Ubisoft Review emboragoes vs. EA review

[CrazyBlaze]

So as we all know this is this the time for major games to come out and many of us use reviews to help gauge how much money we are willing to put down on a new game (buy now or wait till it becomes cheaper) or even day one buys. Now this week Ubisoft released two major games this Tuesday; Assassin's Creed Unity and Assassin's Creed Rouge, neither of which have reviews out on most major websites. In fact ACU reviews are not allowed out until 9 AM Pacific Standard Time (just over two hours from the time of this post) and ACR didn't even get review copy's sent out. So for anyone wanting to cancel a preorder or place one well they just wouldn't be able to get an idea of the game.

Now on the other EA will release Dragon Age Inquisition next week and reviews are already out for it. So if people didn't like what they saw or heard about it they can just cancel or wait for it. It really strikes me as strange because EA was screwing up for so long that the fact they are now making steps in the right direction is just disturbing.

 

[tippy2k2]

I never understood everyone's obsession with review embargoes...

If you're intelligent, you either don't pre-order or you pre-order at a place that will allow you to cancel it even after the game comes out (which is the vast majority I've seen; maybe there are places that don't allow you to but I've never seen it). Therefore the embargo should mean nothing to you.

If you're too antsy or you are not plugged into the gaming scene (in which case, you're not reading reviews anyway), that's a risk you know you are taking and if it bites you, that's the gamble you rolled.

 

[BloatedGuppy]

I never understood everyone's obsession with review embargoes...

A review embargo that lasts until the game's retail release is usually something of a red flag. Is the same case with films. Leaves you wondering what it is they're hiding.

Nice to see EA letting DA3 reviews out so early. Shows confidence in the product. And from the sounds of it the early reviews are positive, and indicate a good faith effort by Bioware to "return to form".

 

[DoPo]

I never understood everyone's obsession with review embargoes...

A review embargo that lasts until the game's retail release is usually something of a red flag. Is the same case with films. Leaves you wondering what it is they're hiding.

Yet if you wait for a week after release, there would be plenty of reviews. Are there that many people who absolutely positively can both only have the game on day 1 and don't even know if they are to trust it? I don't think so. Or perhaps, I don't want to think so. Because these two seem at odds at each other - it seems to me that you should only be getting something at day 1 if you trust it.

There is the separate question of whether people should be going for absolutely positively day 1, accept no substitutes. Or at least in such big quantities for review embargoes to be a problem.

To clarify, I'm not saying review embargoes are good or that even aren't an issue, however, their and impact does reveal something else that could be problematic. In other words, the fact that they are a problem doesn't seem to be the only problem.

 

[BloatedGuppy]

Yet if you wait for a week after release, there would be plenty of reviews. Are there that many people who absolutely positively can both only have the game on day 1 and don't even know if they are to trust it? I don't think so. Or perhaps, I don't want to think so. Because these two seem at odds at each other - it seems to me that you should only be getting something at day 1 if you trust it.

There is the separate question of whether people should be going for absolutely positively day 1, accept no substitutes. Or at least in such big quantities for review embargoes to be a problem.

To clarify, I'm not saying review embargoes are good or that even aren't an issue, however, their and impact does reveal something else that could be problematic. In other words, the fact that they are a problem doesn't seem to be the only problem.

Caveat Emptor is a separate issue entirely. The two can inform each other, but they're not interconnected.

A person buying something on day one with zero research involved, either because they couldn't or wouldn't, is an issue with that person and their decision making process.

A game or film or other media product that has reviews denied or hidden until sales have begun in earnest is concerning. Positive reviews will typically boost day one sales, so one has to be suspicious as to the reason said reviews were blocked.

I don't rely on day one reviews to drive my purchasing decisions, so it's all rather irrelevant to me, but news of shady review embargos make me extra suspicious towards a product. Fortunately in this case I was never interested in Assassins Creed 45 to begin with.

 

[IllumInaTIma]

Sometimes a review embargo can tell more about a game than a review itself.
It was a case with the Last of Us, that lifted the embargo more than a week in advance, and it seems to be the case with The Inquisition. It just shows the confidence and faith in their creation on the part of the developer.

 

[DoPo]

Yet if you wait for a week after release, there would be plenty of reviews. Are there that many people who absolutely positively can both only have the game on day 1 and don't even know if they are to trust it? I don't think so. Or perhaps, I don't want to think so. Because these two seem at odds at each other - it seems to me that you should only be getting something at day 1 if you trust it.

There is the separate question of whether people should be going for absolutely positively day 1, accept no substitutes. Or at least in such big quantities for review embargoes to be a problem.

To clarify, I'm not saying review embargoes are good or that even aren't an issue, however, their and impact does reveal something else that could be problematic. In other words, the fact that they are a problem doesn't seem to be the only problem.

Caveat Emptor is a separate issue entirely. The two can inform each other, but they're not interconnected.

And I don't claim they are interconnected either, just that if review embargoes affect a sufficiently many people, then there is sufficiently many people who preorder with not enough prior knowledge or trust. The two are linked to the day 1 purchasing which does appear to be a problem.

 

[Longing]

Didn't EA also refuse to send copies of The Sims 4 to be reviewed? I think it's pretty obvious that the less a publisher has faith in his product the more likely he is of relying on people buying blindly on release day.

Anyway, I, for one, learned my lesson and fuck Ubisoft. Both Assassin's Creed will end up being shit and they're just trying to minimize the damage.

 

[Adam Jensen_v1legacy]

Anyway, I, for one, learned my lesson and fuck Ubisoft. Both Assassin's Creed will end up being shit and they're just trying to minimize the damage.

Rogue seems to be OK. But they really couldn't mess up with that one, seeing how it's basically a standalone expansion for Black Flag. The same engine, the same code, the same assets. They mixed and matched a lot of stuff from AC3 and Black Flag and they came up with Rogue. I guess Rogue is to Kenway saga what Revelation was to Ezio trilogy. I enjoyed Revelations a lot. And I enjoyed Black Flag. I'm still not gonna pre-order Rogue for the PC, but I will get it at some point. Unity, even if they fix it up completely, will end up in my library when it's $7,5 at most.

 

[Atmos Duality]

Publishers aren't legally obligated to provide review copies, but neither am I obligated to take them at their word, at any point. That said, I have extremely low tolerance for obfuscation, especially from companies that spend gobs on marketing for their games already.

For them, a review embargo ensures no sale from me. Period.
Not just on day 1, but well past that.