Since the release of Play Meter Magazine in 1974, consumers have depended on print publications for impartial reviews on the latest releases. This dependence may have diminished somewhat with the proliferation of the internet, but a large amount of the videogaming community still utilise print as their primary source of referral when it comes to purchasing a new title. Not only are they becoming more accessible with the emergence of services such as Zinio, there is an expectation that they will provide content of the highest quality, due to the price of the pages themselves.
[drop2]It came as a painful surprise, then, when Metacritic told CVG this week that the website had been forced to remove a media outlet from their database after discovering evidence of corrupt practises. Marc Doyle, the co-founder of the scoring aggregator, failed to confirm the outlet’s name and the way in which it carried out its corrupt practise but, even so, it doesn’t take extra details for the gravity of this situation to be fully realised. Although the stone may have just been thrown into the water, the ripples are sure to have an effect on every magazine and website working in the industry today.Given that key information regarding the outlet itself has been withheld, we are forced to think hypothetically. If Marc was forced to remove a videogaming website from Metacritic, this would no doubt come as a huge relief to Future Publishing and Imagine, two of the largest publishing houses in Britain today. Small, independent websites are typically approached with a fair bit of caution anyway, so the best case scenario states that Marc chose to remove a barely established domain that nobody really knew. However, this seems implausible as an appearance on Metacritic is not something that is provided lightly; the website in question would have had to prove itself beforehand, thus pointing to the removal of a larger website with an expanse of regular visitors.
It’s clear that IGN, Gamespot and Eurogamer all remain, so this reduces the possibility of the corrupt website employing staff on the payroll. If the website was manned by unpaid volunteers then the issue is unlikely to trouble the big guns any longer and sit instead on the doorstep of unsalaried websites. Regular readers will know that we strive to provide informed and entertaining content, but there is no doubt that this revelation may well have an impact as to how newcomers to the site perceive our content. The same could be said for other websites that work upon the same ethic; a degree of distrust culminating is almost inevitable.
[drop] Comparatively, if it turned out that a videogaming publication was removed and not a website, the ripples of the aforementioned stone may well be a whole lot greater. Only this year did Future Publishing report a 45% fall in pre-tax profits, and this could possibly add fuel to the already burning fire. Videogaming publications have always prided themselves on offering a journal of unparalleled expertise and information, and this principle is one of the reasons why print is still managing to hold its own against the monumental mammoth that is the internet.If a magazine was indeed wiped off Metacritic, it would shatter that layer of integrity that has always been associated with print, and potentially result in another decline in sales. Personally, I find this extremely saddening; having briefly worked inside a publishing house myself, the passion and talent that exudes from the employees inside is unmistakable, and to think that a payoff to one reviewer could leave the reputation of print in tatters makes me extremely angry. It would simply act as another reason for consumers to fire up their laptop and click on the address bar, something that cannot happen if the print market wishes to continue in its current form.
All of the above is comprised from my personal conjecture, and nobody knows (apart from Marc and those inside Metacritic) whether it was a videogaming website or indeed a publication that was pulled from the database. I’m inclined to say that the outlet in question should be announced; at least then one market would be saved from the aura of suspicion that will gradually emerge.
Corruption is a definite issue, but it’s important to remember that just because you disagree with a review doesn’t mean it’s corrupt; they are opinions after all, and they are bound to differ. In saying that, it would be naive to say that this revelation won’t have an effect on how future reviews are received. The videogaming industry has long been one of trust, but with corruption somewhere in the ranks, it’s a value that may not hold as much worth as it once did.
Tuffcub
As Metacritic decides which publications and websites make up their averages, they – not everyone else – decide the final score. If they decide for whatever reason to omit a load of 10/10s then the average suffers.
Which makes Metacritic utterly pointless.
Sitorimon
Agreed. Also while I find metacritic interesting, I don’t think it’s ever swung a purchase for me one way or another.
colmshan1990
I don’t use it for the score, but I’ll just pick out a few random reviews and read them if I’m unsure of a game I’m thinking of buying.
At least one low-score review, one high, and one where the score is as close to the average I can get.
I should have a good idea of whether I’d like the game then.
Uhyve
Ditto. Though while I don’t particularly listen to reviews unless they’re from a site I respect, apparently, game publishers do actually look to metacritic to decide whether or not a game was good, while looking at sales to decide if it was a success.
Voganlight
I found this a confusing article, written quite weirdly in my opinion. The actual article doesn’t seem to match the title.
Toby M [Dexter17]
Sorry to hear that, but I can’t see how the title fails to match the text.
