Reps from the UK PR firm for Eidos have confirmed that they're asking publications not to release any reviews for Tomb Raider: Underworld below an 8/10 until Monday. The firm says they're doing so at the request of Eidos, which is trying to manage the scores for as long as it can. The game is currently sporting a 78 on Metacritic.
Really Eidos? Really? You didn't lose enough goodwill being blamed for getting the world's most popular video games journalist fired and bringing a respected games portal to its knees? (Yes, we know you denied any involvement. This sort of thing certainly makes that seem credible.) You thought maybe journalists would keep this quiet because you were buds? Because they were worried about not getting advance copies of Just Cause 2?
Note to Eidos: Stop being evil. That is all.
[Update: The head of Barrington Harvey, the UK PR firm, is playing defense, with director Simon Byron saying, "Any site, be it Gamespot or whoever, is entirely within their rights to post whatever score they want and no-one is under any sort of obligation to delay any review." It should be noted that "being obligated to" and "being asked to under penalty of being blacklisted" are two very different things. Not that we think that happened, of course.]
Reader Comments (93)
Posted: Nov 21st 2008 10:38AM (Unverified) said
i am pissed! I have no idea what's going on, but I'm this close to spilling mountain dew over my homemade snes controller while my mom shouts at me to do my homework!
EIDOS!! EIDOS DAMN YOU!
Reply
EIDOS!! EIDOS DAMN YOU!
Posted: Nov 21st 2008 11:41AM BananaBoat said
I was extremely surprised by the Tomb Raider Underworld coverage on the 1up show. Especially considering that they loved the game, and never made even one joke about Miss Croft's Boobs. Then I saw the full page ad for the game on 1up.com. Now I'm wondering if yet another site hasn't fallen under the weight of a money hat.
I'm holding out belief that they just REALLY love Tomb Raider, and take it ultra seriously, but come on guys.
Oh, and Eidos got a permaban from receiving my money. They were shitlisted if you will. This new fiasco moves them up the list.
Reply
I'm holding out belief that they just REALLY love Tomb Raider, and take it ultra seriously, but come on guys.
Oh, and Eidos got a permaban from receiving my money. They were shitlisted if you will. This new fiasco moves them up the list.
Posted: Nov 21st 2008 12:29PM (Unverified) said
It's only really Xbox owners upset here, as finally they felt they had something even remotely as good as Uncharted, but really they should just stop crying, and buy the PS3/Uncharted pack and be done with it. better console, better game. job done..
Reply
Posted: Nov 21st 2008 2:43PM Vcize said
I played, and loved, Uncharted. But I don't get why that would mean you wouldn't care about any other games coming out in the same genre. I mean the game is like what, 8 hours long? How many freaking times can you play through that thing before you want another game in the same genre?
Though, I guess PS3-only owners got used to playing the same thing over and over and over and over and over again for that year and a half where they only had 1 decent game worth playing.
What's that you say? I'm using an old, expired argument? Take a look in the mirror, Mister "Shooterbox".
Reply
Though, I guess PS3-only owners got used to playing the same thing over and over and over and over and over again for that year and a half where they only had 1 decent game worth playing.
What's that you say? I'm using an old, expired argument? Take a look in the mirror, Mister "Shooterbox".
Posted: Nov 21st 2008 3:52PM Seven Weasels Running on a Keybo said
@reign
That is oversimplifying a little.
I think the largely accepted view is:
90s: you should play this
80s: this is worth playing for almost everyone
70s: worth playing for genre/series fans but little outside appeal
60s: your next-door neighbor will argue with you about how underappreciated it is, but it is honestly mediocre and/or buggy
Below: Just like an F in school, you can always get a lower percentage, but, the lower you get, the more likely it seems to be that the developers weren't even trying.
I guess that would fit with an A,B,C,D,F system very well, but the percentages, I think, are understood well by most. The supposed inflation of game ratings seems to have followed the common trends of grade inflation in academia, so the scales are about equivalent.
Mostly, I just wouldn't want letter grades because then you can't do complex, down to the nth demical point analyses of metacritic and gameranking scores. All my pointless Excel regressions of metacritics score vs number of letters in game's title would be ruined!
