Game Reviewers to be Investigated

metalface13 wrote:

Michael Barnes wrote:

No. You passed up the opportunity by not trading me TOMB OF ICE. It's Almarik now. The fate of the game here at F:AT rests on his shoulders.

Back to the trunk for you, Lava Elf-themed cheerleader skirt.

Hey! I have one of those! Wanna see it? I'll throw on a pair of cottony-soft Fruit Of The Loom briefs, just to make sure you don't get an extra show. And while I do my cheers, perhaps you could enjoy a delicious McDonalds brand hamburger and fries.

moofrank wrote:

If Thaad ever finds this thread, I bet she throws up in her mouth a little.

Meh. what do you mean 'finds' I posted on page 2, Mr.

I don't think Marketing is evil. Yes, I am slanted. But Deep Down - it comes down to a consumer take responsibily to judge the merit of the source of statements.

Marketing a crap game gets you no where. People will buy it - but 'early adopters' are only so much of a print run's purchasers. They will take it home, play it with their game group, and if it sucks, not only will their buddies not buy it, but they are going to be less likely to buy other things by the same company.

What game marketing really strives for (in my non-official opinion) is to match players with games that they will like. I don't like EVERY GAME style. You don't either. What you need to do, is find games you do like, that will hit a table. It could be the best damn thing in the world, but if it takes 4 hours, and you have 4 kids, a job to get to in the morning, a wife who wants the table clear for breakfast, and a cat who likes to sprawl amidst piles of chits, it ain't for you. Likewise, if you're like me, and hate mathy games, a great balanced game where you have to get out the slide rule is not good. You're going to be bad at it, have a bad time, and never want to play it again.

It's not unslanted info by any means, but it's information. Take it with a grain of salt, and look at content matching expectations over time. I think saying people saying they have to state loudly their source of game, funding etc is silly. Gov should be making lobbyists and judges and the like, you know IMPORTANT crap have sunshine.

It's not unslanted info by any means, but it's information. Take it with a grain of salt, and look at content matching expectations over time. I think saying people saying they have to state loudly their source of game, funding etc is silly. Gov should be making lobbyists and judges and the like, you know IMPORTANT crap have sunshine.

'Tis true. Even as far as internet skullduggery goes, sponsored blogs shouldn't even be near the top of the to-do list. I'm much more concerned about software that surreptitiously installs itself on my computer without my knowledge or consent, you know, something that actually violates my property rights. I can handle the shilling all by myself, thanks.