Funny Email From a Publisher re. Reviews

[EricNoah]

Hey there folks --

If you check out the current news, or if you look up to Morrus' most recent post, you'll see that by and large much of this has been cleared up. A case of mistaken identity and other mistakes on the part of Avalanche Press.

So, what do you say -- is the question moot now? Or do we need some further discussion?

 

[Khan the Warlord]

Sorry for the re-post, but I think my original post in my poll thread got buried in an onslaught of other posts.

-----

Well, while I'm glad that an official apology was given to Simon Collins and the rest of EN World, I'm still kinda miffed.

1. How can anyone in the industry confuse EN World for any other site?

2. If this was indeed a hastily-made e-mail intended for another reviews site, so what? The only thing that has changed is that EN World is being placed with the other "favorable" review sites that he mentioned in the original e-mail. Just because he says now that "good reviews for free product" isn't what AP desires, doesn't excuse or explain why he says the complete opposite in the first e-mail.

3. I don't like or agree with the statement he made about how reviews suggesting *not* to purchase a particular AP product are bad. If I were given a free review copy of a product and I honestly thought it rated a "1" (Appalling), then why shouldn't I state in my review that the product isn't worth a gamer's hard-earned cash? Once again, we're seeing a mentality that says "you're ok to say you don't like it, but since it was free, we're limiting HOW you state your feelings about it".

If anything, this second e-mail just dug them a bigger hole in my eyes.

But what do I know.

 

[Crothian]

Mistakes happen, give them the benefit of the doubt. I really feel that this negative backlash is because Avalanche didn't have a solid reputation to beigin with since so many people seem to find disdain with their covers.

 

[Dragongirl]

Whether the first email was intended for ENWorld or another site changes nothing. They still come off sounding like they are buying reviews and saying that some sites are more cooperative in that. IMO

Everything is ok now because they didn't mean ENWorld??

 

[Khan the Warlord]

Everything is ok now because they didn't mean ENWorld??

Exactly.

As I said in my other thread about this, if an apology was to be given, it would probably be just to field off the negative responses by this being brought to the public's attention.

Just because the original e-mail wasn't intended for EN World (which I have problems accepting fully), doesn't change the original intent and suggestive nature of the e-mail.

In fact, the second e-mail only adds to the questionable nature.

 

[Crothian]

Whether the first email was intended for ENWorld or another site changes nothing. They still come off sounding like they are buying reviews and saying that some sites are more cooperative in that. IMO

Everything is ok now because they didn't mean ENWorld??

No, everythongs okay because they explained the situation. They got rid of a reviewer who was blantantly telling people not to buy their product. That I can understand. Also, Marcelo A. Figueroa apologized for it. No harm no foul in my book.

 

[Teflon Billy]

...We did have some yuks about the cover of the Ragnarok book in the ENnies forum, though.

Oh hell yeah

 

[HellHound]

Hmmm...

As someone who actually LIKES Heavy Metal magazine and the art thereof (which uses the same artists and styles as AP's material), I get tired of the constant bashing of their product covers. I'm 31, married, 2 kids... But this is a "classic" form of art that I enjoy, just not one that was ever before seen in the RPG industry.

But aside from that.

The apology sent to Morrus doesn't cut it. The fact of the matter is that the initial email to Simon makes a series of statements that should never have been made, no matter who was the recipient of the email.

"A customer who has paid for the product has every right to complain as much as they want about the product, and its value. Someone who got it for free does not reserve such judgement."

Right there, the writer of the initial email has damned himself. Even if that wasn't intended for Simon Collins or ENworld, it openly states that the company feels that reviewers of free copies do not have the right to make a comment on the value of the product. True, it comes off in a better light after reading the response, but it still reads as buying reviews.


Hell, ask Collin what my response was to his harsh review of Librum Equitis volume 1. I thanked him and sent him a copy of Librum Equitis volume 2.

 

[AaronLoeb]

"A customer who has paid for the product has every right to complain as much as they want about the product, and its value. Someone who got it for free does not reserve such judgement."

Right, but put that quote in this context: as a response to the statement 'DON'T BUY THIS BOOK! GET IT CHEAP!'

A person who actually paid cash money for a book has a very good reason to say, "I paid too darn much for this book." A person who got it for free is being disingenuous (at best) making such a statement.

Not actually taking a stand on this issue -- but I think that this is what Mr Figueroa meant to explain. A person who gets free books can't complain personally about the price of the books he got; in fact, it is ethically incumbent upon him or her to say "I got this for free." Which is a good idea anyway, because then you can follow it up with the evergreen, "And even at free, this book was too expensive."

Anyway, I think this was what he was getting at. Just a post for clarification, not meaning to espouse an argument.

Aaron

 

[Khan the Warlord]

Hmmm...

As someone who actually LIKES Heavy Metal magazine and the art thereof (which uses the same artists and styles as AP's material), I get tired of the constant bashing of their product covers. I'm 31, married, 2 kids... But this is a "classic" form of art that I enjoy, just not one that was ever before seen in the RPG industry.

But aside from that.

I see your point, Jason, but AP cannot be honestly shocked by the throngs of people upset by this stance. They knew before they ever printed their first d20 cover what would happen and they chose to do it anyway. So basically, right or wrong, they have no room to be alarmed at the general public disapproval.

The apology sent to Morrus doesn't cut it. The fact of the matter is that the initial email to Simon makes a series of statements that should never have been made, no matter who was the recipient of the email.

"A customer who has paid for the product has every right to complain as much as they want about the product, and its value. Someone who got it for free does not reserve such judgement."

Right there, the writer of the initial email has damned himself. Even if that wasn't intended for Simon Collins or ENworld, it openly states that the company feels that reviewers of free copies do not have the right to make a comment on the value of the product. True, it comes off in a better light after reading the response, but it still reads as buying reviews.

BINGO. We have another winner!

Hell, ask Collin what my response was to his harsh review of Librum Equitis volume 1. I thanked him and sent him a copy of Librum Equitis volume 2.

I respect you all the more for that, Jason, as we discussed his review and I know that it was unsettling for you. However, you sucked in your gut, created LE2, and zipped another free copy his way.

What is the BEST thing a publisher can do after receiving a scathing review?

Receive a better review on the next project from the same reviewer. If you can win someone over that really disliked your first offering, you have accomplished a lot.

Every publisher should have this positive mentality.