Reply
That is oversimplifying a little.
I think the largely accepted view is:
90s: you should play this
80s: this is worth playing for almost everyone
70s: worth playing for genre/series fans but little outside appeal
60s: your next-door neighbor will argue with you about how underappreciated it is, but it is honestly mediocre and/or buggy
Below: Just like an F in school, you can always get a lower percentage, but, the lower you get, the more likely it seems to be that the developers weren't even trying.
I guess that would fit with an A,B,C,D,F system very well, but the percentages, I think, are understood well by most. The supposed inflation of game ratings seems to have followed the common trends of grade inflation in academia, so the scales are about equivalent.
Mostly, I just wouldn't want letter grades because then you can't do complex, down to the nth demical point analyses of metacritic and gameranking scores. All my pointless Excel regressions of metacritics score vs number of letters in game's title would be ruined!
Posted: Nov 21st 2008 4:31PM butaneko said
Uncharted is not a great game, please stop spreading these falsehoods. After purchasing, playing, and selling this game, I came to these conclusions:
- The graphics are great
- The gunplay is weak and more than a little out of sync with the storyline (light banter after I just murdered 30 dudes?)
- The platforming stuff has been done 10 times better in Prince of Persia games. It's not fun or challenging.
- Zombies? No.
C+
Reply
- The graphics are great
- The gunplay is weak and more than a little out of sync with the storyline (light banter after I just murdered 30 dudes?)
- The platforming stuff has been done 10 times better in Prince of Persia games. It's not fun or challenging.
- Zombies? No.
C+
Posted: Nov 22nd 2008 7:26AM BananaBoat said
I know that I'm beating a dead horse at this point, but 1up reviewed Underworld again....why would a game get two reviews nearly back to back, especially when it's not really a AAA title? Shenanigannnnnsssssssss.
For its part, Uncharted dropped when the PS3 had dick all else for those without Wii's or 360's to play. Naturally, all of those people decided that it was the greatest game in history, and tried to lord it over the internet for awhile, but noone that had a 360 at the time bought into the hype. It's a decent game, but it has been done so many times in the past that it isn't even worth bringing up again.
Reply
For its part, Uncharted dropped when the PS3 had dick all else for those without Wii's or 360's to play. Naturally, all of those people decided that it was the greatest game in history, and tried to lord it over the internet for awhile, but noone that had a 360 at the time bought into the hype. It's a decent game, but it has been done so many times in the past that it isn't even worth bringing up again.
Posted: Nov 21st 2008 10:39AM (Unverified) said
Wow, just wow. To do this one time is bad enough but doing it twice in a year is just crazy! Looks like I'll be boycotting Tomb Raider now.
Reply
Posted: Nov 21st 2008 12:36PM aughscreennames said
From a business standpoint its a perfectly good strategy for shitty games, they will sell more shitty games if people dont know theyre shitty.
The problem here is Tomb Raider isnt a shitty game (anymore at least, the new ones are pretty good), but Eidos in all of their wisdom plans on making people assume its a shitty game that needs protection from the press. They also seem to have a fetish for user score backlash and should enjoy an extremely low user score average on all the major sites.
They should have left it alone. The game isnt bad, it just lacks polish because it didnt have a massive budget to make every element perfect. People can look past that just like they do with STALKER and other medium-budget good games.
Reply
The problem here is Tomb Raider isnt a shitty game (anymore at least, the new ones are pretty good), but Eidos in all of their wisdom plans on making people assume its a shitty game that needs protection from the press. They also seem to have a fetish for user score backlash and should enjoy an extremely low user score average on all the major sites.
They should have left it alone. The game isnt bad, it just lacks polish because it didnt have a massive budget to make every element perfect. People can look past that just like they do with STALKER and other medium-budget good games.
Posted: Nov 21st 2008 1:02PM Duke said
"From a business standpoint its a perfectly good strategy for shitty games, they will sell more shitty games if people dont know theyre shitty."
Believe it or not we aren't all stupid. Of course it would help sell more games. Yet it will also hurt their image to consumers when they find out the company is using such a strategy to trick them into buying said games.
