Comments on: IGN Responds to MusicHub Controversy – A Perfect Storm or a Perfect Crime?

By: graventy

graventy — Sun, 11 Oct 2009 04:27:28 +0000

"We’ve added a mission statement to the “about” page to reinforce that the site is a community hub for the titles in this specific franchise." Wow. Well, I guess that clears everything up. No worries everyone, there's now a note on the About page! Thanks for your work on the story, it's proved to be fascinating and frustrating in equal measures. I don't think IGN has owned up to anything here, and I find "Oh gosh we tried to find another name but mean ol' Activision just wouldn't let us" to be disingenuous at best. If they really wanted to address the issue, they would change the damn name. If Planet Quake can serve that community with no issue I find it hard to believe that HeroHub couldn't also do the same.

By: jay

jay — Sun, 11 Oct 2009 02:47:33 +0000

also consider; something like this which isn't clearly designated as community based fan-site benefits from free advertising. if you consider that the conclusion that can easily be reached is that the site is ultimately an advertisement, you have to consider that anyone adding content to the site is thereby advertising the product. by putting however much sponsorship into simply running the site, activision is basically getting near zero cost advertising for their 'hero' products by having fans do it for free.

By: TheCrowing

TheCrowing — Sat, 10 Oct 2009 19:47:20 +0000

This is a great editorial. Ive noticed over that last year or so that major game sites are all becoming characterless. i use to love 1up, but its become just another video game blog with no character. Its seems like i have to go to smaller sites like GiantBomb for transparency. Im pretty sure that in Giantbombs review of Halo ODST they mentioned that they were sponsored by them. Thats something i dont feel i would ever see from an IGN or 1up. I do know that i will be visiting this site now for, hopefully, more great articles.

By: Disbeliever

Disbeliever — Sat, 10 Oct 2009 19:21:16 +0000

He says Activision isn't involved in the editorial decisions made by his staff, but also says that Music Hub, as a "community" site, isn't directly under IGN editor's 'oversight' (no pun intended, but it really should be) so Activision reps are, one would assume, free to submit articles at will. After all, they're paying for it. The content isn't mixed with IGN content? It sure seems to be, given the way articles have been linked directly from IGN's main page. How is the casual consumer supposed to know they've been transferred to a 'community site' and what they're reading isn't IGN editiorial content?

By: rainmanin1969

rainmanin1969 — Sat, 10 Oct 2009 19:21:13 +0000

alot of people talking about this in the forums are saying the same thing / what is the big deal here and where is the controversy? ya a fan site is filled with rabbid fanboys. i checked out that site / it seems stanard. it runs news and has a wiki. i didnt see anything about buying/selling the game or even praising the game, no reviews either. actualy the site seems completely void of that stuff. sad to say all this story broke was fan sites loves a game and work with a game maker. thats nothing new. O and that a crappy name can confuse some people enough to come up with conspiracys. amirite?

By: M. W. DeDomenicis

M. W. DeDomenicis — Sat, 10 Oct 2009 15:55:43 +0000

Great follow-up to the original. I really enjoyed these -- what I'd call investigative reporting -- and the focus on integrity and transparency. Also, good point about how transparency isn't necessarily a bad thing and can have authoritative value when people know what they're getting from whom.