I'm all for this, I respected him a lot before this and even more so now. He actually stated this in his video, good seeing him post it on Twitter so that more people can know.
I certainly have to respect LGR for that. That he says he doesn't want to feel influenced (even unintentionally) by being sent there on EA's terms, but that he's still open to going if he can ever afford it on his own really seems to say a lot about him as a person. While he and I may not share some of the same priorities where the Sims 4 are concerned, I know I can rely on his reviews because of how honest he is about both the positive and the negative aspects. He gives attention to both rather than focusing more on one or the other. Again, I really do have to respect him.
I feel the same
if in doubt about a game I can relly on his rewiuv, and it will tell me enough in an honest and fun way that I can make my decision... and LGR and I defently didn't have the same prefrence on sims3.. well not all the way any way.
I don't think it's desperate for EA to want to Invite him to an event. He has high influence in the community, that is why they often invite popular Fansites and YouTube personalities because of the influence. The fact they they have only just started inviting to event is the more surprising to me.
Now whether the terms they want him to agree to will restrict him from speaking his honest opinion idk but usually theses terms are simple like not being able to discuss certain features as they want players to discover things on their own or the feature isn't finished yet, not being able to express thought and opinions until a certain time and not being able to release screenshot or gameplay footage until a certain time.
does terms are fair enough
but others are also seen when it comes to blogs and youtube channels invited (or send "gifts") by companies.
Even with only the fair terms, well then they can give a wrong immage of his independens, do to some others beign payed of and not telling...
Bought? Are you All Freaking Kidding me? I was not bought because I signed a nondisclosure. :lmao:
*No one in EA said I had to say Positive Comments about what I was shown nor did I have to Only Ever give them Good Reviews. I signed saying I wouldn't give My Comments or Views on what was shown until a certain time. Not that it HAD to be Wonderful Comments.
Bought? Are you All Freaking Kidding me? I was not bought because I signed a nondisclosure. :lmao:
*No one in EA said I had to say Positive Comments about what I was shown nor did I have to Only Ever give them Good Reviews. I signed saying I wouldn't give My Comments or Views on what was shown until a certain time. Not that it HAD to be Wonderful Comments.
What is going on around here? O.o
I think it is more or less the all expenses paid portion of it. Most organizations do not partake on the off-chance that the paid expenses skew their opinions. Basically, it can be viewed as taking a bribe even though it isn't necessarily them stating everything you say must be positive.
Now as a person who creates for the game and isn't running any Nobel prize winning news organization...id say it really doesn't matter what you do or anyone's opinion of the matter.
AND I remember how so many people here were upset that he wasn't invited by EA because his fans believed he would give an "Honest" review but now that he is invited it's seen as if EA is trying to buy his review? This idea so blows my mind.
*Yes, I am upset because you all put into question MY integrity. Well, pfft. I say.
AND I remember how so many people here were upset that he wasn't invited by EA because his fans believed he would give an "Honest" review but now that he is invited it's seen as if EA is trying to buy his review? This idea so blows my mind.
*Yes, I am upset because you all put into question MY integrity. Well, pfft. I say.
Like another simmer said, the "all expenses paid" part is where things become hairy. That's why he specifically said that he'd try going if he could pay for things himself, not EA. Which he can, because he's invited now.
Bought? Are you All Freaking Kidding me? I was not bought because I signed a nondisclosure. :lmao:
*No one in EA said I had to say Positive Comments about what I was shown nor did I have to Only Ever give them Good Reviews. I signed saying I wouldn't give My Comments or Views on what was shown until a certain time. Not that it HAD to be Wonderful Comments.
What is going on around here? O.o
Thank you for that insight. I've found the assumptions around review and event NDAs to be offbase with what the industries I know from inside do, and was really finding myself wondering if gaming was that vastly different from film or TV or books that they tied early access to public opinion. And if a reviewer feels they're that easily influenced, maybe they're in the wrong business.
EA CREATOR NETWORK MEMBER — Want to be notified of patches, new Broken Mods threads, and urgent Sims 4 news? Follow me at https://www.patreon.com/luthienrising.
You can still be critical of something and be comped by the product/service's creator. I see it tons on other blogs for other content so I don't know why people seem to think that special access means you must give a raving review. Heck, I write and sometimes send out early release copies of my work and get non-stellar reviews sometimes. It's part of the process of getting reviews.
