Support NeoGAF

[Thick Thighs Save Lives]

Game reviews can often be subjective. As a gamer, you may typically gravitate towards an outlet that you find common interests in. However, the more pronounced outlets, such as IGN and Gamereactor, have regional offices that are not directly tied to the home base but still carry the publication’s name. For example, IGN Brasil writers and staff really have no connection or affiliation with IGN.

However, a publication for Gamereactor based out of Finland shared their comments about Tekken 8 that didn’t sit well with game director Katsuhiro Harada, where he took to Twitter to call out the issues within the review, one of which addressed the statement in the review that the game was Pay to Win.

The headline of the review was translated to “Tekken 8 is a disappointment in almost all aspects and smells like a cash grab,” and if you’ve played Tekken 8, that may catch you by surprise. The writer was upset about the season pass structure of the game and how characters will be added to the roster. However, the game launched with 32 characters. Regardless of the criticisms, they were wrong, and Harada-san took offense.

The director went to Twitter and said in a now-deleted Tweet, “Game Reactor Finland has just one word to say about the Metacritic rating [Tekken 8 is a pay-to-win money-making machine], huh? PAY TO WIN?? Conversely, Game Reactor writers/reviewers can go on a winning streak if they spend money, right? Go ahead, try it.”

This morning, the publication amended the review and is working with Metacritic to get it removed; they posted:

Greetings,

After this review was published, we were made aware that parts of the criticisms leveled at the game are made on a factually incorrect basis. This is indeed regrettable, and we take great pride in crafting original, well-researched reviews. However, we obviously dropped the ball in describing the game as “pay-to-win” based on the fact that extra characters are purchasable.

We will completely remove the review, as you can see below, and will take steps to have it removed from Metacritic as well. Instead, we’d like to point you in the direction of our actual network review from our fighting game expert Jonas, that awarded the game a 9/10 when the embargo was dropped on January 23rd.

We’ve been operating for 26 years, we’re live in 20 countries, and have been a strong part of the gaming scene for that entire duration, even lending our platform to Harada-san on a number occasions previously.
We hope to amend the situation as best we can on our end.

Following the post, Harada-san deleted his Tweet and thanked them:

Gamereactor.fi Tekken 8 Review Taken Down Following Director Comment

However, a publication for Gamereactor based out of Finland shared their comments about Tekken 8 that didn't sit well with game director Katsuhiro Harada,

noisypixel.net

 

[Mr.Phoenix]

Jesus... who will save us from these damn reviewers?

I swear something needs to be done about them. There has to be some sort of structure, standards, prerequisites... to be a reviewer. There has to be some form of accountability. Or cost.

Or not what is the point of there even being reviewers?

 

[Variahunter]

I mean, most of the fighting games today are pay to win because most of the DLC characters are often God tier in order to sell them easily to the FGC.
It’s well known. Look at Akuma or Leroy in Tekken 7… in SF6 I predict that Akuma will be top tier, as he was in SFV (also DLC).

Somehow, there is some truth to what the reviewer said then.

 

[Fake]

Some reviewers are really something else.

Are they always hate this job?

 

[Mr.Phoenix]

I mean, most of the fighting games today are pay to win because most of the DLC characters are often God tier in order to sell them easily to the FGC.
It’s well known. Look at Akuma or Leroy in Tekken 7… in SF6 I predict that Akuma will be top tier, as he was in SFV (also DLC).

Somehow, there is some truth to what the reviewer said then.

Wow... I guess this is reflective of the problem. In a thread about reviewers and misinformation, you post misinformation and use it to push your agenda.

Akuma in Tekken 7 was not a DLC character. He was a launch character, part of the OG launch roster. And if you really think any character in Tekken is OP/God tier, then you are simply telling us that you do not play Tekken.

Hell you don't even need to be an avid Tekken gamer, just look at EVO or other Tekken competitions and look at the characters that whoever finishes in the top 4 uses.

What that reviewer said was completely false. And that is why the review was taken down.

 

[Swipeyowifelike]

I mean, most of the fighting games today are pay to win because most of the DLC characters are often God tier in order to sell them easily to the FGC.
It’s well known. Look at Akuma or Leroy in Tekken 7… in SF6 I predict that Akuma will be top tier, as he was in SFV (also DLC).

Somehow, there is some truth to what the reviewer said then.

