• alphafour - May 21, 2011 5:49 p.m.

    I'm gonna write a bad review on his amazon page too, that arsehole. If his livelihood is bashing games disproportionately for problems that they probably couldn't fix anyway (It's on the Wii guys.. I bet producing graphics of that standard would be like trying to get your grandma to do the High Jump..), he doesn't deserve to be a journalist. Weren't journalists meant to be as impartial as possible? This fella seems like a bit of a prick in my opinion.
  • PooPSock - May 21, 2011 5:15 p.m.

    @GamesRadarTylerWilde Good point, but I was trying to relate it to feeling a personal attachment to something and defending it by rebuking against someone panning said something. Being personally connected to something and having a personal connection with something is very different, but I think that the emotional bond is still strong(perhaps not as strong, but in some cases even more potent(I refer you to Fanboys)). Hurt feelings are hurt feelings. I'm fairly sure that was the motive on the part of High Voltage, and it most certainly wasn't professional. However, that doesn't truly legitimize a peer review as a full-blown controversy. It's all a petty matter in the end, and no one can say that Murdock's book didn't gain some additional publicity due to the fiasco(if you can call it that). Is there really any harm done?
  • trackstar103 - May 21, 2011 4:23 p.m.

    High Voltage's creative director just made a statement saying the workers could feel free to READ THE BOOK and then write a review. Thats like saying I'm free to read this article and then comment like I'm doing now; it goes without saying. As to supposedly hurting this author's career, just think about metacritic and sites where countless users will give a game a 0 simply out of spite. do you trust that the game deserves a score of 0? @grandinquisitor yeah exactly all Murdock should be saying is 'thanks for the free publicity'
  • Spacegrass - May 21, 2011 4:13 p.m.

    Way to be grown ups there, High Voltage. Here's an idea: if you don't want bad reviews, DO NOT MAKE A BAD GAME. This shouldn't be hard to figure out. I really have no sympathy for people who make bad games, because it's a terrible thing to do. They're taking peoples' hard-earned money and giving them trash in return because making something good would take too much effort. Murdock didn't write anything that wasn't called for. This whole thing will probably backfire on them, too. The publicity that this story is getting will result in more people reading about how bad Conduit 2 is, and less people buying the game. I haven't read the book, but if it really is any good, the publicity it's getting will cause more people to read it and give it good reviews. Hope your childish moment of revenge was worth it!
  • yagirlfriendsfavoriterapper - May 21, 2011 4:02 p.m.

    High Voltage are still my heroes, the reviewer is clearly an asshole, right?
  • crumbdunky - May 21, 2011 3:29 p.m.

    Funny thing is I've read the book and, if anything, it's just as bad as Conduit2 and even more amazingly it even shares a few faults-derivative of the rest of it's genre to the nth degree springs straight to mind. So,having played the book and read the game I feel in total command of the facts and the best one of them is called "both game and book are sub-par and thus deserve to be linked forever". So,meh, may HVS and Murdock remain very happy together inhabiting the same level of mild disappointment as they currently do. I suppose, in fairness, a Joystick writer and the makers of the previously underwhelming Conduit were always likely to meet somewhere down in the middle of mediocrity. Nothing to see here. Well, nothing of any great quality anyway and to me the way Murdock is clinging onto this as the best way to push his awful book is the most desperate thing I've seen in ages.
  • misfit119 - May 21, 2011 3:11 p.m.

    Name calling and giving games bad reviews for no reason has worked out just fine for Destructoid so far so I see no reason other sites shouldn't get in on the fun. I do also love how people like to give game reviewers huge amounts of shit for their opinions then they like to devalue the reviewers work by stating that it's just an opinion. Well obviously it's a helluva opinion if it's got you so butthurt over it. And no, he didn't bring up his book review that little blurb is appended to all reviews written on Joystiq as part of the writers credits. But clearly that's too much effort for the game developers to notice. Clearly they're too busy having little spats with people who don't like their crappy games to actually develop anything worth a damn.
  • Turbonutter - May 21, 2011 3:01 p.m.

    Seems to me like both sides were rather childish and unprofessional during the whole affair. Resorting to name-calling in a "professional" review is sophomoric nonsense that does nothing to aid your credibility, and a studio head calling out the author's other (unrelated) work in a tit-for-tat manner is grade-school level B.S. Stay classy gentlemen, stay classy...
  • InsertWittyNameHere - May 21, 2011 2:43 p.m.

    I definitely think that retaliating against a review, no matter how bad, is wrong. Now, according to the article, the reviewer plugged his book. That being true, I would think he deserved the flak. But, after following the link and reading the review, he did not plug his book. His book is referenced after the article and probably by his editor as to the writers qualifications. So, I think all fault lies with the Developer!
  • ParagonT - May 21, 2011 1:19 p.m.

