NCAA Football 12 Retraction

 Pages 1 2 NEXT
 

NCAA Football 12 Retraction

After due consideration, we have pulled our NCAA 12 review.

Read Full Article

Sure is a lot of "l2p" rage. I'm guessing it's only going to get worse.

The online perks also don't add much of an advantage at all, if you can figure out what works well to get recruits to commit its not a problem. I had some of the perks from last years game which are the same thing. I didn't even look at them I felt so cheated on what I had just bought.

Hot husky on orange guy action. I am very hot right now ;)

The Cheezy One:
Hot husky on orange guy action. I am very hot right now ;)

"Go deep!"

I wonder how many people are actually interested in buying an upgrade to the last year's game every single year. I know I'm not.

I was never much for college football. If I were going to buy a football game, I'd want it to have NFL teams.

...ok the mascot thing is pretty awesome.

The ability to have everyone be a mascot is almost enough to get me to play a sports game.

The ending must have made all the furries laugh there ass off xD.

And maybe turn a few of them one >.>... Let's not talk about those ones xp

It takes a big man to admit he is wrong. You get my respect for publishing a retraction. I don't get metacritics refusal though.

Not that I ever view meta.

bjj hero:
It takes a big man to admit he is wrong. You get my respect for publishing a retraction. I don't get metacritics refusal though.

Not that I ever view meta.

I agree, I didn't read the review and have never played or liked the games, but this 'retraction statement' for lack of a better term has already boosted my confidence in the Escapist. Nice one guys!

If the retraction was made because of quality concerns (which i wholeheartedly believe) then damn guys, way to raise confidence (which you allready had).

But also, now im really really curious about how the review was before it got pulled.

Actually im also damned curious what took place to make it so supposedly sub-par.

I more curioius about what was wrong. It seemed a pretty fair review to me. This game has been rereleased since '95 i don't see any reason to pull what seemed to me to be an accurate reveiw. factual errors? may i ask what errors occured as it may effect my purchasing decision? did the distrubutors CEO just not threaten reveiwers on twitter this time so there is deniability this time?

If nobody's losing their jobs for this, but got scolded and sent to their bedrooms without dinner, then I'm ok with it.

After looking on Metacritic, I am more interested in why the Escapist thinks NCAA 2011 is better than 2012, because I would definitely disagree. They improved the game a lot over 2011, at least in my opinion, as well as my friends who play the game.

rayen020:
I more curioius about what was wrong. It seemed a pretty fair review to me. This game has been rereleased since '95 i don't see any reason to pull what seemed to me to be an accurate reveiw. factual errors? may i ask what errors occured as it may effect my purchasing decision? did the distrubutors CEO just not threaten reveiwers on twitter this time so there is deniability this time?

Gotta go with you on this. I watched the video review and read part of the review and well....I didnt see anything wrong with it. He seemed to enjoy the game and described it well, Im guessing the part they werent happy with was in the written section which I didnt fully read.

I thought the Escapist doesn't give number scores?

Hire me and consider all your problems solved...if you can keep me from getting drunk, that is.

Mortier:

The Cheezy One:
Hot husky on orange guy action. I am very hot right now ;)

"Go deep!"

I wonder how many people are actually interested in buying an upgrade to the last year's game every single year. I know I'm not.

Enough for the company to keep making them at least, so it must be a decent number. Not to mention the many stories of people getting angry when they go to trade in the year before's game for the new one and find out they'll get about fifty cents for it.

Anyways, isn't this game pretty redundant anyways thanks to the fact there's the lockout going on? Or has that reached it's conclusion? Anyways, I think it does take a pretty confident company to admit they were wrong. Good job Escapist (and no, that isn't sarcasm, in case it comes off as such).

Kapol:

Mortier:

The Cheezy One:
Hot husky on orange guy action. I am very hot right now ;)

"Go deep!"

I wonder how many people are actually interested in buying an upgrade to the last year's game every single year. I know I'm not.

Enough for the company to keep making them at least, so it must be a decent number. Not to mention the many stories of people getting angry when they go to trade in the year before's game for the new one and find out they'll get about fifty cents for it.

Anyways, isn't this game pretty redundant anyways thanks to the fact there's the lockout going on? Or has that reached it's conclusion? Anyways, I think it does take a pretty confident company to admit they were wrong. Good job Escapist (and no, that isn't sarcasm, in case it comes off as such).

You're thinking of the NFL not the NCAA and the NFL is about to end the lockout and have a season like everyone thought they would because both the players and the owners make way too much money to not have a season.

While I know many times the games do not make very many improvements, NCAA 2012 is easily the best NCAA football game they have made yet.