As nobody knows whether it was a website or publication that was pulled, I outlined the potential consequences for both possible scenarios. I also explained that the revelation of corruption is likely to damage how videogaming websites and magazines are perceived by consumers.
If you go into more detail as to what you mean, I’d be happy to try and address your query further.
Voganlight
Well, i don’t know what it is, I just find it confusing. The title is the cost of corruption yet the article talks about the state magazines are in. It feels like you wanted to get deeper into it yet couldn’t, like a few paragraphs have just been cut out. The overall balance of the article just doesn’t feel right.
Toby M [Dexter17]
Personally, I think that the balance of the article is fine. I’ve addressed the potential consequences for both print and the internet, and don’t feel that I have left any major point out. In addition, I referenced the fall in profits of Future to highlight the fact that print isn’t exactly booming, and as such a loss in trust could prove extremely damaging for the already stuttering market.
DirtyHabit
Im with Voganlight.
I don’t get the point of the article at all. Some site/mag got pulled from Metacritic. So what? Its hardly the scandal of the century is it?
I think you’re making a mountain of a mole hill to be honest.
Toby M [Dexter17]
I disagree. Metacritic have very high standards and for an outlet to be removed due to evidence of corrupt practise raises some serious questions regarding the integrity of other outlets within the same market. Although it may not be “the scandal of the century” it could have ramifications if it was eventually uncovered that a major publication was pulled, and not simply a small, independent website as everyone suspects.
colmshan1990
I could also say that one journalist hacking a celebrity’s voice mail was a non-story too, but we all know where that mole-hill led, don’t we?
DirtyHabit
Not really.
I dont think an entire Media empire is going to fall to its knees because someone accepted a couple of rounds of golf to say a computer game was quite good. I think you’re blowing it way out of proportion.
Corruption as you so like to dramatically put it, is in this, case little more than ‘Palm greasing’ which happens in most industries.
A gaming publication got its reviews pulled from a gaming web site… *someone somewhere shrugs and world keeps spinning* :)
Toby M [Dexter17]
What would you like me to say? Corruption is corruption, and Marc clearly stated that he had found evidence of it when he removed the outlet in question from the site. As for the corruption being “little more than palm greasing” nobody knows (apart from Marc and those inside Metacritic towers) the extent or form of the corruption that took place, so whilst you can speculate, you can’t really portray your earlier comment as fact.
I might be blowing things out of proportion – I appreciate your opinion andnobody outside Metacritic really knows anything apart from what Marc told CVG. I just think that small events can very easily develop into larger ones, and thought the issue was worth some speculation. I guess that others don’t feel the same way and that’s fair enough, everyone is entitled to an opinion. I’m always happy to listen as to what the community want to read and if this sort of article isn’t appreciated then I’ll keep it in mind for the future.
Personally, I still think that above is a well written article and that I have made several valid points, albeit most of them guesswork. However, like I said, I’m always happy to listen to feedback and to adapt my subject choices accordingly in future.
DirtyHabit
Its not that the article isn’t appreciated, I respect anyone that can and will take the time to write them. I know I certainly couldn’t. Hey, I took the time to read it :)
I agree, we are all speculating, but as far a speculation goes I think you’ve taken it a bit to far in this particular instance. But y’know I’m just gonna put my ‘ten-penneth’ in like every one else. :)
Don’t take it personally, the last thing you should do is bend over and ‘adapt your subject choices’. As a fairly new writer your gonna come across a lot more Tw@ts like me :D
bunimomike
Toby, fella. From a consumer perspective you might see that there really is very little fallout from all of this. If it was a website or a printed magazine, respect would drop; readership would reduce but maybe not to such a catastrophic degree that you imply.
From your more industry-centric perspective you can see ripples that this will throw out but I guarantee you it won’t be felt this side of the proverbial consumer pond nearly as much.
That’s my constructive criticism and observation but please understand that it’s my opinion and I have respect for you so if we disagree I promise to still talk to you in the school yard… mainly because I’m banned from the school yard for a host of different reasons.
Want some candy? :-)
Toby M [Dexter17]
Ha! Thanks for your comments guys – I have no problems with people disagreeing with me as long as they are respectful and provide me with some constructive stuff to work with, which both of you have done.
Your comments are noted, and I can see now that the hypothetical stuff may have veered off into very much a “worst case scenario” situation. I think that this was down to the outlet in question not being announced; instead of the distrust being confined to one title I was (and still am slightly) worried that this will mean that consumers do approach websites and magazines with a bit more caution than they usually would. However in saying that, I can see that the consequences may not be as large as the words above portrayed.
