First Super Mario Odyssey Review in! (EDGE)

[Barkley]

Wyrdness said:

Barkley said:

I'm telling you that the 1st review of a game always gets far more attention then the rest. That the first few reviews gain much more exposure for their publication. This is big publicity for Edge, they certainly sold magazines on the back of this and it's good advertising too, it's driving discussion and raising awareness about them.

You can't argue that there is no benefit to breaking a report (or review) first. It's a basic fact of journalism.

Maybe so now explain how a deal factors into this as being a magazine getting a review out first or late is part of the territory.

I'm not going to say that there was any sort of "shady deal" or that the score would have been any different if Edge didn't get the game earlier. My point is just that no publication should get beneficial treatment over another as it inherently raises an issue of bias, whether that bias is actually there or not.

That they recieved beneficial treatment is evident by the edge editors comment. They got the code earlier than other reviewers.

"You want to know how we got code early? We spent two decades building a thing that's respected the world over. Then we asked for it."

Imagine edge had given the game 7/10, now everyone on here would be talking about "Oh no Odyssey is doooomed!" and Edge's relationship with Nintendo will have been damaged by the negative discussions and outlook that would now be surrounding their future title. They wouldn't be getting the game earlier than other publications after that.

Edge wouldn't want to damage a business relationship that benefits them financially by recieving beneficial treatment over other reviewers.