Wow, I'm really curious to see what went so horribly wrong that you had to pull this review.

Russ Pitts:
I hope that you will give us a chance to regain your trust.

The fact that you not only had the balls to pull the article but then also point that fact out to all of your readers and request that metacritic remove your score only gives me more trust in the Escapist. Besides, with the amount of awesome content you guys produce, it'll take a lot more than one botched review to make me stop coming here.

The only thing I saw that was incredibly inaccurate was that he said the juking function had been removed when it hadn't (I watched the review right after watching my friend play and was utterly shocked that he'd made that mistake). I suppose a couple features were also ignored such as the revamped Road to Glory and Dynasty modes, but I had just assumed that that had just meant they weren't significant enough to merit a mention.

Anyway, my tip of the hat goes to Russ Pitts for maintaining the integrity of the site by pulling a flawed article. Thank you for restoring my faith in this wonderful website.

I would like to throw my hat into wanting to know what was wrong ring. Like others have said, Russ, big respect to admit error publicly. I watched the video review and saw nothing wrong so to speak. The only thing I can guess is something to do with instruction manuals, as that was by far the most negative aspect of the review. If that's the case letting us know what the difference i.e. the error, is would help those who were interested get a more accurate picture. You guys do excellent reviews, and Greg has earned my trust as a fair reviewer in the past.

Oh I hope no one gets fired for this (I didn't see the review, so I don't know who "dun' goofed").

It's just another stupid American Football game (I'm not American; Football is it's own thing). It was respectable of you to post a retraction, but please don't sack anyone!

Silver Lining: Now that you've technically reviewed one of these games you never, ever, ever have to review another one. :)

It takes more than a botched review to lose respect in my opinion, and in this case it seems as if the review got retracted before many people got to read it. Also, this game already has a set audience that is going to buy this game no matter what. Even though that isn't an excuse to write inaccurate reviews, at least it wasn't a game that needed good reviews to begin with.

With that said, I had a thought come to mind. Read me out...

In two recent Editor's Notes ("Connecting the Dots for Fun and Profit" and "Open Letter to Duke Nukem PR"), there has been an interesting connection made between the readers and the publishers of Escapist. The former article gives us the bombshell news that readers are going to be given the opportunity to submit articles for the Escapist (which sounds like a great opportunity), while the later article talks about the importance of "transparency and trust" between review sites, such as the Escapist, and video game companies, such as 2K Games and EA Sports.

With these articles and the retraction in mind, could there be an article showing us what goes into an Escapist video game review/article?

I'm well aware of the Extra Credits episode about how to be a video game reviewer, but I think that an article showing us what goes into these articles from someone such as a Russ Pitts, Greg Tito, Susan Arendt, etc., could shed some light on how to write quality articles for future issues of the Escapist so that we can submit articles that meet the Escapist's standards and not worry about our articles/reviews getting retracted. This magazine doens't need to do anything to try and win my trust back, but I wouldn't mind knowing a little bit more about the new transparency there is between the readers and the magazine.

Hope this helps.

Man, I wish I had seen the review... now I'm curious what was wrong with it, and who it was that posted it (though I can kinda guess who it was.) Was it really just the removal of the game mode mentioned earlier in the thread?

I'm sure with some clever Google caching or somesuch you could find the article again.

As for this, I gotta say, The Escapist never fails to maintain my respect for it.

Having been able to read the original review, I can say that there were a number of errors.
(Tip: Anyone in Publisher's Club can probably find the full written review if they use an RSS feed)

Based on the written review, you would think that the reviewer hasn't played a football game since around 2003. The controls in all EA football games has stayed the same since it introduced the right stick controls for juking (they were then modified about 5 years ago to include the "truck stick" by pushing up on the right stick and the Reggie Bush back juke by pressing down). I will say that the effectiveness of a normal juke has been reduced but it's because it more accurately reflects player momentum and ratings and you can't stop on a dime and make a defender miss by 2 yards unless you really set it up well. Of course, the spin move is overpowered but that's another issue entirely.

In the written review, the reviewer wrote the following: "The choice of plays is streamlined, with only three options for any given situation on both offense and defense." This is flat out wrong. Any play in the entire playbook is open to you at any time if you are playing a normal game. It's just a matter of changing the play selection menu from the coach's advice or whatever they're calling it this year to plays by formation or plays by type.

In Road to Glory, you are restricted in terms of playcalling. When you arrive on campus. you're given one play. No option to change it, flip at line of scrimmage, call a hot route or audible at the line. As you gain coach's trust, you gain these abilities. I'm doing my Road to Glory as a QB so I have these options but I'm not sure if other positions are allowed to change the plays.