The only thing this might hinder is him speaking on rumors about said content if they come out before it's release. With that said, I wonder what this special content is. Hopefully toddlers in a patch.
Bought? Are you All Freaking Kidding me? I was not bought because I signed a nondisclosure. :lmao:
*No one in EA said I had to say Positive Comments about what I was shown nor did I have to Only Ever give them Good Reviews. I signed saying I wouldn't give My Comments or Views on what was shown until a certain time. Not that it HAD to be Wonderful Comments.
What is going on around here? O.o
I did not say all reviewers were bought. I said shame on those who do let themselves be bought. It happens.
I've heard that LGR once saved three dozen orphans from a burning building, and that the flames could not touch him because the passion and purity of his heart burned greater than the inferno around him. There are also reports that his tears cause the lame to walk and the blind to see.
AND I remember how so many people here were upset that he wasn't invited by EA because his fans believed he would give an "Honest" review but now that he is invited it's seen as if EA is trying to buy his review? This idea so blows my mind.
*Yes, I am upset because you all put into question MY integrity. Well, pfft. I say.
Just remember that half the crowd has one opinion and the other half hold the opposing opinion. So just because people said one thing and are now saying the other doesn't mean it was all the same people.
I actually think it was good of him to refuse the expenses paid portion. He is highly influential and his opinions do make a huge difference. So that he acknowledges that is a positive for him and his brand. That's not to mean any disrespect toward you for going. It's just the choice he has made based on the publicity that it might cause in the event that people find out. Look at his 2 year review. When he said he had been receiving the stuff packs for review some simmers turned rabid saying his positive reviews were paid for. So I get where he is coming from.
AND I remember how so many people here were upset that he wasn't invited by EA because his fans believed he would give an "Honest" review but now that he is invited it's seen as if EA is trying to buy his review? This idea so blows my mind.
*Yes, I am upset because you all put into question MY integrity. Well, pfft. I say.
Just remember that half the crowd has one opinion and the other half hold the opposing opinion. So just because people said one thing and are now saying the other doesn't mean it was all the same people.
I actually think it was good of him to refuse the expenses paid portion. He is highly influential and his opinions do make a huge difference. So that he acknowledges that is a positive for him and his brand. That's not to mean any disrespect toward you for going. It's just the choice he has made based on the publicity that it might cause in the event that people find out. Look at his 2 year review. When he said he had been receiving the stuff packs for review some simmers turned rabid saying his positive reviews were paid for. So I get where he is coming from.
That's the part the makes LGR not want to have EA pay for him. I'm sure if fans weren't so suspicious of having things paid for by EA or having early copies, he would've taken it, but his fanbase is way too suspicious to ever trust a person who has the trip to EARS paid for, with a hotel and everything.
Just some random Simmer you probably don't even follow on the gallery! Gallery name's the same as my username! Did I just rhyme there?
Bought? Are you All Freaking Kidding me? I was not bought because I signed a nondisclosure. :lmao:
*No one in EA said I had to say Positive Comments about what I was shown nor did I have to Only Ever give them Good Reviews. I signed saying I wouldn't give My Comments or Views on what was shown until a certain time. Not that it HAD to be Wonderful Comments.
What is going on around here? O.o
I think LGR declined what was offered because I think things have changed since SimsCamp etc. It's just things we hear here and there. The new 'influencer' program EA has been using for it's MMORPGs for quite a long time has now come over to TS4 game? Please, SimGuruDrake don't bother with need to correct me. I think he wasn't happy with the Influencer program and didn't want to be a part of it.
It's not only the new way EA wants to reach players through influencer sites and individuals, but has many other responsibilities.
"Games Are Not The Place To Tell Stories, Games Are Meant To Let People Tell Their Own Stories"...Will Wright.
Bought? Are you All Freaking Kidding me? I was not bought because I signed a nondisclosure. :lmao:
*No one in EA said I had to say Positive Comments about what I was shown nor did I have to Only Ever give them Good Reviews. I signed saying I wouldn't give My Comments or Views on what was shown until a certain time. Not that it HAD to be Wonderful Comments.