    I think its definitely unprofessional. The reviews job description is to voice their opinion, no matter how untactful or positive they are about it. A developer, although help making the game, really shows their insecurities and their pride when they do these things. It's not the image I would like to set for myself if I was him. He shouldn't have to do that if he was proud and solid on the game itself, but just by what he did the the reviewer, who was obviously an immature idiot by the way, shows that the game cannot speak for itself. That the game needs big brother to watch its back instead of letting it shine on its own. If the game is good, then it doesn't matter what the ***-hat reviewer says. But obviously that's not the case...
  • MuleVariant - May 21, 2011 1:08 p.m.

    I'm gonna go ahead and judge that book by it's cover and say that it is terrible!
  • stavros45 - May 21, 2011 12:35 p.m.

    EDIT: If you can't handle that, you have no business playing a video game ever.
  • stavros45 - May 21, 2011 12:35 p.m.

    I don't see why High Voltage got so upset. It's not like Joystiq is a real website or anything. They just grab articles from other, better blogs and repost. Granted, the reviewer got what he deserved by posting a overly negative review just to grab some attention. "Heck, break out your N64 instead and replay Perfect Dark. Even that story makes more sense, and, to be honest ... the graphics are a little better." Really? Even for sarcastic that's overkill. Perfect Dark looks like a muddy piece of garbage. Oh, and I seriously can't stand reviewers who complain about controls. You can adjust every single goddamn aspect of control, even mapping buttons. If you can handle that, you have no business playing a video game. Ever.
  • bilstar - May 21, 2011 11:14 a.m.

    Ummm... the review was pretty scathing, you've got to remember that some people put a LOT of time and effort into the game, and are going to be upset when their game gets slagged off so comprehensively. BUT, it IS a review and it's supposed to give us an opinion of the game, which that review certainly did! Possibly the review could have been worded better AND conveyed the same message? Manners cost nothing. The Amazon book-bashing by High Voltage is really sad though. If you're going to get offended, either make a better game of don't read the review. You can't go taking these things personally, it's just not on.
  • quincytheodore - May 21, 2011 7:29 a.m.

    I learned something profound in literature today by reading this article.. Lackadaisi... Lackasid... Lackadaisical.. oh, I was right the first time. It means lack of life. What might be the cause for one to use such complicated word which the meaning is simpler than the word itself?
  • joemoreheroes - May 21, 2011 5:23 a.m.

    The review was essentially an attack ad and a lie. It appears that they wanted to make a point by countering a dishonest unprofessional review with dishonest unprofessional reviews. Murdock Claims that this was an attack on his livelihood, but one can argue that a dishonest attack review regarding the developers and their product is as well. He’s only a “lowly” reviewer? Well its obvious that he has oh so high esteem of his job and role in the industry.
  • Kayden - May 21, 2011 4:53 a.m.

    As long as they read and give their impressions of it with out trying to pollute it with what he did to the studio, seriously I don't care. The problem is that even if a review from them is thoughtfully negative he wants to cry foul and he is acting literally childish.
  • kingdom - May 21, 2011 4:47 a.m.

    I don't think we should ignore the reviewer sounding like a smug prick and blasting all of that and then plugging his own stuff on the same page. That is a pretty dick move from a reviewer. A bad review is one thing, a bad review followed by "You know what doesn't suck this bad? My it and stuff!" Really kinda opens yourself up a bit, especially if this is a sarcastic interoffice email (as it sounds to me) that people are taking out of context and freaking out. Its like that adoptive dad freaking out about one or two lines in Portal 2's dialog and ignoring all the others dripping with sarcasm and Cave Johnson talking about not hiring handicapped folk because its expensive for ramps. These are fairly different deals but I feel like both are taking something out of context. The devs shouldn't have done this but I think it makes both parties look pretty childish, not just one.
  • WinkedUp Lozza - May 21, 2011 4:26 a.m.

    Thing is, it's actually made the book more noticed, so this story is really advertising the reviewer's book and the game, Conduit
  • BLOODmuffins - May 21, 2011 4:18 a.m.

    Wow, the people at High Voltage are a bunch of cunts. Maybe instead of attacking people who give an honest review of their game they should focus on making sure their next product isn't a worthless sack of shit like Conduit 2 is.

Showing 21-40 of 67 comments

Join the Discussion
Add a comment (HTML tags are not allowed.)
Characters remaining: 5000


Connect with Facebook

Log in using Facebook to share comments, games, status update and other activity easily with your Facebook feed.