Gaming So I made a thread about nintendo paying reviewers.....

grossaffe · Mar 15, 2017

Maluma said:
I guess you arent familiar with probable cause. Im not going to argue with you Osaka,at the end of the day you can't tell people something that they don't want to hear. Ive proved to people that their girlfriend has cheated on them and they still don't want to believe it. Thats not my problem. Someone made a thread here saying that Nintendo Investors want the switch to fail so that they end up going into the mobile app market. Nintendo doesnt exist to make fanboys happy,they exist to turn a profit.

1) Probable cause is used in order to get a search warrant to collect further evidence; it is not a declaration of guilt.
2) There is no probable cause here. Hell, I'm not certain you even have a good case for the even lesser burden of proof, reasonable suspicion. All you have is some guy got laid off. If you want probable cause, why don't you start with getting us the reason he was laid off. And explain why the review was pushed through by the editor who was, himself, not laid off. If they had an order not to post less-than-glowing reviews of the Switch, then the editor would be the one responsible for making sure the review met the praise quota.

Speaking of the editor, let's ask Mr. Editor Dan Stapleton if ol' Vinny was laid off for the review:

DanStapleton EditorMar 10 2017 3PM

@Prodigy258 No. His departure was completely unrelated to this review.

Of course you'll say he's just towing the company line. So let's ask Vincent.

Yo, Vin! Any connection between your review and being laid off?

Vincent Ingenito‏Verified account @Vincogneato

@poopydildoman Nope. None at all dude.
https://twitter.com/Vincogneato/status/840826718675918848

Well shoot, both sides are denying it. They're totally colluding and their coordinated denial is probable cause!

Hells Malice · Mar 15, 2017

I don't know why you actually care as much as you seem to.
Might as well go watch the Kardashians and worry about them instead.

Nintendo is probably the least likely company to buy good reviews. Mostly just because they're incredibly behind the times and very full of themselves. Didn't bother to read any of the guys reviews, but he was probably laid off for being shit or not pushing IGNs narrative. Hard to say but it likely wasn't just that review that did it, if it was at all.

NekoMichi · Mar 15, 2017

Not to mention the fact that the review is still available online. If the review was problematic for IGN they would have pulled it by now.

Deleted-401606 · Mar 15, 2017

grossaffe said:
1) Probable cause is used in order to get a search warrant to collect further evidence; it is not a declaration of guilt.
2) There is no probable cause here. Hell, I'm not certain you even have a good case for the even lesser burden of proof, reasonable suspicion. All you have is some guy got laid off. If you want probable cause, why don't you start with getting us the reason he was laid off. And explain why the review was pushed through by the editor who was, himself, not laid off. If they had an order not to post less-than-glowing reviews of the Switch, then the editor would be the one responsible for making sure the review met the praise quota.

Speaking of the editor, let's ask Mr. Editor Dan Stapleton if ol' Vinny was laid off for the review:

DanStapleton EditorMar 10 2017 3PM

@Prodigy258 No. His departure was completely unrelated to this review.

Of course you'll say he's just towing the company line. So let's ask Vincent.

Yo, Vin! Any connection between your review and being laid off?

Vincent Ingenito‏Verified account @Vincogneato

@poopydildoman Nope. None at all dude.
https://twitter.com/Vincogneato/status/840826718675918848

Well shoot, both sides are denying it. They're totally colluding and their coordinated denial is probable cause!

Im not getting into an argument with you. This isn't a legal term all I meant to say was that it was common sense. People do what is in their best interest,period. It is suspicious that he got fired right after that interview. What did you want IGN to say you genius? "Yes we fired him because he gave nintendo a bad review" Are you really that naive to think that someone is going to admit that?Imagine a prosecutor asking a suspect "Did you murder someone?" and the suspect says "Yes of course I did" come on.Like I said I am not going to get into this with you,I have seen you argue for days on days even when you are wrong. You aren't going to stop even if you are proven wrong. I wont be replying to anymore of your post.