What is going on around here? O.o
I think LGR declined what was offered because I think things have changed since SimsCamp etc. It's just things we hear here and there. The new 'influencer' program EA has been using for it's MMORPGs for quite a long time has now come over to TS4 game? Please, SimGuruDrake don't bother with need to correct me. I think he wasn't happy with the Influencer program and didn't want to be a part of it.
It's not only the new way EA wants to reach players through influencer sites and individuals, but has many other responsibilities.
Oooh...Okay. So they have a New Program. K... I'll be quiet and Sorry. :muchescookietokeepmymouthbusy:
Like the vast majority of games, The Sims can operate perrfectly well without Influencer sites. EA can talk to us here and on social media, and they can publish their news them-plummin'-selves. In future if EA want people to attend workshops in order test stuff and give feedback, why don't they invite creators and players who actually use the stuff? When it comes to plain news we really don't need middlemen to display it to us.
Comments
Honestly don't care. Hope someone else has the answer for you. And I wish the game were as exciting as the drama about the game community
not selling your intregrity to go to something, that surly must be interesting.
EA if you invite people to rewiuv a product, let them rewiuv freely.... or it is not a rewiuv and do not count
I feel the same
if in doubt about a game I can relly on his rewiuv, and it will tell me enough in an honest and fun way that I can make my decision... and LGR and I defently didn't have the same prefrence on sims3.. well not all the way any way.
does terms are fair enough
but others are also seen when it comes to blogs and youtube channels invited (or send "gifts") by companies.
Even with only the fair terms, well then they can give a wrong immage of his independens, do to some others beign payed of and not telling...
so I highly respect his decision
Nothing stinks like desperation, eh?
*No one in EA said I had to say Positive Comments about what I was shown nor did I have to Only Ever give them Good Reviews. I signed saying I wouldn't give My Comments or Views on what was shown until a certain time. Not that it HAD to be Wonderful Comments.
What is going on around here? O.o
I think it is more or less the all expenses paid portion of it. Most organizations do not partake on the off-chance that the paid expenses skew their opinions. Basically, it can be viewed as taking a bribe even though it isn't necessarily them stating everything you say must be positive.
Now as a person who creates for the game and isn't running any Nobel prize winning news organization...id say it really doesn't matter what you do or anyone's opinion of the matter.
*Yes, I am upset because you all put into question MY integrity. Well, pfft. I say.
Like another simmer said, the "all expenses paid" part is where things become hairy. That's why he specifically said that he'd try going if he could pay for things himself, not EA. Which he can, because he's invited now.
Thank you for that insight. I've found the assumptions around review and event NDAs to be offbase with what the industries I know from inside do, and was really finding myself wondering if gaming was that vastly different from film or TV or books that they tied early access to public opinion. And if a reviewer feels they're that easily influenced, maybe they're in the wrong business.
The only thing this might hinder is him speaking on rumors about said content if they come out before it's release. With that said, I wonder what this special content is. Hopefully toddlers in a patch.
I did not say all reviewers were bought. I said shame on those who do let themselves be bought. It happens.
Just remember that half the crowd has one opinion and the other half hold the opposing opinion. So just because people said one thing and are now saying the other doesn't mean it was all the same people.
I actually think it was good of him to refuse the expenses paid portion. He is highly influential and his opinions do make a huge difference. So that he acknowledges that is a positive for him and his brand. That's not to mean any disrespect toward you for going. It's just the choice he has made based on the publicity that it might cause in the event that people find out. Look at his 2 year review. When he said he had been receiving the stuff packs for review some simmers turned rabid saying his positive reviews were paid for. So I get where he is coming from.
That's the part the makes LGR not want to have EA pay for him. I'm sure if fans weren't so suspicious of having things paid for by EA or having early copies, he would've taken it, but his fanbase is way too suspicious to ever trust a person who has the trip to EARS paid for, with a hotel and everything.
I think LGR declined what was offered because I think things have changed since SimsCamp etc. It's just things we hear here and there. The new 'influencer' program EA has been using for it's MMORPGs for quite a long time has now come over to TS4 game? Please, SimGuruDrake don't bother with need to correct me. I think he wasn't happy with the Influencer program and didn't want to be a part of it.
It's not only the new way EA wants to reach players through influencer sites and individuals, but has many other responsibilities.
Oooh...Okay.
I really take his review into account before buying but that could be said about any reviewer?