Reply
Believe it or not we aren't all stupid. Of course it would help sell more games. Yet it will also hurt their image to consumers when they find out the company is using such a strategy to trick them into buying said games.
Posted: Nov 21st 2008 8:12PM (Unverified) said
@Eh
"From a business standpoint its a perfectly good strategy for shitty games, they will sell more shitty games if people dont know theyre shitty."
A perfect scheme. There's just one problem: we all know it's a shitty game now, even if it isn't.
Gaming publications - the ones that would actually even open, much less submit to, an email from Eidos' PR firm - are patronized by the same readers who visit game blogs. In fact, I'd say your average game site troll is more likely to read about this scandal than they are to read a sub-80% review of Tomb Raider.
Reply
"From a business standpoint its a perfectly good strategy for shitty games, they will sell more shitty games if people dont know theyre shitty."
A perfect scheme. There's just one problem: we all know it's a shitty game now, even if it isn't.
Gaming publications - the ones that would actually even open, much less submit to, an email from Eidos' PR firm - are patronized by the same readers who visit game blogs. In fact, I'd say your average game site troll is more likely to read about this scandal than they are to read a sub-80% review of Tomb Raider.
Posted: Nov 21st 2008 5:01PM MacGyver10 said
which by the way, OT, but Army of Two is now $30 new at walmart. in my opinion, its a great game for $30.
Reply
Posted: Nov 21st 2008 11:01AM koehler83 said
I guess we wont be hearing any real reviews until monday then. Except from anyone who doesnt give a crap about Eidos advertising revenue... (clearly not Joystiq, plastered with TR:U ads, as it is)
I can't be the only one who thinks that game looks horrible. I have no idea how it plays, but it certainly looks bad.
Reply
I can't be the only one who thinks that game looks horrible. I have no idea how it plays, but it certainly looks bad.
Posted: Nov 21st 2008 11:52AM SoCoolCurt said
Firefox 3 + Ad Block Plus = i have no idea what ads you are talking about.
Reply
Posted: Nov 21st 2008 10:54AM (Unverified) said
There's not too many Eidos games I care about anyway, but now I am not buying them with a purpose!
Reply
Posted: Nov 21st 2008 10:55AM darkinchworm said
When will developers and publishers realize that pulling stunts like these will only work against them in the long run?
Fuck you guys.
Reply
Fuck you guys.
Posted: Nov 21st 2008 10:56AM (Unverified) said
Lol, they can go fuck themselves.
I await the amazon review thrashings.
Reply
I await the amazon review thrashings.
Posted: Nov 21st 2008 10:56AM (Unverified) said
It's okay, Eidos. Most of us haven't even played a Tomb Raider game since the PSX days and will keep it that way.
Reply
Posted: Nov 21st 2008 11:03AM falcomadol said
Oh ouch. Not smart. Eidos needs to wake up and smell the coffee on this one. They keep stepping into the same pile of dogshit over and over.
Reply
Posted: Nov 21st 2008 11:04AM Jechtshot78 said
Eidos, what the hell are you doing? People have NOT forgotten gertsmann gate you know.
Reply
Posted: Nov 21st 2008 11:04AM (Unverified) said
Wow, that's pretty damn pathetic. What's the story involving the journalist being fired? I must have been out of the loop when that happened.
Reply
Posted: Nov 21st 2008 11:15AM (Unverified) said
Ah, there we go. That wasn't linked 5 minutes ago. Thanks for the heads up though.
Reply
Posted: Nov 21st 2008 11:15AM (Unverified) said
Ah, there we go. That wasn't linked 5 minutes ago. Thanks for the heads up though.
Reply
Sorry, you must be logged in to leave a comment.
Featured Stories
The most popular posts
in the last 7 days
- Vita 'UMD Passport' won't be offered in US 213 comments
- Kingdoms of Amalur: Reckoning review: A tempting fate 149 comments
- David Jaffe leaves Eat Sleep Play, layoffs hit developer [Update] 105 comments
- EA's Origin has signed up 9.3 million players since launch 103 comments
- Don't call it a remake: Final Fantasy X is a 'remaster,' to be clear 94 comments










