Why is it legal to set rules for people to review your product?

[Words Of Wisdom]

rocketpig said:

Words Of Wisdom said:

This is the big catch.

Reviewers aren't entitled to early copies of anything. Those copies are provided by developers/publishers at their discretion. If the reviewer wants an early copy of a game, they must abide by the stipulations of the provider. It's essentially a contract between reviewers and providers.

It serves both parties too. Providers can dictate terms of the review and reviewers can get reviews out before their competition.

I'm sorry but that is sleazy. The idea that a reviewer has to jump through a company's hoops to get an early shot at reviewing a game is wrong. It puts all the control in the publisher's hands and turns the publications into whores for a scoop.

This industry would better itself if every publication gave a big "FUCK YOU" to the publishers and held out until a game's release to review the final product, no strings attached.

After all, I don't see Columbia blackballing Peter Travers from early screenings for fear that he might slam their latest piece of shit movie and they certainly do not tell him what he can or cannot say in his review. They invite him and hope for the best. That puts the power in the reviewers' hands and that's where it should be. After all, he/she is the one who the public turns to for an honest view of a movie/book/videogame.

You misunderstand the industry. The industry isn't working for the consumer, the industry is working for itself. Reviewers aren't in the business to make your life better despite claims to the contrary, they are in it to make money as are developers/publishers.

If both of them can make money at the same time so much the better for them and good luck getting them to change.

It is sleazy, but that's how it works. If you want to setup your own gaming website and call yourself a professional reviewer, go ahead. ^_^