Who really knows though? :-)
david
i agree with vogan in that it almost seems as if there’s a couple of paragraphs missing, its not that there’s any thing wrong with the article or the title. in fact its a really interesting and very well written, it just feels a bit strange when you read through it.
also its hardly like this is a small issue, there’s been rumors about Microsoft bribing reviews for ages. but this is the first time its ever been confirmed that there is some corruption in the industry. if it ever got out which publication/website it was it would probably be the end of it.
blackredyellow
Your comment confuses me, it seems as though you’ve missed out a few lines…. ;)
blackredyellow
Another sad state of affairs by the looks of it, whether its a big publisher or a small internet set-up.
However, I tend to trust the opinions of people I personally know, or those here at TSA (staff and members) for a review of any game before I take a trip to the local store/website. Not necessarily for reasons involving mistrust etc of the big reviewers, but mainly so I will be able to play the game with mates/TSA as opposed to randoms!
DJ Judas
I can only deduce that the outlet in question is a relatively new venture, as my extremely quick, and largely flawed investigation involved picking a fairly widely-reviewed game; 50 Cent Blood on the Sand and compared the real page to that of an archive from April 2009.
There was only 1 review missing from the current page that was featured in the archive, yet this outlet is featured in other current Metaritic pages and therefore cannot be the perpetrating outlet. Therefore either they didn’t review the game or they didn’t exist yet, but with the archive page featuring 51 critic reviews, the odds are they didn’t exist at the point in time that the snapshot originates from.
Regarding the potential ramifications, if indeed the outlet is a young one, this bodes well for the potential reputation impact that it could have on other outlets, but not so well for the trust process that new ventures will have to go through.
I doubt that it will have much of an impact on potential magazine sales, no more than the high level of reporting from key websites in the scene such as TSA unfortunately has on sales figures for publications, crossed with the economic position potential buyers find themselves in.
Quinlank
“The videogaming industry has long been one of trust”
Trust counts for little when it comes to picking up the advertising cheques, as we’ve seen with many outlets in the past.
nofi
I think people are massively overthinking all this. Without knowing who or why it’s all kinda silly.
Tuffcub
Says TSA’s very own Rebekah Brooks :)
moshi
Has Nofi long flowing Ginger Locks.
Foxhound
We should all use ou
Jlulllmp
Foxhound
Our own judgement. Talk to friends, other gamers and TSA. metacritic has been compromised, simples.
DirtyHabit
Lol. Love the comment fail. :) Just carry on as normal and hope no one noticed :)
TheMekon
Magazine industry had some incidents, if that’s the best word, long before Metacritic etc reared it’s head.Those of us old enough might remember:
F.O.F.T bugged to hell on Atari ST, yet pulling in rave reviews, only The Games Machine came out and very publicly made note of this (Front cover had a massive NO! why you must not buy this game).
Then there was Zzap 64 with it’s C64 Operation Thunderbolt review-looked fantastic, gained a Sizzler award, yet review was based on unfinished and then scrapped ver.Final retail version, mere shadow etc.
Edge magazine-airbrushed up Xbox D.O.A screenshots.
What’s also seemingly become more of industry habbit is magazine is ‘invited’ to say a hotel where big name game is offered for review, jurnolists allowed set time to play game in 1 room, with company P.R person in room next door (Edge admitted they had to do this with Halo:ODST)-It’s supposed to be to stop game being leaked onto the net, but are these really ideal review conditions?.
then there’s the aspect of publishers rattling sabre of:give us good review score or we withdraw advertising, compo.prizes etc.
This to myself? just latest in a very long string of questionable occurances.
psychobudgie
and yet Edge Magazine remains.
Voganlight
I just compared all the black ops reviews (Which is pretty much the most reviewed game) and there are no changes between now and June 16th.
Voganlight
Wait a minute, this happened a long time ago.
“Yes. On one occasion I did discontinue my coverage of a publication’s reviews because of what I considered to be corrupt practices.”
Toby M [Dexter17]
Yes, it did, but only came out this week after Marc spoke to CVG on the back of a podcast.
Voganlight
But who cares then? (No offence intended) If it had been someone important everyone would’ve noticed it already.
Toby M [Dexter17]
None taken! I guess you’re correct in the publication sense – if a massive publication was removed such as EDGE or PSM3 then it would inevitably be noticed. However, there are so many website scores on Metacritic that if one was omitted I’m not sure many would notice unless it was someone like Eurogamer or Gamespot.