Journalists Forced To Buy Their Own Sonic Boom Copies To Review

53 Comments

1. That’s kinda funny actually

   1. I strongly agree. 😀

   2. Funny in a sad way. Just goes to show how Sega has absolutely no faith in this game.

2. Good, they had to buy their own copies like the rest of us. As it should be. It makes them show true interest and love for something and desire to put cash out to review it instead of freebies they could care less for. Its good to see they have the interest and love in Sonic to buy a game to review it.

   1. I feel the same way. You said everything perfectly! 😉 Let’s just hope that this doesn’t negatively impact their reviews though. 😮

      1. It Won’t. Though Sonic Boom is already set to be DEMOLISHED by reviewers considering how awful the games are.

   2. You seem to be forgetting the part where this is their job and not just something they do for fun. Spending a few bucks on some work clothes so that you’re up to dress code or something like that is one thing, but to have to shell out for a 60 dollar game (or in this case, 60+another 35 or whatever the 3ds version costs) is another.
      Granted, of course, their employer could be covering the costs in this case, but at the same time if they had just gotten the review copies they wouldn’t have to.
      If these were smaller scale reviewers, then I might kind of agree here (I’ve seen smaller reviewers just plain not review anything they don’t get advance copies for), but when it comes to reviewers the size of IGN and Kotaku, there’s just no good reason for this.
      Also, when reviewing something, the point is to be as unbiased as possible. Showing “love,” “interest” and “desire” for something going into it is the polar opposite of that.

      1. Sonic Boom Wii U is 50 dollars. This is no Mario game we’re talking about here.

   3. Umm, no. It’ll be considered a work expense that their employer will cover. The reviewer him/herself doesn’t need to spend a dime on the game. Also, to someone who covers the games industry who gets free games on a regular basis, receiving a free review copy in advance is not a big deal. It’s not a perk, it’s paperwork that they need to do their job properly.

      At the end of the day, that’s just it – they’re buying their own copies so they can still actually do their jobs. It doesn’t mean they have any deep love for the series.

   4. Point. Missed. Woooooosh

3. Well, if I were Sega and had to deal with IGN’s IGNorance for a decade plus, I would probably do the same thing when I finally had a good game made just so they would have to pony up for the privilege just like the rest of the world.

   1. Indeed.

   2. Except this doesn’t look like a good game. This looks like another Sonic 06, and making them pay for a bad game with their own money is only throwing gasoline onto a fire.

      1. @Josh

         Pretty much. It has less to do with IGN thinking Sonic is bad, which, lets be honest, there’s no evidence for. Not when you consider the fact that the Adventure games, Heroes, Colors, Generations, Sonic 4 Episode 1, the Wii version of Unleashed, pretty much all of the handheld games from the original Advance right up until Colors DS, fuck, even Free Riders, have all achieved high scores from them.
         Sega just doesn’t have faith in the game, and with good reason, frankly.

         1. For what its worth, IGN once wrote an article implying that even the classic Sonic games were never that good in the first place. I remember that they even used the word “illusion” specifically. Unfortunately I don’t have a link to it. The article is a few years old and may not even be on the site anymore. They also once posted a short comic saying how Sonic was dead. If you saw those things for yourself, it would be hard to deny that some of the IGN staff (not all of them) have at least a slight bias against Sonic.

   3. Whatever your opinion of IGN, the fact remains that they are one of the largest and most influential gaming journalism sites out there.

      1. An unfortunate fact. In a different product market entirely, I know of a certain influential site (CNET) that still pumps out mindlessly positive reviews in favor of Beats headphones. A listener with decent ears knows a pair of Beats is hardly better than a $20 pair of headphones, even for hard hitting quality bass. The point is, nowadays, so-called “professional” reviews are often more emotionally driven and, in turn, less reputable than many user reviews. Don’t be IGNorant. 😉

   4. BOOM is likely a bad game.

      1. Or a good game

4. Good, I say. Face it, even if the game is actually good, sites like IGN will rate it low anyway (see Sonic Adventure 2: Battle). Why give out free copies to people who will surely give the game a low score?

   1. Yeah, you play that victimization card, show them who’s boss.

      (This game looks like absolute dog shit and deserves nothing but low scores).

   2. Site gives game score you don’t agree with, so therefore site is worthless and irrelevant?

      1. This is IGN we’re talking about

         1. I’m well aware that there is a lot of animosity towards IGN, especially from the Sonic fanbase. But unless someone can demonstrate a genuine IGN bias against the franchise… well, let’s just say my pitchfork will remain in storage.

   3. What makes you think every low score a Sonic game gets is biased? Because you like Sonic? Oh boohoo. Grow up, kid.

   4. They gave SA2 B too high of a score.

5. It’s a dire attempt to make a small profit from review sites’ purchase of the game rather than distributing them freely to them. In addition to the obvious fact that Sega forecasted negative sales impact from the poor reviews that the games would have (and are bound to) garnern(ed) had the games been reviewed before release.

   (Feel like I just pointed out that the sky is blue.)

