GINGER NINJA
COMMUNITY WRITER
XBL -NONE-
PSN -NONE-
WII
-NONE-
STEAM -NONE-
GINGER NINJA'S SPONSOR
POST BY THIS AUTHOR (0)
COMMENTS BY THIS AUTHOR (2)
"
Very unprofessional article full of assumption, un-factual information and zero evidence to substantiate any of the claim/assumptions. You have implied that the sites you mention have either broken an embargo date or that they have danced a dance as you call it to give higher scores which has enabled them to gain permission to publish early reviews.
"
Very unprofessional article full of assumption, un-factual information and zero evidence to substantiate any of the claim/assumptions. You have implied that the sites you mention have either broken an embargo date or that they have danced a dance as you call it to give higher scores which has enabled them to gain permission to publish early reviews.
You have no idea what the embargo date issued to these publication was and all you have quoted is a generic embargo date, you have no evidence that these sites danced a dance and failed to mention any of the magazines published prior to the embargo date which have also reviewed the title yet not listed on MetaCritic.
You have no evidence to substantiate anything which you imply in this article, you do not know the embargo dates which these publications had and all you have is a generic date which was issued to other outlets to then base these assumption on. Shockingly bad journalism and a shockingly bad article which is dancing the dance to try and gain cheap page views.
"
Wednesday, March 16, 2011
Dennis, you clearly have no idea why some reviews were published prior to the generic embargo date you quote, regardless of that you decided to publish an article in which you make some very serious allegations based on absolutely nothing, was completely un-factual, 100% inaccurate and based on nothing more than your own personal (incorrect) assumptions.
Despite your numerous attempts to edit the article you have directly questioned not only the integrity of THQ but also the integrity and validity of the web sites reviews which were published prior to an embargo date you have assumed was the same for everyone. In fact there were numerous additional reviews published prior to the embargo date you seem to feel was the same for everyone yet you only referenced ones listed on Metacritic. Has it ever occurred to you that MetaCritic does not reference all websites content?
According to MetaCritic 1Up gave Just Cause 2 100/100 http://www.metacritic.com/game/playstation-3/just-cause-2/critic-reviews and Eurogamer gave it 80 and GamePro gave it 60. Based on your ridiculous logic and assumptions from this article has 1Up therefore Danced a Dance with Atari or is it possible that the reviewer actually based his/her opinion and rating on the experience they had with the game?
You have made completely un-founded assumptions, based on nothing other than the fact you have assumed an embargo date existed and therefore any site publishing a review prior to that date is either:
A: Dancing a Dance with THQ to publish early for traffic providing they score the game high
B: Have broken an Embargo date
I can 100% assure you neither is the case and that a specific sequence of events which you are clearly not privy too allowed for the reviews to be published and that the reviews published had nothing to do with Dancing a Dance with THQ or breaking embargos.
"