Slashdot Mirror


Atari Tries To Supress Bad Reviews, Claims Piracy

im_thatoneguy sends in an account up at Shacknews about Atari's actions to get early reviews of its upcoming game Alone In the Dark pulled from Web sites in Europe. Atari sued the German site 4Players, alleging piracy, and also cancelled an advertising deal on the site, after a pre-release review gave the game only 68%. 4Players posted a commentary (translation) alleging that Atari is doing this bcause the review is unfavorable. Shacknews reports that Atari has also demanded that both Gamer.no and GameReactor remove early reviews — both reviews gave the game a score of 3/10. Kotaku editorializes: "[Does Atari] fear that, because these outlets may have received copies of the game 'early' (i.e. from pirated copies), that they're somehow reviewing incomplete code, which could affect their opinion of the game? Maybe. Pessimists could, however, be forgiven for thinking it's a convenient excuse for Atari to attack negative reviews of the only game they're releasing in 2008 that has any chance of making them some money."

6 of 275 comments (clear)

  1. "all publicity is good publicity"... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    ... once again. Before I read this I didn't know about "Alone in the Dark". I guess their strategy worked

  2. Re:Hard to say. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    > but none of the sites mentioned recieved official review copies of Alone In The Dark, which means they're all pirated

    You lie.

    And your logic is super fail.

  3. Re:Hmm.... by schon · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Atari has every right in the world to not only sue these guys, but put them out of business Yes, because god forbid anyone should have the right to freedom of speech, right?
  4. Re:Hmm.... by phoenixwade · · Score: 5, Insightful

    What a pathetic joke. Why should anyone take the reviews of a site that is obviously willing to break the law to do what it wants. I can't believe there are actually people defending the review site. "Oh, this is only cause they said it sucked".


    God I love Slashdot's fluid moral code.

    Break the LAW how, pray tell?

    The same article that reported the take down request / suit, reported the copy reviewed as a legal distribution copy designed for reviews. I don't see any indication where the site was obviously willing to break the law.

    --
    A positive attitude may not solve all your problems, but it will annoy enough people to make it worth the effort.
  5. Re:Hmm.... by hairyfeet · · Score: 5, Insightful
    Don't you just LOVE the translated text "What comes next? 4P bangs frogs in office ignite? Wives of editors with footballs bewerfen?" What are those scummy Atari people threatening to do to those poor editors wives with them soccer balls?


    But seriously if they did manage to get their hands on a boxed version prior to release I don't see how they can scream. It also might be a good test to show their true motives if someone set up a fake review praising the game and pointed out to Atari that they did the same thing. I'd bet Atari wouldn't say a word. Do they really think that this kind of crap is going to help in ANY way? Have they never heard of the Streisand effect? Now the story has been slahdotted and I'm sure it'll spread to most of the tech and gamer sites so instead of being able to sneak their bowel churner past the gate now everyone will know that it sucks. A really stupid move by the legal department at Atari IMHO. If they wanted to get the review changed they should have wined them and dined them and bought a bunch of ads. Instead the just stirred up the hornets nest. But that is my 02c,YMMV

    --
    ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
  6. Re:Hmm.... by Cruciform · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Since when is buying a retail copy before the street date illegal?
    It might be a violation of the agreement between the publisher and retailers, but it has no bearing on the consumer whatsoever.