Akuma was available at launch, so one character that got nerfed to hell. Fahkumram was worse then basically bottom tier when all was said and done.

 

[Saber]

To think some reviewers are paid to do this kind of work.
There are better people, even non educaded, that would gladly do a hard work review for cheap.

 

[Griffon]

How likely is it that it's ChatGPT that made up the pay-to-win bit?

 

[John Bilbo]

Torille? Ei tänään.

 

[FeralEcho]

I mean, most of the fighting games today are pay to win because most of the DLC characters are often God tier in order to sell them easily to the FGC.
It’s well known. Look at Akuma or Leroy in Tekken 7… in SF6 I predict that Akuma will be top tier, as he was in SFV (also DLC).

Somehow, there is some truth to what the reviewer said then.

Well somebody didn't play Tekken 7

Akuma was a main roster character not dlc....he was even in the damn story mode...

 

[Portugeezer]

Jesus... who will save us from these damn reviewers?

I swear something needs to be done about them. There has to be some sort of structure, standards, prerequisites... to be a reviewer. There has to be some form of accountability. Or cost.

Or not what is the point of there even being reviewers?

Maybe they were primarily a sex toy reviewer.

 

[TerribleAtThisGame]

I've never played a Tekken game, nor have any interest in it, but Harada consistently reking people cracks me up to no end.

 

[StereoVsn]

How likely is it that it's ChatGPT that made up the pay-to-win bit?

Odds of some AI generated content there are pretty high I think. Mind you, it may not be ChatGPT per se as there are specialized products for writing whether it’s marketing, these sorts of “reviews” or even books (Amazon digital publishing is full of that crap).

 

[Skifi28]

Reviewing reviews should be a thing.

 

[VenomousCoffee]

Who Reviews The Reviewers?

 

[LazyParrot]

Jesus... who will save us from these damn reviewers?

I swear something needs to be done about them. There has to be some sort of structure, standards, prerequisites... to be a reviewer. There has to be some form of accountability. Or cost.

Or not what is the point of there even being reviewers?

I mean, the accountability is kind of built into the whole system. If people don't like a reviewer, they can just stop visiting their site and reading their reviews. If a developer or publisher doesn't like a reviewer, they can refuse to provide them with review copies.

The latter happens all the time, the former generally doesn't. People here hate game reviewers' guts, but they'll happily link to their articles and tweets and start threads about Jason Schreier publishing a book or whatever. The love for drama trumps all.

 

[diffusionx]

I mean, most of the fighting games today are pay to win because most of the DLC characters are often God tier in order to sell them easily to the FGC.
It’s well known. Look at Akuma or Leroy in Tekken 7… in SF6 I predict that Akuma will be top tier, as he was in SFV (also DLC).

Somehow, there is some truth to what the reviewer said then.

I remember when SF4 came out, people whined about Sagat being "broken". Well I spent weeks if not months clowning on Sagats online (with Chun-Li who was "lower tier") and IIRC he didn't win a lot of tournaments either. This stuff is so sensationalist especially day one. These are games made by people who aren't imperfect but usually these balance issues are so blown out of proportion.

 

[Arsic]

I remember when SF4 came out, people whined about Sagat being "broken". Well I spent weeks if not months clowning on Sagats online (with Chun-Li who was "lower tier") and IIRC he didn't win a lot of tournaments either. This stuff is so sensationalist especially day one. These are games made by people who aren't imperfect but usually these balance issues are so blown out of proportion.

You playing at home on WiFi Xbox 360 in goon league isn’t the same as a Sagat player in the top 1% of the world playing in a tournament. Sagat was absolutely an issue on release of vanilla SF4.

For Tekken 7, Akuma was a launch character , but remained a problem throughout the whole games life cycle. Too lazy to google but I imagine Akuma either won the most tournaments , or was the most successful top 8 character in tournaments.

Devs often release dlc fighters more tuned up at launch, then nerf a month later. Some characters take many nerfs to bring them back to level.

It did seem like Lidia in T7 was a non issue and a few others. So it’s a toss up. Are they intentionally making them over tuned? I don’t think so but I also think they don’t play test them with the intent to make them average/mid tier either.

Harada was right to call this out. It’s not pay to win.

 

[diffusionx]

You playing at home on WiFi Xbox 360 in goon league isn’t the same as a Sagat player in the top 1% of the world playing in a tournament. Sagat was absolutely an issue on release of vanilla SF4.

