• deadbeef79000@lemmy.nz
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    45
    ·
    9 days ago

    Because you might click the link and leave the news site.

    Source: worked in the industry, literally told this.

    • DdCno1@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      9 days ago

      Publisher relations is another reason. I don’t think EA appreciates this.

      • deadbeef79000@lemmy.nz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        9 days ago

        Been there too. I think it was Warner Brothers (at the time) that had a hissy fit about a review of a game. They didn’t like the review: they wanted advertising rather than editorial. We told them to talk to the sales department.

            • DdCno1@beehaw.org
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              8 days ago

              Interesting. I actually remember this game very fondly. It’s a well made mid-budget game for kids, in my opinion. Nothing groundbreaking, but charming, atmospheric and with fun gameplay. I was young when it came out, definitely part of the target audience (despite not caring about Harry Potter), but even revisiting it as an adult, I still found it to be enjoyable. Reading the Wikipedia article, I’m actually surprised by how low its review scores are.

              How did your magazine cover it?