--------------------- MERGED ---------------------------

NekoMichi said:
Not to mention the fact that the review is still available online. If the review was problematic for IGN they would have pulled it by now.

If they pulled the review that would basically confirm that he was fired for making the review. That move would cost IGN MILLIONS of dollars as it would completely ruin their credibility.

--------------------- MERGED ---------------------------

Hells Malice said:
I don't know why you actually care as much as you seem to.
Might as well go watch the Kardashians and worry about them instead.

Nintendo is probably the least likely company to buy good reviews. Mostly just because they're incredibly behind the times and very full of themselves. Didn't bother to read any of the guys reviews, but he was probably laid off for being shit or not pushing IGNs narrative. Hard to say but it likely wasn't just that review that did it, if it was at all.

So you are saying he wasn't pushing IGNS narrative. Pretty much you are saying that if you don't review exactly how IGN wants you to you get fired. Some people here are really shocked that there is corruption in the gaming industry. If there is corruption in governments,why is it so hard to believe that there is no corruption in the gaming industry?

barronwaffles · Mar 15, 2017

Wait, people still give two shits about 'professional' reviews?

Logan Pockrus · Mar 15, 2017

You people discuss video games like you would politics. This whole idea of Nintendo paying off reviewers is unfounded, with only false "evidence" in its favor (referring to the OP's initial post). As mentioned above:

NekoMichi said:
Not to mention the fact that the review is still available online. If the review was problematic for IGN they would have pulled it by now.

osaka35 · Mar 15, 2017

Maluma said:
I guess you arent familiar with probable cause. Im not going to argue with you Osaka,at the end of the day you can't tell people something that they don't want to hear. Ive proved to people that their girlfriend has cheated on them and they still don't want to believe it. Thats not my problem. Someone made a thread here saying that Nintendo Investors want the switch to fail so that they end up going into the mobile app market. Nintendo doesnt exist to make fanboys happy,they exist to turn a profit.

...probable cause has to deal with justification for an action...

grossaffe · Mar 15, 2017

Maluma said:
Im not getting into an argument with you. This isn't a legal term all I meant to say was that it was common sense. People do what is in their best interest,period. It is suspicious that he got fired right after that interview. What did you want IGN to say you genius? "Yes we fired him because he gave nintendo a bad review" Are you really that naive to think that someone is going to admit that?Imagine a prosecutor asking a suspect "Did you murder someone?" and the suspect says "Yes of course I did" come on.Like I said I am not going to get into this with you,I have seen you argue for days on days even when you are wrong. You aren't going to stop even if you are proven wrong. I wont be replying to anymore of your post.

So you're not getting into an argument with me, yet here you are arguing away? You need a whole lot more than 'he was laid off' for probable cause. Where's the connection to Nintendo? Do you at least have a trend of such happenstances?

I also noticed the bulk of your response is attacking the part where I quoted the Editor stating it was not because of the review, but you conveniently ignored where I also quoted Vincent himself saying that it had absolutely nothing to do with that review. You see, I provided both sides of the story in my post in attempt to get an objective view. And both sides of the story agreed. You, however, chose to only attack the side of the Editor with the "that's exactly what he'd say if they did do something wrong!" argument while that this isn't a he-said she-said case. It's a case of 'they both said the same fucking thing and you choose to instead concoct a conspiracy' and somehow that conspiracy is the 'common sense' rather than the one that both sides actually involved agree to be the case.

NekoMichi · Mar 15, 2017

grossaffe said:
[OP] chose to only attack the side of the Editor with the "that's exactly what he'd say if they did do something wrong!" argument while that this isn't a he-said she-said case. [...]

Sadly the original post's accusation is built upon the belief that unfounded speculation is more compelling than first-hand witness accounts, despite the factual evidence you have provided it is unlikely to convince conspiracy theorists to think otherwise when they can easily dismiss anything under the blanket explanation of "that's exactly what they would say if they were guilty".

