Sekiro review embargo is very peculiar

[hanselthecaretaker]

So not only won?t the review embargo lift until after the release date [https://www.gamerevolution.com/news/506379-sekiro-shadows-die-twice-review-embargo], but Activision won?t even provide review copies at all until then.

This to me could mean one of two things mostly:

A. FROM influenced this decision through not wanting any chance of YouTubers spoiling big reveals or other aspects ahead of release.

B. Activision is just ?being weird? like the article says; most likely due to this being a very uncharacteristic release strategy for them (no micro transactions, loot boxes seasons passes or other preorder-baiting bs) and they are getting all moogly googly over it.

Or something else entirely. It would be a big surprise if it had anything to do with the game?s quality, as nothing has been a cause for concern prior and everyone?s impressions are positive. I?d hate to think it?s just Activision pulling a different kind of bs out of some twisted form of spite in having to make concessions with a developer for once.

It goes without saying that game reviews these days are as much a publicity ploy for big business as they are to simply provide critical feedback to consumers, but it?s odd nonetheless, as I also haven?t seen any of the ?big marketing push? [https://www.gamesindustry.biz/articles/2018-08-24-when-from-software-knocks-on-your-door-and-says-hey-we-wanna-make-a-game-you-have-only-one-answer-right] for this once-in-a-blue-moon game that Activision is typically known for with their yearly titles. [https://digiday.com/marketing/call-of-duty-marketing/]

I?m sure more will develop on this over the next week.

 

[Silentpony_v1legacy]

I know Jim Sterling claims review embargos are meant to make it easier for reviewers to review, giving them a wider window to get it done, but lets be honest they're a marketing strategy. You embargo when you want to prevent the customers from knowing something.

So not only a embargo until after release, but also review copies AFTER release tells me either From or Activision or both know something is wrong with their game. They believe their sales will increase the less consumers know about their product. They believe if a consumer read a review of the game they would choose not to buy it.
So something is wrong with the game.

 

[Lufia Erim]

I know Jim Sterling claims review embargos are meant to make it easier for reviewers to review, giving them a wider window to get it done, but lets be honest they're a marketing strategy. You embargo when you want to prevent the customers from knowing something.

So not only a embargo until after release, but also review copies AFTER release tells me either From or Activision or both know something is wrong with their game. They believe their sales will increase the less consumers know about their product. They believe if a consumer read a review of the game they would choose not to buy it.
So something is wrong with the game.

That's way too obvious to be the case. That's obviously what people are going to think. I think it's a spoiler thing. Remember when Persona 5 prohibited streaming past a certain in game day so people can experience the game and the twist themselves without spoilers? I feel like it's the same thing. This is From Softwares new IP. If Bloodborn and Darksouls is anything to go from, this game is best experienced blind. And let's be honest, with the way games media is these days it's very hard to experience something fresh and blind.

 

[Silentpony_v1legacy]

I know Jim Sterling claims review embargos are meant to make it easier for reviewers to review, giving them a wider window to get it done, but lets be honest they're a marketing strategy. You embargo when you want to prevent the customers from knowing something.

So not only a embargo until after release, but also review copies AFTER release tells me either From or Activision or both know something is wrong with their game. They believe their sales will increase the less consumers know about their product. They believe if a consumer read a review of the game they would choose not to buy it.
So something is wrong with the game.

That's way too obvious to be the case. That's obviously what people are going to think. I think it's a spoiler thing. Remember when Persona 5 prohibited streaming past a certain in game day so people can experience the game and the twist themselves without spoilers? I feel like it's the same thing. This is From Softwares new IP. If Bloodborn and Darksouls is anything to go from, this game is best experienced blind. And let's be honest, with the way games media is these days it's very hard to experience something fresh and blind.

