twesterm on 02 February 2009
| Fumanchu said: @Twesterm I understand what you're implying - the whole dynamics of a first review out of the gate before a review embargo lift, stands to reason that they have to be high review scores with the publisher green-lighting it. I think that a fairly reputable source is still risking a lot of their credibility should they accept the 'publishers bitch' role in the hopes of increased sales of their 'breaking news' review unless they geniunely believe that the score will be backed by other sources. Maybe we should wait until other sources confirm or deny this warm reception before writing it off completely. |
You should also remember that OXM is also running a business. In an owners mind, padding a review in order to get the first or one of the first reviews out there in order to sell more magazines is very much worth a small group of people on the internet bitching about corrupt reviewers that probably won't buy the magazine anyways.
Remember, us (the people who frwuequent game forums and game news blogs) are not in any way at all the majority. You think OXM cares about their reputation and I'm sure there are people there that do, but the owners care about selling more magazines.
So whether that review is entirely truthful or not, that review cannot be trusted until the embargo is actually lifted.
