Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Community
Meta - Forums About Forums
Meta
Funny Email From a Publisher re. Reviews
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="The Sigil" data-source="post: 421341" data-attributes="member: 2013"><p>In a word, reprehensible.</p><p></p><p>I was stunned to see this kind of letter from a company - essentially implying that their understanding of the review process is that "companies that give out freebies should get better reviews than companies that don't because freebies should never get bad reviews."</p><p></p><p>I am speechless. Does it not occur to these folks that there is a difference between a REVIEW and an ADVERTISEMENT? The moment a reader starts to feel that a "good review" is the result of bias on the part of the reviewer and not on the merit of the product, the impact of that review is lost. That doesn't mean that if a reviewer says, "I may be biased on this because I like alternative magic systems" that the review becomes worthless, because that is an admission of the personal preferences of the reviewer - if my personal preferences are the same (or different), I know to pay particular attention (or give less weight to) that portion of the review.</p><p></p><p>However, the instant I think that "this guy is giving the product a good review because he got it for free" I have to throw everything said about the product completely out the window (unless it's a freebie for everyone).</p><p></p><p>In my mind, there is an obligation that exists when a reviewer accepts a free copy of a work from a publisher. That obligation is to give a review of the product. In other words, "feedback" is the price the reviewer is expected to pay. Whether that feedback is positive or negative is of course the realm of the reviewer.</p><p></p><p>I haven't bought anything from Avalanche yet (their T&A covers left me nonplussed and I found the work within even less appealing to me - though admittedly I am not a historical buff and therefore probably not in the target audience). Looks like I don't need to plan to either - any company that confuses REVIEWS for ADVERTISING apparently does not understand that the credibility of the reviewer is what makes reviews much more persuasive than advertising and if they attempt to undermine the credibility of the reviewer, any positive reviews they may receive are nothing more than wasted type and actually wind up having a NEGATIVE effect. At least with me.</p><p></p><p>--The Sigil</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="The Sigil, post: 421341, member: 2013"] In a word, reprehensible. I was stunned to see this kind of letter from a company - essentially implying that their understanding of the review process is that "companies that give out freebies should get better reviews than companies that don't because freebies should never get bad reviews." I am speechless. Does it not occur to these folks that there is a difference between a REVIEW and an ADVERTISEMENT? The moment a reader starts to feel that a "good review" is the result of bias on the part of the reviewer and not on the merit of the product, the impact of that review is lost. That doesn't mean that if a reviewer says, "I may be biased on this because I like alternative magic systems" that the review becomes worthless, because that is an admission of the personal preferences of the reviewer - if my personal preferences are the same (or different), I know to pay particular attention (or give less weight to) that portion of the review. However, the instant I think that "this guy is giving the product a good review because he got it for free" I have to throw everything said about the product completely out the window (unless it's a freebie for everyone). In my mind, there is an obligation that exists when a reviewer accepts a free copy of a work from a publisher. That obligation is to give a review of the product. In other words, "feedback" is the price the reviewer is expected to pay. Whether that feedback is positive or negative is of course the realm of the reviewer. I haven't bought anything from Avalanche yet (their T&A covers left me nonplussed and I found the work within even less appealing to me - though admittedly I am not a historical buff and therefore probably not in the target audience). Looks like I don't need to plan to either - any company that confuses REVIEWS for ADVERTISING apparently does not understand that the credibility of the reviewer is what makes reviews much more persuasive than advertising and if they attempt to undermine the credibility of the reviewer, any positive reviews they may receive are nothing more than wasted type and actually wind up having a NEGATIVE effect. At least with me. --The Sigil [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
Meta - Forums About Forums
Meta
Funny Email From a Publisher re. Reviews
Top