That would make sense if it was only a review embargo, but why would they refuse to send out review copies until AFTER release? If they're worried about spoilers, the embargo is enough. Not even wanting reviewers to play it until after launch is suspicious

 

[Phoenixmgs_v1legacy]

Who cares? Gaming journalism's only purpose is advertising the game anyways, reviews are glorified advertisements. Oh noes, I'm not going to know if reviewers think it's 80-something awesome or 90-something awesome, how will I ever know whether or not to buy the game? We have full unedited sections of gameplay on Youtube demonstrating the game so it's not like we are just going off well-edited trailers showing only the good parts. And games that are shitty already have betas/demos to know they are shit like say Anthem or Fallout 76 or Battlefront 2. How is anyone that pays at least a little attention to an upcoming release "tricked" into buying some misadvertised, shitty game? In the end, it won't be until you play Sekiro yourself that you will know whether the gameplay systems work for you or not just like any other game.

 

[Erttheking]

Yeah gonna wait a few days for a clear image of this game to form.

 

[CaitSeith]

*snip*

*sniff* *sniff*
Do I smell a broken game? Or is it a PR stunt?

Who cares?

Lots of people.

Next!

 

[hanselthecaretaker]

It would be odd if this decision was made due to the game having issues, as

A. We haven?t heard of any concerns from any preview coverage thus far

B. If a certain aspect wasn?t up to par, it would be delayed. We haven?t heard of any issues with development though either.

My hunch is spoiler prevention, which even journalists have been known to violate.

 

[stroopwafel]

I was playing bloodborne till I saw the sekiro notification that it was pre-loading and I was like ''wtf did I just lose a week?'' but pre-load came early so that means it's already on the server. If that also means review copies are out idk. Now to stare at the timer I guess. *sigh*

Whatever publisher decisions are made concerning review embargos I don't really care in this case. I have blind faith in Miyazaki that he would never let Activision compromise on his vision. In the last decade this guy and his little studio made some of the best games ever made. Espescially the games he directed are my most favorite of all time. I have absolutely no doubt Sekiro is going to be another masterpiece.

 

[sXeth]

Really weird grassrooots attempt? Get the proverbial water cooler players to talk about it before letting the often fluffed press take on it.

Or its got some crippling flaw that they plan to patch in the first day or something.

Flip a coin really. Positive previews don't really mean crap. Anthem had overwhelmingly positive previews (even if always with a footnote of "EA will probably **** this up") until the demo hit with the damp thud of general "Well its alright" ranging into "this thing just broke my machine".


Or the alternative possiblity that this is a very gameplay oriented title (which would fit with at least some of the marketing). And well, reviewers have gotten more then a little artsy (predominantly, not always) over the last decade or so. So letting players who are more likely to embrace gameplay might generate more buzz then listening to a bunch of reviewers dissect how an action game is just a string of excuses to kill all the things in various backdrops.

 

[Worgen]

Hrmm. On one hand I really want this game and From Software does good quality but yeah this is a really weird thing to do if you have faith in a product. I mean I would expect Bethesda to pull this but Activision usually doesn't as far as I remember. Hmm, kinda makes me want to wait till those reviews show up, I mean I'm sure it will be good, but...

 

[hanselthecaretaker]

Hrmm. On one hand I really want this game and From Software does good quality but yeah this is a really weird thing to do if you have faith in a product. I mean I would expect Bethesda to pull this but Activision usually doesn't as far as I remember. Hmm, kinda makes me want to wait till those reviews show up, I mean I'm sure it will be good, but...

Apparently they did, with DOOM 2016. As a result it was ultimately enough to warrant somewhat of a policy change [https://www.vg247.com/2018/08/12/bethesda-review-policy-change-pete-hines/] to boot. IIRC Zelda BotW also had an embargo in place until something like mere hours before release.

In a way I wonder if this relatively new practice is meant as a bit of an insulator from potential media shitstorms surrounding games that could be considered controversial, even from a design standpoint like this. Sekiro clearly represents FROM?s largest change to their beloved formula since they?ve been on the map, and the fanbase is an exceptionally passionate one. Perhaps they figured it?s best for everyone to form their own opinions equally rather than have the ?professionals? blabber on about what?s ?good? or ?bad? as far as difficulty or whatever ahead of time, thus casting doubt and convoluting peoples? expectations.

