Pielorinho said:
As long as your review is respectful to the writers, I don't see a problem with giving it very low marks.
It's honest, but the publishers may not like it - there was some misleading ad copy used to promote the product and that
is mentioned in the review. Likewise, the price point is rediculously high for what you get (having been involved with small press publishing ventures and working at a commercial bindery in the past, I'm in a position to know that). Also, the rules are a
lot shorter than those found in previous editions of the game - but because of space constraints (the box that the game ships in is approximately 5"x7"x1" - something that I really would have liked to know about before I pre-ordered the game).
The consumer needs to know about all of that. I know that if I was a consumer and a reviewer purposely glossed over the bad aspects of a product to make the publisher happy, leading me to rush out and buy said product, I would definitely hold that against the reviewer (and have in the past) - this person was supposed to tell me about the product. Good
and bad. A reviewer's job is
not just to tell the comsumer what the publisher wants them to say - that's
ad copy, not a review. A review covers all of the bases, not just the ones that make a product look good.
Rather than writing a review that trashed the product, I just didn't write a review.
Note that the sole purpose of a review is to inform the conumer, not to please the publisher - if the publisher's product sports extremely low production values, then you owe it to the consumer to let them know that. As a rule, I make it clear up front that any
solicited complimentary material that I receive for review will, in fact, receive a fair and honest rview - and make sure to note that "fair and honest" doesn't necessarily mean "a glowing piece of ad copy that you can use to sell more games".
Now... alll of that said...
This isn't the wall that I've run into. The wall that I've run into is a product with stunningly low production values that has been promoted using some 'loaded' ad copy (explained in the review) and that has been priced to sell at what I consider (again, drawing on my experience in publishing and grunt work at a commercial bindery) to be an unfair gouge at the consumer's wallet. This pains me bad enough, as I've waited for this game upwards of nine years now.
The wall I've run into is a purely selfish one - I really don't want this game (depsite having eagerly anticipated it for almost 10 years for it), but at the same time, I'd feel really awful about selling or trading it to another gamer in exchange for an amount of money or product that would come close to covering my loss - because I
really feel that it isn't worth more than, possibly, $15.00 (US). This was what tempted me to skew the review in favor of the game, but like I said - I'm not going to do that (because that's even more unfair to the consumer).
I guess, the bottom line is that, for me, buying this game was akin to flushing my $25 down the toilet - and it sucks that, in order for me to both write and honest review and avoid ripping off a fellow gamer, I'm just going to have to chalk it up as a near total loss. I honestly haven't been this disappointed by a product for
years. While it was nice to see T&T get another print run, because of the poor production values and relatively high price of the 30th Anniversary Edition, I can't help but view the metal box that it ships in as a tiny, silver, coffin.