---

To add to the part about Vincent's response, there would be no reason for him to lie and cover up any foul play on IGN's part since he is no longer under their employment. It's not like they can fire him now.

Deleted User · Mar 15, 2017

DarkCoffe64 said:

Sounds familiar... game with issues (frome drops to say the least), reviewers got it few months prior to us, really high scores for not much reasons (good graphics? Really? Have you played on the pc in the last 5 years?)... nintendo are you hiding something?

grossaffe · Mar 15, 2017

NekoMichi said:
Sadly the original accusation is built upon the belief that unfounded speculation is more compelling than first-hand witness accounts, despite the factual evidence you have provided it is unlikely to convince conspiracy theorists to think otherwise when they can easily dismiss anything under the blanket explanation of "that's exactly what they would say if they were guilty".

It's a Temp Trend. I noticed he went on to attack me for 'being wrong and never admitting it when proven wrong' in other threads (which he failed to list any examples of). I do a fair amount of fighting the good fight when it comes to some chicken little screaming his head off over speculation they treat as fact. Heck, rarely do I even take an actual stance, but rather argue from the perspective of "you don't know everything" and "here's why your evidence isn't as good as you think it is". Sometimes the speculation winds up being correct, but it's not because the person was super-smart and had rock-solid evidence to from which to draw their conclusion, but rather simple statistics; throw enough shit against the wall and some of it will stick.

migles · Mar 15, 2017

DinohScene said:
>IGN.
>Actually believing big name reviewers.

You people are so dense...

The only good reviewer is yourself and no one else.

hello, nintendo, can i get a free switch and game, to review the unit by myself to myself so i decide if i will purchase it?

heh, what you say is true, the best reviewer is yourself, but you need others to tell you their experience so you can know what you should expect..
otherwise you would be just "pre-order" and then when you get the thing you know if it's shit or not...

NyaakoXD · Mar 15, 2017

After all this... I still see no proof that Nintendo does paid reviews...

Welp, back to BotW.

MarioFanatic64 · Mar 15, 2017

WiiUBricker said:
No idea if it's the same with Nintendo, but there tech companies who only lend you their products for review.

As a reviewer I can assure you that I actually get to keep the Nintendo products I review.

Risingdawn · Mar 15, 2017

MarioFanatic64 said:
As a reviewer I can assure you that I actually get to keep the Nintendo products I review.

Do they pay you to give good reviews?

MarioFanatic64 · Mar 15, 2017

Risingdawn said:
Do they pay you to give good reviews?

No.

Risingdawn · Mar 15, 2017

MarioFanatic64 said:
No.

Do they send large men, possibly called butch or killa, to oversee your review before you post it?

MarioFanatic64 · Mar 15, 2017

Risingdawn said:
Do they send large men, possibly called butch or killa, to oversee your review before you post it?

No.

Risingdawn · Mar 15, 2017

MarioFanatic64 said:
No.

Do they subtly hint that they know the locations of your loved ones, and should a score be published not in the 9's that it could be the last time you see them in one single attached piece?

MarioFanatic64 · Mar 15, 2017

Risingdawn said:
Do they subtly hint that they know the locations of your loved ones, and should a score be published not in the 9's that it could be the last time you see them in one single attached piece?

I'm not allowed to speak about that.

Gaming So I made a thread about nintendo paying reviewers.....

Well-Known Member

Are you a bully?

Retro Collector

Deleted-401606

Guest

Well-Known Member

Knawledge is key.

Instructional Designer

Well-Known Member

Retro Collector

Deleted User

Guest

Well-Known Member

All my gbatemp friends are now mods, except for me

( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)

The guy who does things

Tempallica

The guy who does things

Tempallica

The guy who does things

Tempallica

The guy who does things

Similar threads

Popular threads in this forum