That and it?s inevitable some talking head would let the cat out of the bag on some major things they want all players to discover for themselves.

 

[Phoenixmgs_v1legacy]

Who cares?

Lots of people.

Next!

Yeah, I forgot the Internet only cares about shit that doesn't matter.

Positive previews don't really mean crap. Anthem had overwhelmingly positive previews (even if always with a footnote of "EA will probably **** this up") until the demo hit with the damp thud of general "Well its alright" ranging into "this thing just broke my machine".

Gaming journalism is just advertisements for the game, even the reviews too (unless the game totally shits the bed). All you have to do is watch half hour or so of unedited gameplay footage (which is out there for Sekiro) to have a pretty good idea about the game as you always have to play it to fully know for sure anyway.

Hrmm. On one hand I really want this game and From Software does good quality but yeah this is a really weird thing to do if you have faith in a product. I mean I would expect Bethesda to pull this but Activision usually doesn't as far as I remember. Hmm, kinda makes me want to wait till those reviews show up, I mean I'm sure it will be good, but...

When did "evil" Bethesda's anti-review policy ever hide something horrifically wrong with a game; Dishonored 2 and Prey came out and they were exactly what you'd expect from Arkane. Doom 2016 was a Doom game. Or when Ubisoft totally pulled a fast one with the Watch Dogs downgrade... but totally showed footage of the final game well before the release that was perfectly accurate representation of the game. Outside of Aliens Colonial Marines and No Man's Sky, when have gamers ever been actually deceived? When you show chunks of unedited footage of a game, there's really nothing to hide.

I'm not saying to have blind faith in anybody or any developer, but simply just watch some footage like this [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9vBsk27bo6o] and judge for yourself.

 

[sXeth]

When you show chunks of unedited footage of a game, there's really nothing to hide.

I'm not saying to have blind faith in anybody or any developer, but simply just watch some footage like this [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9vBsk27bo6o] and judge for yourself.

You realize that link didn't even get to two minutes before it jump cuts, right? He literally announced so its not like its shadow editing, but kind of kills your point.

Which comes down to well, who has "unedited" footage. No Mans SKy you were watching Sean Murray "play" the thing with a controller on a TV in front of him, but that was all a trailer made out of a test build. Cowboy in your link was flown out by Activision to play a build presented to him, which we might assume was a limited demo, since it clearly doesn't start at a start point of the game (even before the jump cuts).

Obviously, once the games actually out in the wild, there's going to be dozens of presented cases that will start showing any obvious massages pretty quickly.


I would agree that the amount of meaningful deceit is generally kind of small. Its not profitable to be that studio that's spewed out controversy after controversy. Sekiro being kind of eyeballed skeptically because of Activisions involvement is proof enough of that, and Activision aren't even generally known for a lot of BS so much as formulaic games and constant, but up front, monetizations.

 

[Phoenixmgs_v1legacy]

You realize that link didn't even get to two minutes before it jump cuts, right? He literally announced so its not like its shadow editing, but kind of kills your point.

Which comes down to well, who has "unedited" footage. No Mans SKy you were watching Sean Murray "play" the thing with a controller on a TV in front of him, but that was all a trailer made out of a test build. Cowboy in your link was flown out by Activision to play a build presented to him, which we might assume was a limited demo, since it clearly doesn't start at a start point of the game (even before the jump cuts).

Obviously, once the games actually out in the wild, there's going to be dozens of presented cases that will start showing any obvious massages pretty quickly.

I would agree that the amount of meaningful deceit is generally kind of small. Its not profitable to be that studio that's spewed out controversy after controversy. Sekiro being kind of eyeballed skeptically because of Activisions involvement is proof enough of that, and Activision aren't even generally known for a lot of BS so much as formulaic games and constant, but up front, monetizations.

I figured that video would be a better watch than one that is in Japanese [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YVI413TmAg4]. Plus, there is good chunks of gameplay without edits in the video along with it definitely not being scripted footage either.