For Tekken 7, Akuma was a launch character , but remained a problem throughout the whole games life cycle. Too lazy to google but I imagine Akuma either won the most tournaments , or was the most successful top 8 character in tournaments.

Devs often release dlc fighters more tuned up at launch, then nerf a month later. Some characters take many nerfs to bring them back to level.

It did seem like Lidia in T7 was a non issue and a few others. So it’s a toss up. Are they intentionally making them over tuned? I don’t think so but I also think they don’t play test them with the intent to make them average/mid tier either.

Harada was right to call this out. It’s not pay to win.

Well, like I said, Sagat wasn't necessarily winning tournaments either. Even if he was, even if certain characters are too powerful, I think it's overblown. SF3:TS has been a known game for like 15 years. Like 3 characters are viable at a high level. Doesn't seem to bother people. They just added the game to Evo again.

Not to mention, if you're rushing out to buy an OP DLC character because he's OP, you're a scrub. They need to sell to scrubs, it's fine. They can't make any money just by selling to professional players. Even if it was some massive conspiracy it's not that big of a deal.

 

[StreetsofBeige]

Some reviewers are really something else.

Are they always hate this job?

Thats because just about all game site workers are basically bloggers who ramble on like any Joe Schmo doing social media after dinner. There's basically zero professionalism or training required. You, me or anyone else on GAF could do reviews too. Anyone can. My 80 year old parents can technically do a movie, tv show or game review too if they sat on the couch and tried it.

It's also an industry (media in general) which is based on click bait content to get viewers. Your water or electricity company needs zero hype. Everyone uses it despite zero marketing and silliness click bait, and if they went on a marketing crusade nobody is going to suddenly use double the water. But for media people, the key factor to success in their job isn't even accuracy or truth. It's hype and popularity.

That's why there's that old saying... "there's no such thing a bad publicity". Thats not actually true. Bad publicity can be bad for a company or person, but only in media and marketing does that statement kind of stick around because it can definitely be true because silliness can still be greatly rewarded.

On the other hand, I'm pretty sure bad publicity for a company who built a bridge collapsing is totally bad press.

 

[Js562]

I mean, most of the fighting games today are pay to win because most of the DLC characters are often God tier in order to sell them easily to the FGC.
It’s well known. Look at Akuma or Leroy in Tekken 7… in SF6 I predict that Akuma will be top tier, as he was in SFV (also DLC).

Somehow, there is some truth to what the reviewer said then.

 

[YCoCg]

Tekken 8 has a shit load of content and is one of the most content packed fighting games in years, so yeah, calling it a cash grab and pay to win is fucking ridiculous.

 

[AJUMP23]

I am glad the director said something and the company corrected their mistakes.

 

[Puscifer]

I'd argue the the game launched with 30. I barely consider kuma/panda more then pallet swaps and most of Devil Jin (Djinn, I just caught that) move set is pretty much in Jin now. Could've at least brought Eddy and Miguel back.

 

[Rocco Schiavone]

Owned their asses. Well done Harada.

 

[near]

I mean, most of the fighting games today are pay to win because most of the DLC characters are often God tier in order to sell them easily to the FGC.
It’s well known. Look at Akuma or Leroy in Tekken 7… in SF6 I predict that Akuma will be top tier, as he was in SFV (also DLC).

Somehow, there is some truth to what the reviewer said then.

Pay to win has a certain connotation to it that can often sour potential buyers from purchasing a game. I'd consider what you describe to be more of a balancing issue that can be rectified, if that were to ever be the case.

 

[Hypereides]

Jesus... who will save us from these damn reviewers?

I swear something needs to be done about them. There has to be some sort of structure, standards, prerequisites... to be a reviewer. There has to be some form of accountability. Or cost.

Or not what is the point of there even being reviewers?

That's the unfortunate part. There is none. Most people just blindly accept a reviewer/journo's word on the grading without further consideration. Lots of games have gotten screwed over wrongdoing or lack of diligence.

They just walk away scot free with zero accountability.

 

[NT80]

For Tekken 7, Akuma was a launch character , but remained a problem throughout the whole games life cycle. Too lazy to google but I imagine Akuma either won the most tournaments , or was the most successful top 8 character in tournaments.

Devs often release dlc fighters more tuned up at launch, then nerf a month later. Some characters take many nerfs to bring them back to level.

