No doubt they'll be sending who ever reviewed it death threatsMS shills right now:
OP
OP
Deleted member 223
Guest
I'm a bit confused as to what you mean but if you can point me (quote) directly to what you say I may get some clarification.
If you have the Xbox shill mojo hanging over your head you may want to play it safe when everyone has eyes on you at a particular point in time. Like a child putting up his best mannerisms and behavior around say, an attractive female. The score given will neither incite furor by Sony fans nor cause disappointment at MS headquarters. A compromise - and if it fits the bill, much better - with a clean conscience.
Last edited by a moderator:
Right. Because they suck. MS can kiss my ass..and they can never make good games that we will ever admit to..blah.. blah..Over the last couple of days several gaming media outlets and Youtube personalities have expressed concern, bewilderment, and anger at the fact that Bethesda and MS have withheld sending them review copies of the "highly anticipated" game Starfield. The list of outlets and youtubers being left out is numerous and by no means niche and unknown. Many are staples of the gaming press and community. The known so far include:
Link Eurogamer
Link Guardian
Link Axios
Link MetroUK
SkillUp
Link Edge
Link RockPaperShotgun
Link Dexerto
If you know of others leave a comment below to add to the growing list.
There is undoubtedly many other reviewers that have yet to publicly speak out. Many outlets and youtubers may refrain from letting their voices be heard for fear of burning bridges with Microsoft, a prominent known sponsor in gaming. Moreover, access, the name of the game, keeps the light on for many.
Naturally the first thing that comes up to people's mind is that this may simply have been the case of someone at Bethesda or MS fucking up somewhere along the pre-release rollout. However evidence that has come forth suggest the contrary. The evidence suggest that there is a careful cherry picking of outlets that receive the codes and those who do not. The list of reviewers being left out include so many notorious names that theorizing and chalking this behavior up as Bethesda/Microsoft simply withholding reviews from a couple clickbait sites or console warrior shills, that do not deserve the codes, goes out the window. Ironically, well known console warrior Youtubers and Xbox shills like ColtEastwood, Parris Lily and others are getting review codes.
The notable first to open the floodgates on this debacle was Eurogamer. After Eurogamer mustered the courage to speak out, many others also started to come out and add their name to the list, express frustration, etc.
Here is what Eurogamer had to say regarding the situation: https://www.eurogamer.net/eurogamer-and-bethesda-starfield
So the situation is as follows. Digital Foundry, an Eurogamer partner and off-shoot gets priority access to a review copy of the game but Eurogamer staff itself is not given a copy nor allowed to share with and use DF’s copy of the game for proper review purposes - explicitly requested by Bethesda itself.
Bethesda and Microsoft here show the explicit intent in locking out Eurogamer’s reviewing team from access, despite plenty of abundance and availability of review copies/codes.
What is clear here is that DF’s shilling for MS/Xbox over the years, spearheaded by Richard Leadbetter, has paid off in spades in terms of priority access. So much so, that in the shilling pyramid, Eurogamer itself is at the bottom, while DF is at the very top.
Since the posting of the article by Eurogamer, Bethesda and MS quickly provided a review code to Eurogamer. MS/Bethesda did this to obviously stamp out the PR damage coming their way. Due to the nature of reviews, it's unlikely that Eurogamer staff will have a review ready in the short span of two days before the review embargo is lifted and reviews go live – which is exactly the whole point of the exercise.
Like with Eurogamer, this was done to several other media outlets and individuals. Sometimes stalling tactics were used.
MetroUK:
The strategy comes to the fore:
Goal: Improve Starfields Metacritic/Opencritic Score.
#1: Shrink the pool and number of potentially negative reviews (or objective reviewers if you suspect your game has several clear flaws):
#2: Ensure that initial embargo day reviews are mostly positive:
- Withhold review copies for selected outlets/individuals. This usually drives up the MetaCritic Score of a game provided the reviews that do register on MetaCritic are positive.
- If outlets and individuals complain of being left out, correct the issue on a case by case basis. By the time those outlets and individuals complain and receive review copies, most, if not all will miss the critical embargo date. Thus, the initial metacritic average score that goes into making a first impression on consumers, as well as serving as ammunition for marketing hype will be largely positive and unaffected by the potentially suspect reviews that trickle later down the line, post embargo day.
- Limit exposure to outlets with a 5 star review ranking system. 5/5 = 100. 4/5 = 80, 3/5 = 60. You get the point.
All of this smells of desperation. Desperation by Microsoft/Bethesda to provide a media darling and hit after a decade + of mediocrity and failures.
- Send review copies to sites known to have a positive or compromised relationship with Microsoft/Bethesda regarding coverage, whether that be gaming media sites, say IGN, Polygon, etc, or Youtubers and influencers like ColtEastwood, Parris Lily and the other members of the MS/Xbox cult. Cultivate that relationship - via access or other means. Sometimes a group photo, or lunch can do wonders.
- Play dumb, stupid and innocent all throughout.
- Cash in.
For MS it's imperative to land a hit when console sales of Xbox Series are declining YoY % wise at the prime of a console's lifecycle. It's specially pressing when Sony's PlayStation 5, the direct competition is breaking sales records and gobbling up market share. Heading into the holiday season with a good step forward is an absolute must for Xbox.
Bethesda on the other hand is pressured to deliver for MS, after the acquisition, to show the new bosses their worth. This is specially true after a string of duds, including Redfall's disaster. The duds (underperfoming games - critics reception wise, sales wise or both) were part of the reason Zenimax was in trouble ....troubles which had Zenimax accepting exclusivity deals with Sony or whomever was willing to pay - ultimately accepting the generous MS buyout.
Defaulting to such poor strategies like micromanaging MetaScores to fake the hype, to manage perception and create a false perception of reality is not the answer to MS or Bethesda's problems.
A bit more on the shenanigans: https://hitpoints.substack.com/p/159-gaming-the-system
What is a MetaScore? https://www.metacritic.com/about-metascores
Really taking this personal aren't ya champ
Here. The list I shared was of tweets of people mentioning how "yhuge" their reviews were, like little minons.
This pos cant be more transparentReally taking this personal aren't ya champ
But definition an article cannot be a "source", a good article uses sources. So this is even better if we have the original information as a base, there is much less risk of distortion or manipulation.
For now with only the outlets whitelisted by Microsoft yes. I assume that in a few weeks, if the outlets who will have to buy the game make a review, I assume it will drop some point.
Nope.. it's what I see in these threads. Pretty hilarious.Really taking this personal aren't ya champ
It isn't just about one game.
You need to see the history of what MS has engaged in over the years.
Hiring paid shills to mislead and energizing their fanbase to spread fud.
And then you have the leaks from the FTC court case that showed how disgracefully they behave behind backdoors whilst singing kumbaya and lying to the public, there whole goal is to spend sony out of buisness. They cry about sony buying exclusives yet we now know they've pulled games that would have come to playstation, absolute hypocrites.
A monopolsitic company who thrives on driving out it's competitors and spreading lies is a company alot of us don't want to see succeed.
It saved it from dropping all the way to the 70s...
Understood but that's a soap box that I don't want any part of. I want to talk about games. Not the companies that fail or is a pain in the ass to gamers "rooting" for the other company. That shit is too childish for me.
OP
OP