PC Gamer Modifies Review Policy

[Emabulator]

PC Gamer's Editor-in-Chief, Kristen Salvatore, has finally gotten tired of waiting for the gold master version of a game from the publisher before green lighting it for review. They were left with the problem of having their reviews show up in the magazine months after the game has been released. She has adjusted their review policy (http://www.gamesradar.com/pc/f/going-for-the-gold/a-20081205134454561056) in an effort to rectify this situation.

So, let it never be said that I don’t own up to my mistakes. We’re tweaking the policy so we can get the best information to you in the timeliest manner: PC Gamer will only review finished game code, meaning code that the game’s developer has deemed finished and reviewable, and we will review MMO and multiplayer-only games in a setting that replicates the consumer experience, which we’ll create, if we have to. Developers have no incentive to give us unfinished code and call it finished—after all, we’ll continue to harsh on any problems we find, and we do not re-review games. And, as we learned while reviewing Left 4 Dead this month, you don’t need to play a multiplayer game with unseen strangers to find out if it’s a good game—you just need to create a situation that replicates the one you’d get at home. I wonder what effect this will have on the DRM Alerts they imbed in their reviews? As Kristen says, developers have no incentive to give them unfinished code and call it finished. But publishers certainly have an incentive to not include the final version of the DRM on the "reviewable" copy of the game.

[Ozena]

That's often a problem with the print magazines, though . . . information and reviews are almost always behind the internet. It's probably the biggest reason sales have dropped off.

PC Gamer has been one of the worst though, as shown by the editor making these changes. It's a good magazine, but always gives me news I knew weeks in advance.

[see colon]

I wonder what effect this will have on the DRM Alerts they imbed in their reviews? As Kristen says, developers have no incentive to give them unfinished code and call it finished. But publishers certainly have an incentive to not include the final version of the DRM on the "reviewable" copy of the game.

But they do have an incentive to DRM the crap out of a review copy, because it's the "I can download it for free before everyone else can buy it" piracy that really hurts game sales, and those copies have to come from somewhere.

I fully support things like DRM and in game advertising (a few things some people hate no matter what) in certain situations, and this is one of them. Reviewers often have early access to games, without paying for them, and have no direct financial interest in protecting the game developer and/or publisher.

[Orphiuchus]

I used to read PC Gamer... around 1997. Back when issues were 600 pages and loaded with information I couldn't get somewhere else much faster and for free.

[opusdeath]

That's often a problem with the print magazines, though . . . information and reviews are almost always behind the internet. It's probably the biggest reason sales have dropped off.

Definitely. However I'll always subscribe to a print magazine if I think their reviews are worth reading, even if I already own the game.

[Ph00p]

I used to read PC Gamer... around 1997. Back when issues were 600 pages and loaded with information I couldn't get somewhere else much faster and for free.

Now the book is more like 65% ads, well maybe not that high but is sure as hell seems like it.

[Emabulator]

But they do have an incentive to DRM the crap out of a review copy, because it's the "I can download it for free before everyone else can buy it" piracy that really hurts game sales, and those copies have to come from somewhere.

I fully support things like DRM and in game advertising (a few things some people hate no matter what) in certain situations, and this is one of them. Reviewers often have early access to games, without paying for them, and have no direct financial interest in protecting the game developer and/or publisher.I agree, they do have an incentive to DRM the "reviewable" copy for the reason you mentioned.

My question is will the "reviewable" copy have no install limits and the retail copy ship with a limited number of installs, say three or five? That's what I meant when I said the final version of the DRM .

Sorry for the lack of clarity on my part.

[Ozena]

Definitely. However I'll always subscribe to a print magazine if I think their reviews are worth reading, even if I already own the game.


Same here. I don't buy magazine as often as I used to, but they're good throne-room material :p.

[ElektroDragon]

I haven't touched a PC only game magazine since Games for Windows magazine died. I can't imagine how any PC only game magazines can stay in business nowadays, which is a shame.

[Emabulator]

Same here. I don't buy magazine as often as I used to, but they're good throne-room material :p.Amen to that! PC Gamer and the NY Post help keep me "regular". ;)

For the record: I think Kristen's policy change was for the better. I'm just leery of publishers taking advantage of the situation as far as DRM goes.

[trip1eX]

It's a no-win battle.

Pcgamer probably needs to provide infotainment that isn't needed on a timely basis and skip things like reviews.

[BloodPack]

It's a no-win battle.

Pcgamer probably needs to provide infotainment that isn't needed on a timely basis and skip things like reviews.
Thats what GFW did, can't say it helped them much.

[vherub]

print magazines can no longer compete with the timeliness of the internet, especially with reviews. But I think there is a niche for gaming magazines to offer post-release reviews, 6-12 months out. After a game has been patched, gotten its beak wet in the online community, had problems ironed out or new features added.
A review for the gamer looking to get last year's games, interested in the latest state of the game and how it turned out over a longer period of time.

[Shifter]

I'm letting my last PC Gamer subscription run out this year. I've been reading it for years, but in the past year it's been REALLY late on everything. And if they're not going to provide deeper and more thoughtful analysis on reviews, then why would I bother reading their stuff? By the time it shows up in the mag, i'm long done with the title in question.

If they want to be meaningful to anyone they have to concentrate on stuff i can't get for free on a daily basis. For example, I think their column on mods is actually quite useful, and I always pay attention to their hardware reviews and PC builds (although i've been burned by those in the past).

[Roc Ingersol]

Crazy Idea: put time-sensitive news content on a website for subscription holders and use the dead-tree edition for actual journalism. (See: the Escapist)

[Silent1]

pc gamer has to be one of the worst magazines out there, actually there really aren't any good pc gaming magazines. The reviews are old and jaded and the magazine has more ads then content, their hardware reviews are a joke (the killer nic card). The magazine isn't even good bathroom material.