«

[xoopx]

Originally posted by Borodin+Jan 11 2005, 05:11 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Borodin @ Jan 11 2005, 05:11 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-xoopx@Jan 10 2005, 08:56 PM
i think it was because funcom isnt a very big company and cant afford the advertising and bribes to magazines and websites

I don't think it's advertising that drives the presence of reviews in magazines, but regular, sustained attempts to contact the press. Many developers, especially those that aren't located in the a magazine's home country, have difficulty doing this. When I wanted to do a review of The Longest Journey, my contact was the company owner. He was very genial, but told me Funcom didn't maintain a database of reviewers or magazines. I received a copy from overseas, and reviewed it, but he expressed no interest in the content to use for future promotion.

By contrast, the big game companies are aggressive in getting their products under the eyes of magazine editors and reviewers. They don't have to buy advertising to do this. They only have to enthuse a few people about their game. I've known sober editors in my day who turned into little kids upon being shown playable demos of some games.

Finally, stating that magazines do or don't do reviews on the basis of bribes is both harsh, and the kind of accusation that screams for proof when it's made. If you have proof, state it. If you don't, maybe you ought to consider how that kind of unsubstantiated accusation reflects upon you before making it. [/b][/quote]
the "proof" i need is when terrible games get 9/10 ratings. ive seen magazine slate a game that wasnt terrible, because they had arguments with the game company over previous things (amiga power and team 17 springs to mind)
frankly, i dont need to PROVE anything related to my opinion to you or anyone else. if you dont like it, thats not my problem.