suspect of Telltale as a company if they did allow complaints to alter their story as it went.
They have previously made subtle gameplay tweaks between episodes, or coding changes as system variations cannot be 100% accounted for. From how I saw Batman develop, it looks like they've grown too much and are working on too much at once to even really work on those issues anymore as much as they used to. Sure they could... If they went back to making 1 game a year. So you TWD fans would be waiting 3-4 years approx. between seasons.
Episode length is a valid complaint, but is not one that will be addressed between episodes. They're not going to start shoving in padding for the sake of episode length. Keep bringing it up and the next game might be a bit longer.
Again, lots of games are given early access to critics. Even games that got shit reviews like Duke Nukem Forever. That does not prove anything you're trying to get across. When the fans are unhappy but the majority of critics enjoy it, I think it's more safe to assume that they just simply saw something in it that they didn't. They're just people with opinions just like us. Difference of opinion is not proof.
I've seen positive words about the episodes from sites such as Neogaf and Steam reviews. Since reviews come out before episode release, reviewers don't get to see what audience reaction is to episodes before giving out their review. Also, since they're not invested fans, they likely don't care as much about stuff like what happened to Kenny or Jane as well as knowing that the effects of choices (especially between games) tend to be pretty sparse. Thus, they usually try to judge a game based on its own.
Especially when by steam's own review page 85% have positive reviews from players...we nerds here on the forum are a miniscule amount of the game's fandom. Never dream that this forum is a proper indicator of the game's reception.
Steam reviews are also steadily dropping.
Also compare 85% to Season 1's 96% and Season 2's 95%
Poogers...it is still very positive..plus the LiS folks were pissed that TWD won the trophy for crying...there has been shal we say interesting reviews. I am not argung that there are not issues,,,but for a vast majority of people..they are fine with the game.
You can say that again. I have seen "suggestions" on here that made my eyes bleed reading them.
Lol no.
They clearly haven't done that for any of their other games (Game of Thrones, Minecraft: Story Mode, Batman, etc). Why would they start now?
"A game I don't like is getting good reviews? IMPOSSIBLE!"
Yes I know how controversial the third season has been on the forum but this is starting to get a little petty.
Opinions outside of the forum have been significantly more positive and I have still seen criticism for the episode length and how the Season 2 endings were handled.
It's a shame these reviewers didn't have the same experience I did. Character animations glitching out, black textures appearing all over the place, frame rate dropping during the fight at Prescott, some choices not representing what is said or acted out (tell him off/tie up Jesus), noticing the lack of content/functions compared to previous seasons like rewind and extremely short episodes. The short episodes thing I'm sure they prefer though since reviewers would rather burn through games quickly as possible to get and move on with their lives. Plus they don't actually have to buy the damn thing.
Their lack of attention to these glaring issues is unbelievable when you lay them out as you have and these people are PAID to do this!?
Your theory is a good one though, the quicker they can finish the game, the quicker they can write the review and earn their keep.
My god this forum is getting ridiculous now
I'm not sure but I definitely believe it's a yes whenever I see a review talking about how your decisions greatly impact the game... I'm like "Have you played it more than once by any chance?"
No. Just because the reviewers give games that you don't like good reviews doesn't mean that they're on that company's payroll. This accusation of reviewers being corrupt has always been untrue and nonsensical.
Wtf, where did you find this?
Tweet from the lead writter.
I might point out that only people who have purchased the game can post reviews.
Plus, the top rated reviews are currently all overwhelming negative, it's a similar situation to, say, Watch Dogs 2, which isn't selling well, but has good reviews from the group of people who actually bought it.