It did seem like Lidia in T7 was a non issue and a few others. So it’s a toss up. Are they intentionally making them over tuned? I don’t think so but I also think they don’t play test them with the intent to make them average/mid tier either.

Harada was right to call this out. It’s not pay to win.

Tekken 7's DLC was a mixed bag. The brand new characters were OP probably intentionally so considering what they could do. Of the rest Zafina apart they were average to bad on release. Some of the weaker DLC characters got buffed a lot later on which is not where they'd expect the peak of sales for a DLC character to be. Of the 2 SF6 DLC characters so far Rashid doesn't seem to be an issue and isn't Aki considered the worst in the game? I think quite a lot of SFV's DLC characters were quite underpowered on release too.

 

[Variahunter]

Well somebody didn't play Tekken 7

Akuma was a main roster character not dlc....he was even in the damn story mode...

Ok, my bad. Then explain Leroy.

 

[Faust]

Ok, my bad. Then explain Leroy.

Never had an issue fighting against Leroy players personally. I mained Heihachi and felt *he* was OP as hell, especially when I got Electrics down. Did you just never learn how to counter him?

 

[Nonehxc]

Harada, as always, kicking ass and Tekken names.

 

[Variahunter]

Wow... I guess this is reflective of the problem. In a thread about reviewers and misinformation, you post misinformation and use it to push your agenda.

Akuma in Tekken 7 was not a DLC character. He was a launch character, part of the OG launch roster. And if you really think any character in Tekken is OP/God tier, then you are simply telling us that you do not play Tekken.

Hell you don't even need to be an avid Tekken gamer, just look at EVO or other Tekken competitions and look at the characters that whoever finishes in the top 4 uses.

What that reviewer said was completely false. And that is why the review was taken down.

I play almost all fighting games except Tekken, yes, but I watch the tournaments. I've seen tournaments with an overabundance of Leroy Jenkins. Is he not DLC ?

SFV has done this so many times. Akuma, Abigail, G, Seth, Urien, Poison... They only need to do this for one character in the season, which is what they usually do.

GG Strive : Happy Chaos, Sin...

Of course, there is still top tiers in the base roster, but they know that in order to sell the char (other than the Baiken "style" of characters), they need to make them strong.

Look at SF3.3 : Chun-Li, Makoto => developpers said themselves that they made her completely broken so people will adopt the new version of the game.

DBZ F : Gogeta SSGS, Vegito SSGS, Gogeta SS4, Zamasu fuse, Goku SSGSS, Janemba... all dlc chars.

The list goes on honestly.

 

[MiguelItUp]

This is just one outlet. Think of all the outlets that do this kind of thing for all games. People hold reviews way too high for this kind of stuff to be happening. They're nothing but "professional opinions". If anything, a lot of positives should point to a positive product, much like a lot of negatives.

I'm glad Harada called them out though, these kind of things definitely need to be called out.

 

[DownLikeBCPowder]

Jesus... who will save us from these damn reviewers?

I swear something needs to be done about them. There has to be some sort of structure, standards, prerequisites... to be a reviewer. There has to be some form of accountability. Or cost.

Or not what is the point of there even being reviewers?

I get that - but who would be the decider? What would be the "qualifications" so to speak?

The best bet is to consume information from multiple source and draw your own conclusion, but people tend to take these a lot more seriously than they should.

 

[simpatico]

Jesus... who will save us from these damn reviewers?

Oh the economy is going to sort that out for us this year. Just sit back and stock up on popcorn. It's going to be glorious.

 

[Mr.Phoenix]

I get that - but who would be the decider? What would be the "qualifications" so to speak?

The best bet is to consume information from multiple source and draw your own conclusion, but people tend to take these a lot more seriously than they should.

Honestly, I don't know, but anything would be better than what we currently have. Our current system currently boils down to take your time and checking from multiple sources, which is just a nicer way of saying throw shit at the wall and see what sticks.

Its even worse that reviews are generally a subjective thing, and they are so inherently fickle that they can be swayed even by what the reviewer ate that morning. There is too much at stake, people can say they dont care about reviews all they want, but we cannot pretend that a MC score of say 70 is received as well as a score of say 90. Even within the halls of the publishers themselves. Anything that commands that much power, has to demand more control and scrutiny. And a LOT of people (like me) do not even bother with reading individual reviews, we just look at their MC score and read a few highlights from the review summaries.