The interface at the line of scrimmage can be clunky if you're not used to playing Madden or NCAA. If you've played these games in the past 5-10 years you'll be right at home. Hit square (or X), up on right stick for quick pass, down for run, right for deep pass, left for playaction pass. The face buttons all map to different plays. You can actually see what these are IN GAME if you press the right stick in - which is a useful tip for anyone with problems with the presnap adjustments in general because it will show you the presnap controls without having to go to the menu.

Pointing out that you have to have good timing and know you're receivers routes to have an effective passing game isn't a bad thing, as the reviewer seemed to indicate - it's something anyone who appreciates the sport will find to be an improvement. (Of course, the amount of dropped passes by computer controlled receivers, especially by your receivers in Road to Glory can be frustrating since the ball will often hit them in the helmet or they won't even put their hands up and it will go right past them.)

I watched the video review a few days after reading the written review and will say that the video review was much less offensive and painted a better picture of the game.

The conclusion for any review of NCAA Football 12 should basically be - if you've liked NCAA football in the past, you'll like it again this year. Don't expect any major improvements but you'll appreciate the enhancements. And beware of bugs because there are a number of them.

I was absolutely shocked when I saw that The Escapist retracted the review but I applaud it for having the integrity to admit its mistakes. While everyone is entitled to their opinion about a game, making mistakes about the content of the game or the control scheme such, as the purported inability to juke or use a stiff arm, means that the game was not given a fair evaluation.

Crazed_Puppeteer:
I wouldn't mind knowing a little bit more about the new transparency there is between the readers and the magazine.

With regard to our feature articles, the process goes like this: you pitch an idea, and if it's accepted, you write a feature. We don't just accept every idea that's sent our way, of course - there has to be something special about your pitch. Once you write it up, it's reviewed and edited. If the editor (that'd be me) thinks it's up to snuff, it moves on to fact checking and proofreading. If it isn't, it's sent back to the author for further work. If it's so off base that it simply can't be fixed, it's "killed," and not published. (That's pretty standard for most publication, by the way.) If after ALL of that, something turns up to be incorrect, we fix it. Depending on the severity of the inaccuracy, we may also issue an apology, though to my knowledge, we've never had to do that. We have had to fix people's titles, things like that, but that's about it.

If you want to know more about our submission process, go to the Features tab and scroll down to "Write for The Escapist."

Sgt. Sykes:
I thought the Escapist doesn't give number scores?

We give number scores almost purely for the benefit of aggregation sites like Meta Critic - while we would prefer people read the whole review and form an opinion, that type of metric doesn't show up very nicely on game publisher PR data sheets. Which has an end result of a lot of publishing houses not being interested in the impact of our reviews (which effects how much access we get to games to review in a timely manner). As well as some other sites not linking to us because we don't provide a score. :(

This explains it much better then I ever could: http://www.escapistmagazine.com/articles/view/editorials/7148-Why-Were-Using-Review-Scores

So does this mean the game was better than the Escapist Metacritic score of 60?

Metacritic links to this page for the full review, I would love to read the old one now. Also, will we get a new review?

EDIT: For sports games like these, you could probably just list the features being added or cut and call it a day.

Good start. Now when is that horrible Dragon Age 2 review going to get pulled?

Sgt. Sykes:
I thought the Escapist doesn't give number scores?

They use to just give reviews with a "who will like this" and "who won't" but here a while ago that changed to a star rating system, and that makes me sad. I used to talk up the escapist to my friends because they didn't use them. And quite frankly I think this whole Metacritic response only points out why it's a problem. Not only do you give people a over-simpliified meter to judge how "good" a game is without them relying on facts. Now you have given a score to a game that you acknowledge is incorrect, and you can't take it back.

@Susan_Arendt - This is actually very helpful. Thanks for the the advice (and for exponentially increasing my respect for the Escapist). Continue the great work.

Russ Pitts:
NCAA Football 12 Retraction

After due consideration, we have pulled our NCAA 12 review.

Read Full Article

Congrats to Russ and the Escapist staff for stepping up and taking this into such consideration, and also doing what they felt was right.

Celtic_Kerr:

Congrats to Russ and the Escapist staff for stepping up and taking this into such consideration, and also doing what they felt was right.

I agree. I think it says a lot about this company and the content that they stand by. We can be more assured that they will only release content that they believe in. I actually think NCAA Football 12 is a great game. I'm addicted to it. The graphics are amazing and the crowds sound awesome on my speakers. I can see why some might not like the game as much, but that's not me!

 Pages 1 2 NEXT

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Register for a free account here