Someone should sue them and the reviewers that comply with false advertising...

it really shows how much faith they don't have in the game even though hands on previews by gaming sites are excited about this new batman game(that should have been out by now).

Still not buying the game

Wtf? There's gotta be some sort of law they're breaking. I wasn't gonna buy this anyway, but I will now discourage anyone I can from buying it. No company that feels like it has to cheat its way to higher reviews should be trusted.

There are a lot of games based on movies that are horrible, there are just few that are not. I am pretty sure this game isn't something good.
Now how about Lego Batman: Arkham Asylum?? ERRRR !!!

So, why's this such a big deal? It's as simple as doing nothing...



Never use their service again and they're bankrupt. I've never even heard of these guys...

Wow, well now my faith is a little shaken on the game. I was really hoping this would finally be a good Batman game, but now...........

So, in other words the game is lame?

When I suggest that Intel does similar, I always get in an argument with Cleeve.

We'll see what Metacritic says a week after the release of the game.

In other words, these game-junkie reviewers get to trade advertising (a high rating and prominent featuring) for the game to get a pre-release copy?

Honestly, I don't blame only Eidos if this is true - I would also put a huge amount of blame on game review sites and magazines that accept these pre-release copies. After all, if they are willing to GUARANTEE a 90+ score, are they really giving you a fair and unbiased review of this (or any other) game?

I think PC Gamer did this for Far Cry 2. It overrated that game so much, I wished I could have sent the bill to magazine for convincing me to buy it.

You simply cannot trust the big name review sites today. If your looking for a review of a game its best to go to the smaller sites as they are ignored by publishers. They have no reason to lie and dishonesty will just kill them.

I'm sure many of us can recall the original Black & White the game was one of the most over hyped of all time and all the big reviewers gave it excellent scores. After sometime they even started admitted its over hyped and all around they all gave the same lie that they didn't get to play it long enough and only played the first level. It's obvious that the reviewers were told to give it high scores.

There should really be a law (if there isn't already) that any journalist has to best to their knowledge speak the truth. Anything other unintentional errors should be punishable.

@San Pedro,
I got Farcry 2 with my new video card, not impressed except for the graphics engine is not bad. The malaria thing really put me off and I never did finish the DRM infected rentware. Fallout 3 is much more fun.

And you are asking me why I don't trust video game critics anymore? For exemple, my favorite game of last year is Mirror's Edge... and my favorite for this year is Ghostbusters.

Both got fairly low reviews for their respective qualities. The script and the dialogs of Ghostbusters are easily some of the best in the last 2 years... this game is full of funny moments and made me laugh several times. A little repetitive at the end due to the rushed end... but the 4 first levels are pure blast.

This is how they make crappy games bad, hyping them up and now going as far as bribing reviewers to give the crap game good scores.

Same shit happens with movies and music.

err i mean crappy games good

Honestly, no game can own up to all the hype it's given. But this is worse, there really really should be something done about this. "We just wanted to....bullshit"

The problem with an article like this on Tom's is that they pretend half the time that this kind of thing never happens... Can we assume that other types of hardware/software companies do the same, or is this only limited to games? Has anybody ever bought a product that was rated highly in an article, only to bring it home and find out that it was a P.O.S.?

edios needs thierasses kicked , were i a reviewer i'd tell them to take thier deal and stick up thier ass, what's more this tells me edios doesn't really ahve much faith in thier game. basscialy this has become a trend in the industry like teh movie industry it'sbecome awash of overhyped remakes and sequels that have to rely on hype to acutaly sell because in the end the consumer realises they bought a big stinky turd. we need to see more original game ideas and less bullshit feed ,if you make a great game you dont need to control review scores

..."Just to ensure that we don't put people off buying the game," an Eidos press contact admitted.

Facepalm.

I'm not a developer/publisher/anything like that, but if you made a really fun game you wouldn't need to falsely 'ensure' things like that. I'm not saying their games aren't fun or they didn't put enough effort into them. It just sounds like a load of BS.

Eidos hasn't deserved a 90% rating on a game in a LONG time.

I'm not a "gotta buy on release day" kind of guy so I tend to wait until there's some real feedback from players before buying a game.

I have noticed that there is sometimes a huge difference betwen the "critic" scores on a game and the player scores... I wonder if that's usually a sign of someone rigging the system.

game looks like complete shit anyway

Seeing as how the entire devo team can post "user reviews" I wouldnt see why not. After all, if many people are posting all good things about the game early on, it will override the small number of actual people who played the game at that time (ie release week.)

I cannot remember a single title from eidos that actually deserved a 90%. I suppose I can apply that to most of the newly released games actually..

The Early Tomb Raider games were quite good in their day (I'd have given them 90%)... I think those were Eidos. But that was more than a decade ago.

I always look at the gamer's average score instead of the editor's review on gamespot. That has served me pretty well in the past.