KLXVER said:
Maybe...or maybe the perfect 10 had something to do wih it. Its not impossible. |
You do realize that due to their release schedule, they are constantly reviewing previous month games and early month games, correct? Games from late prior month and early current month are their priority. So getting an early code for a late month game to have it show up in a current month is a drain on resources that reduces their writing output. They are not going to ask for a code and then have a reviewer spend scores of hours playing it, writing a review, edit that review, score that review just to then send it off to the GAME PUBLISHERS TO REVIEW IT. You don't spend resources that could be spent filling your magazine with other articles and collumns on something that lives or dies at the whim of an outside entity.
And one thing you have yet to explain to anyone is WHY? Why would either party do some shady stuff over this? Why would Nintendo do something borderline if not outright illegal for what is ultimately a drop in the ocean's worth of publicity. One review that will be mostly forgotten prior to the embargo lifting for the other outlets and after that point will just be one review among the many? What possible return on risk is there to justify the effort, when there's very good odds this would get out and cause a PR disaster? And EDGE too. Why would a magazine with a sterling reputation that's going strong do this thing that could destroy them in an instant? For a very modest increase in monthly revenue? The review isn't even available digitally and won't be for ages. Until, you know, everyone else's is out.
It makes no logical sense in any way shape or form. It would be all risk, no reward worth anything. Simply asking for the code is worth it because if Nintendo says yes, easy cover story. Cutting some shady deal that could cause a pulicity trainwreck that would completely taint ALL positive coverage of Mario Odyssey and potentially ruin Edge is NOT worth it.
