High Voltage accused of 'amazonbombing' Conduit 2 reviewer

[WiiUBricker]

The review is harsh for sure, but it sounds like it was something the reviewer genuinely did not enjoy.

Did you read the full review? And I mean really the FULL review?

 

[Nathan Drake]

The review is harsh for sure, but it sounds like it was something the reviewer genuinely did not enjoy.

Did you read the full review? And I mean really the FULL review?

Start to finish. I've read more harsh reviews, and have said more harsh things about games people tend to enjoy myself.

 

[Forstride]

it's a lot more childish to deliberately review a game so bad like this person did.

Uh, no, it's not. Have you ever heard the saying "Two wrongs don't make a right?" Yeah, that applies here. Wait, you're an obvious fanboy...This post is pointless to you.

 

[ShadowSoldier]

Meh I hate shooters, so I really don't care if it got a 1 out of 5. But it is childish to rate down a book because your game got a bad review.

It may be childish but it's a lot more childish to deliberately review a game so bad like this person did. Have a look at his review and judge for yourself.

Review = Opinion.

In your mind = "HOW DARE HE HAVE HIS OWN OPINION ON THE GAME! RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE!"

 

[DeMoN]

The email never said to give a negative review, just a review. What the employees decide to do is up to them.
So this can't hold up in court or anything like that.

 

[Fluto]

i loled

 

[Zorua]

LOL, looks like amazon removed most of them.

 

[ShadowSoldier]

The email never said to give a negative review, just a review. What the employees decide to do is up to them.
So this can't hold up in court or anything like that.

It wouldn't go to court in the first place. And it's pretty obvious what the guy wanted them to do -__-

 

[Nollog]

This is rather childish of High Voltage.

They're a rather childish company.

They announce titles before they've even started them.

 

[JoostinOnline]

The game did have some flaws in my opinion (the cheesy dialog), but other than that I think it is great. Multiplayer is absolutely awesome.

 

[Foxi4]

I don't see how any of this is a no-no - I find it quite funny.

The Conduit 2 is indeed one of the best shooters out there for the Wii, the review is indeed a load of crap, you can't demand much more from the Wii. The reviewer had no idea of what he's reviewing, so the "public" payed him back by reviewing his book and not giving a damn what it is about.

Justice is served, the world is filled with smiles.

 

[8BitWalugi]

That's just stupid and immature. High Voltage should learn from that review, and maybe try a better approach.

Not screw up his book reviews.

 

[Juanmatron]

It's not, though. It's really, really not. If you're looking for a solid FPS on a Nintendo console, go pick up Activision's GoldenEye. 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.

Yes, thats right. Perfect Dark on N64 has better graphics than Conduit 2, *insert facepalm here*

Only the multiplayer of Perfect Dark has better graphics. Conduit is a combo of Normal Mapping and a lot of big textures.

PD: I liked GoldenEye more. I have to test better the multiplayer off-line.

 

[WiiUBricker]

Meh I hate shooters, so I really don't care if it got a 1 out of 5. But it is childish to rate down a book because your game got a bad review.

It may be childish but it's a lot more childish to deliberately review a game so bad like this person did. Have a look at his review and judge for yourself.

Review = Opinion.

In your mind = "HOW DARE HE HAVE HIS OWN OPINION ON THE GAME! RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE!"

I lol'd. Obviously any of those people who kinda defend the reviewer havent either read the review, cant understand the english language properly, are morons, are still kids, just plain stupid or dont know what a review is all about. lol

 

[MelodieOctavia]

FIRST OF ALL, You CAN write a review based on the game itself and not your own preferences. I can be an FPS hater and write a review for Halo Reach, and give it 5 out of 5 stars. You know why? Because I can compare it to other FPS games and see that it really brings shit to the table.

Now, it's obvious that this guy wrote the review with his own personal preferences in mind. Maybe even a personal bias against Conduit. That's not the way you write a video game review that will be published on a very well publicized website.

On the other hand, Amazon Bombing the reviewer because you don't agree with his review on something COMPLETELY unrelated to the book, that's childish and bordering on slanderous.

Both parties were in the wrong, IMO High Voltage more so.

 

[Eckin]

Jim Sterling does a better job at calling a good game bad and vice versa. It's at least entertaining.

Murdock sucks at this.

 

[GameWinner]

Meh I hate shooters, so I really don't care if it got a 1 out of 5. But it is childish to rate down a book because your game got a bad review.

It may be childish but it's a lot more childish to deliberately review a game so bad like this person did. Have a look at his review and judge for yourself.

Review = Opinion.

In your mind = "HOW DARE HE HAVE HIS OWN OPINION ON THE GAME! RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE!"

I lol'd. Obviously any of those people who kinda defend the reviewer havent either read the review, cant understand the english language properly, are morons, are still kids, just plain stupid or dont know what a review is all about. lol

Actually I read the review, it's the guys opinion of what he thinks about the game, not anyone else. I seen worst reviews then this actually...

 

[WiiUBricker]

Meh I hate shooters, so I really don't care if it got a 1 out of 5. But it is childish to rate down a book because your game got a bad review.

It may be childish but it's a lot more childish to deliberately review a game so bad like this person did. Have a look at his review and judge for yourself.

Review = Opinion.

In your mind = "HOW DARE HE HAVE HIS OWN OPINION ON THE GAME! RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE!"

I lol'd. Obviously any of those people who kinda defend the reviewer havent either read the review, cant understand the english language properly, are morons, are still kids, just plain stupid or dont know what a review is all about. lol

Actually I read the review, it's the guys opinion of what he thinks about the game, not anyone else. I seen worst reviews then this actually...

A review should be objective, not subjective. A reviewer is free to add his subjective opinion in the final notes or something, but not through the whole review, which is highly unprofessional and doesnt deserve to be called a "review". The man clearly isnt able to write an objective review, which takes out any credibility of it.

 

[Rydian]

I don't see how any of this is a no-no - I find it quite funny.

The Conduit 2 is indeed one of the best shooters out there for the Wii, the review is indeed a load of crap, you can't demand much more from the Wii. The reviewer had no idea of what he's reviewing, so the "public" payed him back by reviewing his book and not giving a damn what it is about.

Justice is served, the world is filled with smiles.

The insinuation was that while he did play the game, people who added these reviews because of the e-mail didn't read the book.

"reviewing his book and not giving a damn what it is about" hints that you think that was the right thing to do?

That's childish.

 

[KingVamp]

Don't know my stance on this. It just unexpected to me and lol worthy.

If I was a dev, I would lesson more to the majority and little of minority for a game.

Still think the review is a little harsh tho...