   1. Proverbial drop in the profit bucket, if you ask me, and most likely untrue. Good theory, but it’s got some holes.

6. Meanwhile, on the TV front…

   “Saturday morning programming (7-11 a.m.) earned year-over-year delivery gains across all targeted kids and boy demos, ranging from 20% to 46%. Sonic Boom (7 a.m.) and Pokémon the Series XY (8 a.m.) both ranked #1 in their respective time periods among kids 9-14 and boys 6-11/9-14. Both new episode premieres grew delivery of all targeted demos vs. the same time period last year, ranging from 52% to 132%.”

   http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/2014/11/11/weekly-ratings-notes-for-adult-swim-cartoon-network-tbs-tnt-american-dad-over-the-garden-wall-transporter-the-series-on-the-menu-more/326412/

   1. That’s… Pretty awesome.

      1. Yeah, really technical mumbo jumbo but the long of the short of it is Sonic Boom is topping the charts so far in the viewer surveys. At least it’s off to a strong and speedy start!

         1. It even boosted viewership compared to last year’s show that was on the same time slot.

         2. SWEET!

7. 10 – 0 – 11 – 00: 2 8-|

8. Wow, the comment section is full of brain deads. Are you fucking serious? This is never a good thing. It’s silencing the media so they can get a few more copies sold before word gets out on how horrible the game is. Even Sega has no faith in this game rofl.
   You know what other game Sega didn’t send out review copies for? Aliens: Colonial Marines. You know how well that game was received? http://www.metacritic.com/game/playstation-3/aliens-colonial-marines
   It’s kind of amusing how history repeats itself. Hardcore Aliens fans were defending that game like it was their newborn child. And now, Sonic fans.

   Maybe the franchise really should die in April 2015.

   1. Try hard hater is try hard.

   2. 100% agreed. This ISN’T a good thing, it means the games will be getting EVEN MORE negative publicity than before for that very reason.

      Boom should’ve just been a TV show with a toyline, dammit.

      1. I agree. If Bomm was just a mere TV show, there would be less controversy.

         1. Indeed.

   3. Totally agreed. I do not believe people here are saying that the media should go and buy their own copy, as if Sega is doing a moral thing (every tech and video game company who wants their product to be reviewed either sends out free copies of the product or at least lends it). Sega merely does not want the game to be reviewed, because they know it will be panned and that it will effect their sales. I wish they would put all of this post-disaster control into actually churning out a quality product.

      I can already see this game being a critical and commercial failure, not to mention cause damage to the Sonic brand. I cannot believe in 2009 Sega went through the trouble of hiring a brand manager (who has now left Sega) and delisted previous poorly received games only to return to damaging the brand with these anti-PR moves and low-quality releases. I am very disappointed in Sega, and I can see the sales of this game (or lack of) having a major impact on their balance sheet at the end of the year, maybe they will learn their lesson this time around (or maybe they will blame it on the video game industry going mobile and say they will focus more on that, you never know with Sega).

9. Holy shit, that is incredibly stupid of Sega. As if dumping salt into their wounded brand with this atrocious redesign isn’t already bad enough, they have to do something like this as well? This isn’t going to get them in good graces with anybody, and it’s particularly stupid of them to do it when Sonic’s public image is already tarnished by his bad games and idiotic fandom who defend actions like this.

   1. Judging from the way you’re talking, I’d say this is a classic case of the shoe being on the other foot. Be nice (or least, make a genuine effort to try), ‘kay? Your complaining does absolutely nothing to change the state of affairs for better or for worse and is akin to a little child throwing a temper tantrum expecting the world to stop at their beckoning whim. So stop.

      1. /\ The butthurt started xD
         Oh, fanboys, fanboys…

         1. @Peter: I know, right. Josh has to swear up a storm and demean others just to keep his pride up. Cringe-worthy posting at its finest…

         2. @Peter
            Do you know the definition of a fanboy sir?

      2. @Hifihedgehog
         Let the man express his opinion. Staying silent doesn’t doesn’t do anything either. But you know…what you say holds some truth cause apparently speaking up doesn’t affect Sega either because they went right ahead and greenlit this game and Sonic Lost World (when nearly everyone loved Colors and Generations and continuing in that direction would’ve made entirely more sense.)

   2. Sega is not an intelligent company

10. http://i3.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/original/000/772/482/381.jpg

    This kids, is why you should always take “professional video game reviews and journalism” with a grain of salt and nothing else.

11. Let’s hope Sega finally releases some Sonic games to the other consoles, especially in light of the ongoing trend of console sales as shown in a chart in this article:

    http://www.theverge.com/2014/11/12/7211395/xbox-one-10-million-sales

    It just makes sense when a sizeable portion of the Sonic the Hedgehog fan demographic is made up of adults 20 to 29 who very likely own non-Nintendo consoles and are potential buyers looking for such a product:

    http://www.imdb.com/title/tt3232262/ratings?ref_=tt_ov_rt

    It would be even nicer if Sega released Sonic Boom to everyone else in the not-so-distant future since, contrary to popular belief (not to mention the incessant lunatic fan antics here), many of us are rather enthusiastic and highly interested in purchasing it on other consoles.

12. Bah, SEGA is not stupid in final of those things ham? :v I mean, they know Sonic fan base, they know how is the haters and they know EXACTLY how we love Sonic, that’s it, they know the game could be good for someone, but for they, it’s not exactly what they wanted to do with Sonic, I mean, I don’t think Takashi agreed 100% with this “new sonic” (Just for a spin-off, is too much).

13. #karma

    1. Karma is spelled with a “k”?! 😮

       1. http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/karma

Comments are closed.