Topic: PC Gamer Changes Its Review Policy

[MysterD]

PC Gamer is going to change its reviewing policy

Going for the gold
PC Gamer modifies its reviews policy
Words: Kristen Salvatore, PC Gamer US

Perhaps you are familiar with the saying, “The best laid plans of mice and men often go awry.” Or, “A journey of a thousand miles begins with a single step.” Or, “You really stepped in it, buddy.”

Some 9 months ago, we published a definitive PC Gamer reviews policy. It pledged that we would review only finished game code; that said game code would be from the gold master version the publisher uses to create the discs that end up in retail boxes or the equivalents; that MMO and multiplayer-only games would be reviewed in a setting that replicates the consumer experience; and that as such, we’d only review MMOs and MP-only games when we could play them against the general populace.

We have adhered to every letter of this reviews policy. And do you know what we’ve discovered? It totally doesn’t work.

Waiting for master discs and the opportunity to play an MMO against the rest of the world is making it almost impossible for us to get you reviews you can actually use to make decisions about what games to buy—the time it takes a publisher to replicate the discs and ship them to stores is so short, there’s not enough time for us to see the code in between. As a result, we feel like the quality of PC Gamer is suffering. Our job isn’t to just info-dump details onto you, but also to show you a good time. Doing that well means taking the time to craft our stories, and we can’t do that when we’re making eleventh-hour adjustments because a disc didn’t show up. In most cases, the difference between “finished code” and “gold master” is just Games for Windows certification, anyway.

So, let it never be said that I don’t own up to my mistakes. We’re tweaking the policy so we can get the best information to you in the timeliest manner: PC Gamer will only review finished game code, meaning code that the game’s developer has deemed finished and reviewable, and we will review MMO and multiplayer-only games in a setting that replicates the consumer experience, which we’ll create, if we have to. Developers have no incentive to give us unfinished code and call it finished—after all, we’ll continue to harsh on any problems we find, and we do not re-review games. And, as we learned while reviewing Left 4 Dead this month, you don’t need to play a multiplayer game with unseen strangers to find out if it’s a good game—you just need to create a situation that replicates the one you’d get at home.

December 5, 2008

[Pugnate]

There is a very very slight possibility that PC Gamer is in trouble. They are doing these constant changes etc., that are very reminiscent of CGW/GFW in its final years. In the end CGW/GFW realized that websites were beating them to the punch by weeks, so they started embracing that by reviewing games as if their readers had already played them and were looking for further discussion. While it sounded like a good idea, it just didn't work out, and GFW is now history.

PC Gamer are going in the opposite direction it seems. Instead of CGW/GFW who accepted the fact that they were behind the internet, PCG are apparently going to try and fight to be as exclusive as possible.

In the end, it may just help them survive longer. Exclusivity is one of the many things that kept PCG on top of CGW/GFW.

[scottws]

Good luck recreating the customer experience of an MMO game.

[Pugnate]

Especially the launch bugs.

[Cobra951]

And good luck reviewing anything accurately a month or 2 ahead of its final release. Print media hasn't got a chance anymore, not in this business.

[Pugnate]

Not unless they employ the business model of Edge:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edge_(magazine)

They are quite expensive, and very high quality (writing, art, printing). Basically they make enough money off of their readers to stay afloat. Apparently the mag does brilliantly. It iswhere all the video game journalists dream of ending up.

I actually have never read any of their issues, but I hear them mentioned in gushing tones by video game journalists frequently.

[Cobra951]

The final paren has to be inside the link, Pug.  Reading now . . .

[scottws]

Not unless they employ the business model of Edge:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edge_(magazine)

They are quite expensive, and very high quality (writing, art, printing). Basically they make enough money off of their readers to stay afloat. Apparently the mag does brilliantly. It is the mag where all the video game journalists dream of ending up.

I actually have never read any of their issues, but I hear them mentioned in gushing tones by video game journalists frequently.

Wow!  $72/yr!  You aren't kidding!

Did anyone check out the sample in the subscribe section?  That little applet is pretty cool!

[Pugnate]

Wow... that is cool!

[idolminds]

Edge is a good mag. I flip through it whenever Im at the book store.

[Pugnate]

What's the newstand price for it Idol?