Sites threatened to be blacklisted for negative Duke reviews

Not having played Duke Nukem Forever yet, I can't give my thoughts on 2K Games and Gearbox's fourteen year long project, but a majority of reviews have shown that time hasn't been good to Duke. Many reviewers such as Gamespot, IGN and 1Up.com slammed the game for poorly paced levels, unnecessary platforming segments, and overall lack of fun. It's not only Duke that's under the gun, but also the reviewers themselves: 2K Games' PR Agency, The Redner Group, publicly threatened to blacklist any reviewer who ran a negative review on Duke Nukem Forever.

After a number of these reviews were published, the Redner Group, based out of Santa Monica, CA, retaliated against the critics and tweeted that they went “too far” with their venom-filled reviews. Furthermore, the agency stated on their Twitter account that they're considering which news outlets get review copies of games in the future and which don't. 2K Games didn't take Redner's reaction well, however, and cut relations with the PR agency. This prompted agency founder, Jim Redner, to submit a formal apology to a number of gaming publications

The press interacts with public relations agencies on a regular basis and this relationship can sometimes walk on shaky ground. According to gaming news outlets like Kotaku, this type of internal blacklisting with gaming companies does happen, but isn't usually made public. Kotaku got blacklisted by Sony from its event, games and interviews when it published a rumor about the unveiling of the PS3 Home back in March 2007. Game developers always want their products to do well and video game journalists want to report on the latest juicy tidbits of news and put forth quality game reviews. It's often a delicate balance that reviewers must take into account when critiquing a game.

Metacritic.com, a website that provides a general critic consensus, shows that Duke Nukem Forever currently has a “Metascore” of 49 on the Xbox 360, a 55 on PS3 and a 57 on the PC. Given the amount of time, money and effort that went into creating this highly anticipated title, the score comes as a pretty big letdown for many gamers.

Reviewing a game at the professional level takes more than popping in a game, playing it for a few hours and then giving it a thumbs up or thumbs down. The reviewing process of a video game can be a lot of work. About a week before a game's release, companies usually provide critics with a review copy of a game. The game then needs to played in its entirety, with the reviewer paying close attention to things like game flow, controls and fun. Ideally, the review needs to be composed and posted before the game hits store shelves, not often an easy task.

Many gamers want their video game they've been waiting for to be fun and intuitive, which is what developers intend to deliver. It doesn't always work out that way, and it's up to gaming journalists to help decide whether the game is worth the time and money. After all, no self-respecting gamer would want to spend their hard-earned money on a game they've been anxiously waiting for, only to take it home and discover it falls short? A game developer can be ultimately passionate about its game, but when threats start to fly, the potential damage can become worse than the final score given by the critic.