In light of recent events by Avalanche Press (Company bashing not desired)

[The Sigil]

Here, in brief, is my problem with Avalanche's policy, explained by paraphrasing their letter:

I am afraid, Mr. Collins, that the message had not been passed on
that Avalanche Press is no longer supporting ENWorld with review
materials.

TRANS: We will not send more free product to ENWorld

Fine, that is their choice and perogative

Our reason for such is the disturbingly unfavorable reviews our products received up to, and including Black Flags.

because it has received bad reviews

Understandable if they wish to avoid negative press. Regardless, it is certainly their perogative to choose not to send product to a reviewer.

While we are not opposed to constructive criticism, and
appreciate the objectivity of a professional reviewer, we find it quite disagreeable to support a publication that continues to publish negative reviews of our product,

And this is unacceptable/disagreeable to us - why waste our money sending you copies of a product if it will not generate positive publicity

Shows a thin skin, perhaps, but I will not call this morally reprehensible in and of itself...

esspecially since said products were not paid for by the reviewer. 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.

Leaving aside the hideous grammatical error (that someone who got it for free "does not reserve" or in other words "should not hold back" or "should state" their complaints about the product when clearly the opposite meaning is intended)

because when we provide free product, the reviewer does not have the RIGHT to give it a negative review (emphasis mine)

Here is where I find their policy unacceptable. Had they left out this statement, I would have had no problem with their policy, as this is where the "buying" of good reviews is not only implied, but explicity stated. This directly impugnes the integrity of the reviewers, however, and rather insults Mr. Collins particularly by suggesting, "you as a reviewer should have compromised your integrity for the price of $9.95" (or whatever their product's face value is). Nice to know Avalanche thinks integrity comes at such a low price. I would be personally insulted by that statement and indeed in another world might seriously consider suing AP for slander/libel (whichever is the applicable one, can never remember as IANAL) against my character.

Thank you, but no thank. We are quite happy to support
GamingReport.com, BeyondAdventure.com & Games Unplugged Magazine.

We would prefer to send our products to these people, who do not criticize us (because we give them free stuff.)

The implication of the stuff in parentheses above bothers me, if indeed it is implied (I read it as implied). This is a slap in the face to the objectivity of these other publications because it calls their objectivity into doubt (I can but assume that they are indeed objective).

THAT'S why I am bothered by their reply.

--The Sigil

 

[ColonelHardisson]

Oh, you'd prefer they do it in the shadows?

No, no, but judging from the smiley, I think you know what I meant.

 

[ced1106]

What if this were your favorite d20 company?

Wouldn't happen. Mostly anecdotal, but I've noticed that if a company puts out quality material, their business acts in a professional manner.

I'm not familiar with Avalanche products, so I checked the last option. If they're no longer interested in receiving publicity about their products, that's their decision.


Cedric.
aka. Washu! ^O^

 

[Umbran]

As for Avalanche, I don't think they have the good sense to tell the different kinds of "bad" reviews apart. We're really not talking about "biased" reviewers here, they simply can't take negative criticism.

Quite possibly. But that isn't unethical. Nor is it reason to stop buying products if they are, in fact, decent in and of themselves.

I was watching a movie last night, "Trekkies" was the title, I think. The characters are movie-lovers who meet William Shatner, who (in the movie) turns out to be a disappointment. The man they meet is not James T Kirk. There's a quote from this movie which may be relevant:

"Separate the art from the artist."

The artist can be a downright jerk, but still produce good material. Are we now supposed to start interviewing publishers, to make sure they're nice people before we buy?

 

[jgbrowning]

Quite possibly. But that isn't unethical. Nor is it reason to stop buying products if they are, in fact, decent in and of themselves.

I was watching a movie last night, "Trekkies" was the title, I think. The characters are movie-lovers who meet William Shatner, who (in the movie) turns out to be a disappointment. The man they meet is not James T Kirk. There's a quote from this movie which may be relevant:

"Separate the art from the artist."

The artist can be a downright jerk, but still produce good material. Are we now supposed to start interviewing publishers, to make sure they're nice people before we buy?

Well its just a matter of degree. I wouldnt buy a book from a criminal about his crime so he can make money about it.

everyone gets to chose how much of a "jerk" the artist is before it crosses that "im not gonna buy it" line. i can see how some people would view this threads topic as such.

joe b.

 

[Crothian]

I was watching a movie last night, "Trekkies" was the title, I think.

That's Free Enterprise, Trekkies was all about real Star Trek fans.

 

[ced1106]

This is interesting -- I'm not familiar with Avalanche Press, but the name Marcelo Figueroa **does** ring a bell. Turns out he's a contributor to the 7th Sea books. I believe I worked under him in AEG's volunteer demo program. When he left AEG, he still participated on the mailing list and, uh, was on the volatile side in his opinions. And, no, I'm not telling you to boycott even more stuff!

http://www.pen-paper.net/rpgdb.php?op=showcreator&creatorid=1972

Anyway, neither the original letter, nor the apology, nor the T&A affects my opinion of AP. Between EQ RPG and a review copy of Orcfest and Tomb of Abysthor, I'm pretty well set d20-wise.


Cedric.
aka. Washu! ^O^

 

[CCamfield]

Well, I'm one of those people who haven't bought Avalanche's products because of their marketing to the lowest common denominator. So this is only an academic question to me, except as a sometime reviewer. I think that independent and honest reviewing is extremely important. The first gaming magazine I read much of was the old SJG Space Gamer, which had a strongly independent review policy, and that made a big impression on me. Unfortunately it doesn't seem to have had enough of an impression on Marcelo, because I think he's still got it wrong.

< mini-rant >
What difference does it make whether a reviewer actually writes out "don't buy this game at full price" or gives it only 1 or 2 out of 5? There is nothing wrong or immoral about rating something below average with a below average mark. The range of possible grades on a five-point scale 1-5, not 3-5!
< end mini-rant >

I just reviewed (a provided review copy of) Common Ground I for rpg.net, and gave it 3/10 because that's exactly what I thought it was worth.

Chris

 

[CCamfield]

Well, that's interesting, Cedric. Another ex-AEG member - John Wick in fact - got royally roasted for a column he wrote on gamingoutpost.com, in which he stated that reviewers should describe a product, but not actually provide any opinions of the contents. *snort*

 

[WizarDru]

I'm most familiar with Avalanche's product by a particular website that mocks their covers. What material I've seen by flipping through has generally left no impression on me, or little favorable. After a protacted period of little income, my gaming dollars are precious to me, and Avalanche just has far too many negative marks to be worth devoting interest to from this point on. I am far more interested in picking up both BadAxe books or the BoVD than books that I would be too embarassed to leave lying around for the in-laws or my children to see the covers of.

And to clarify, as has been mentioned, I prefer reviews written by folks like Simon and Alan. Alan and I disagree over some things, but I know what those are, and I know what his tastes are like. I know that a review written by him will actually review all of the content of a product, and hit all the marks of a professional review. An excellent example is to review some of the entries for some of WOTC's core adventure path modules. Compare the professional to non-professional reviews, and you may determine why I put more stock in the professional reviewers.

IMHO, Avalanche has committed an ethical breach, and merely further biased me against their products. While I boycott them solely based on this information? I tend to doubt that I will, but the cumulative effect of my personal perception of low-quality, extremely poor art (both in taste and execution) and doubts to the validity of any submitted review work fairly well to ensure that I won't be working very hard to pick up any of their products, either.