No Man's Sky is one of the few times there was legit deception. And even then, what they showed looked cool, but how could you not constantly ask "what is it that you actually do in the game (like the normal moment-to-moment gameplay)?" when watching any No Man's Sky footage? Sure Sean Murray said you can do like everything conceivably possible in interviews but never in gameplay. There was definitely deceit but I always thought that NMS would either be like the best thing since sliced bread or it was going to be the most boring game ever (because they just showed flash and nothing else). There'll be some cool and interesting looking planets but what's the percentage of those compared to boring ass desolate planets (it is a universe randomly generated after all). Anyway, you can determine a lot even from the very selected footage shown for marketing purposes like I knew Destiny was going to be shit just from the E3 reveal and dev interviews talking about the game (and that stuff is supposed to be pure unadulterated hype).

 

[PsychedelicDiamond]

Who cares? Gaming journalism's only purpose is advertising the game anyways, reviews are glorified advertisements. Oh noes, I'm not going to know if reviewers think it's 80-something awesome or 90-something awesome, how will I ever know whether or not to buy the game? We have full unedited sections of gameplay on Youtube demonstrating the game so it's not like we are just going off well-edited trailers showing only the good parts. And games that are shitty already have betas/demos to know they are shit like say Anthem or Fallout 76 or Battlefront 2. How is anyone that pays at least a little attention to an upcoming release "tricked" into buying some misadvertised, shitty game? In the end, it won't be until you play Sekiro yourself that you will know whether the gameplay systems work for you or not just like any other game.

That's a very negative take on gaming criticism. While I agree that there are a lot of issues with it, it doesn't deserve to be dismissed as pure advertisment either. A critics work is important and deserves at least some acknowledgement.

 

[Erttheking]

Yeah, I forgot the Internet only cares about shit that doesn't matter.

*Le sigh*

I'm sorry man. It's Activision. I love From Software but them doing this is setting off alarm bells.

 

[stroopwafel]

Who cares? Gaming journalism's only purpose is advertising the game anyways, reviews are glorified advertisements. Oh noes, I'm not going to know if reviewers think it's 80-something awesome or 90-something awesome, how will I ever know whether or not to buy the game? We have full unedited sections of gameplay on Youtube demonstrating the game so it's not like we are just going off well-edited trailers showing only the good parts. And games that are shitty already have betas/demos to know they are shit like say Anthem or Fallout 76 or Battlefront 2. How is anyone that pays at least a little attention to an upcoming release "tricked" into buying some misadvertised, shitty game? In the end, it won't be until you play Sekiro yourself that you will know whether the gameplay systems work for you or not just like any other game.

That's a very negative take on gaming criticism. While I agree that there are a lot of issues with it, it doesn't deserve to be dismissed as pure advertisment either. A critics work is important and deserves at least some acknowledgement.

I think he has a point though. Criticism is subjective so you can wonder what it's worth if the criticism(or praise) is from someone who don't share your taste in games. Games require usually more time commitment than a movie and can't be judged solely on the merits of it's writing either like a book. In that way a videogame is more a product, but with artistic elements. Criticism about games as a product can have some merit to warn the consumer to not buy a particular game(case in point, FO76) but criticism about it's gameplay or artistic elements is highly subjective. Another example here would be Ghost Recon Wildlands, critics panned the game for being repetitive and boring but consumers still loved it as it was a major (sales) hit. It also happens the other way around. God of War and Monster Hunter World were praised by both critics and 'gamers' alike but I didn't really enjoy either game for different reasons. So yeah, opinions and all that. I also agree there is usually a sufficent amount of unedited gameplay available before launch to make your own opinion.

Leaves the question will Sekiro be broken at launch or does Activision has something to hide? Of that, both as game director and president of From Software, I am absolutely assured Miyazaki would never approve.

 

[TheMysteriousGX]

I?m out. Between Activision being shits about layoffs and this new set of review shenanigans, I?m waiting until it?s free.

 

[hanselthecaretaker]

I asked VaatiVidya [https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=ZkUNLxeXaPY] what his thoughts were. Spoilers on the video obviously per the title. We?ll see if he says anything.