Riva3d.com on NVIDIA PR tactics

[Michael]

http://www.riva3d.com/letter.html

In my opinion, this is just PR at work and no company is ever going to be "clean". An interesting read.

Michael

 

[rickn]

I really hate when webmasters whine. The simple fact is that sites like that just cannot compete with a site like Anandtech. Anandtech receives what, 1 million visitors a month? That Riva3d site probably does 100,000 visitors a month. If I was a company, I know who I would let review my product first.

To me, webmaster whining defines the "big boys" from the "peons"

You never see the large commercial sites, such as Gamefan, Gamecenter, Avault, whining about how they didnt get a product first

 

[rahvin]

It's despicable to me that nvidia would tell riva3d to take down a positive V5 review or lose access to hardware. There are a lot of people on here who get offended because 3dfx will say some marketing BS about nvidia but this is review tampering. This calls into question ALL reviews on the web with company provided hardware. To me badmouting someone elses product isn't even in the same league as preventing websites (with real threats) from saying something good about a competitors product. Not even close...

 

[da loser]

looks like a bunch of misunderstandings to me.

However, complaining about anandtech is kind of moot, since he started what 96/97? and riva128 was late 97 back in the alpha opengl drivers ah...the days of rivazone(best riva site) and waiting for alpha, alpha2 so on for opengl in quake; maybe that's why nvidia releases beta drivers after another?

Just seems like he wasn't as much an entrepreneur as Mr.Anand, and he's pissed that he's been working for so long and gotten no respect.

[edit]
after reading some threads at hardocp, i think i missed the point of the article (the only words i know right now are duron, a7v, and geforce mx ). It was that Nvidia's PR was pressuring online sites.
From the way hardocp describes it, their PR blows. I think their PR doesn't realize the importance of these sites to the enthusiast crowd, or are enthusiasts for that matter. So they generally could care less about some internet site posting a review, therefore believe they can impose their will on a little site.

Hopefully, Nvidia's management and engineers don't think this way. Also, hopefully, Anandtech was chosen by Nvidia because they believed this site would truthfully show the awesome power in the Geforce MX with a insightful article.

Maybe the BX-133 article neglected 3dfx because "Naturally, not only was I done with the review, I had not saved for over an hour and a half. So when my computer unexpectedly shut off at 3:00 am, I was left with a whole lot of work left to do." Therefore was rushed and simply forgot to include the 3dfx part?

This is my rosy picture of what happened as a counter argument against the doomsayers.

 

[rickn]

nowhere in that letter did he say nvidia said to take that review down or lose access to our hardware, so stop making sh!t up.

It is a nvidia fan site, promoting nvidia products. It aint such a far stretch to think nvidia wouldn't like them reviewing their competitors products. Comparisons are ok, but flat out reviews, no. If they want to review competitors products, then they should go multiplatform and start playing with the big boys, which means Sharky, FS, Anandtech. And who do you think is going to get the hardware first, and first with the reviews? Some shoebox website with a handful of hits, or Anandtech?


I use to run a gaming page, I know what it is like to get the finger. If you ever run a website, try getting review material from EA or EIDOS. It is part of the game. Bellyaching don't you get anywhere

 

[Scorpion]

rahvin... <edit>
&quot;There were no complaints about the accuracy or methodology used in the tests. There were no complaints about inaccuracies or with the content in general. There was never any spoken threat of them pulling support from RIVA 3D if I chose to leave the article up...&quot;

I'm going to agree with what Da Loser said. It does sound like there were some misunderstandings going on... but this guy is whining a tad. I can't believe he got all upset because he didn't get a review board, but the guy he sent to the conference did. Obviously, they aren't going to give them 2 boards. And it might have been a simple mistake that the other guy got to take the board home. I see this as partly his own fault also.

 

[Michael]

Kyle at http://www.hardocp.com also posted today with similar comments as Riva3d.

I think that NVIDIA's PR group is simply doing their job. Maybe the tactics they have used in some situations are a little &quot;hardball&quot;, but they do work and all companies employ them to some extent or other. The risk when using such a tactic is that it may cause some negative publicity if it is made public.

The complaints about who got cards first or who could post first (Anand posted that NVIDIA gave him permission to post the MX article. If NVIDIA wants to give one of the major HW sites a scoop, that's their call) I ignored (fact of life in the business). The part about the pressure to change or take down the V5 review was, in my opinion, stepping over the line.

Rickn, I agree that the letter doesn't say that a direct threat was made, but this quote does say that there was pressure:

&quot;There was never any spoken threat of them pulling support from RIVA 3D if I chose to leave the article up, but I think anybody in my position would sense what wasn't being said.&quot; <- ScoRp!on, that's the complete quote which supports what rahvin said.

If someone who has been dealing with NVIDIA for as long as Riva3d sensed a veiled threat, then there probably was one. I don't understand how you can say there wasn't a threat made.

Bjorn3d also supports Ross from Riva3d (form the comments section):

&quot;Very well put Ross. As a fellow NVidia fansite webmaster (www.bjorn3d.com) I can only say that I recognice everything you've said and more. I've had my fair share with run-ins with NVidia over things I never even contemplated would make them angry.&quot;

There are a few other posts (from beyond3d and rivastation) that say they have not experienced what Ross says he has.

My real point is that websites are under considerable pressure and there is real money involved - not just for the companies but for all the employees and websites. To the best of my knowledge, no hardware website has a posted statement of ethics where they reveal sponsorships, stock holdings, or other obstacles to an unbiased opinion. As such, all reviews should be somewhat suspect and you need to read many different ones to form a general opinion (and testing yourself is probably the best bet).

Michael

 

[rahvin]

Scorpion, what you are doing is called SELECTIVE quoting. Gonna run for political office someday?

Here is the full quote:
<<
But everything changes, and as NVIDIA has grown, it seems as if they've been more than willing to flex their muscles when it comes to things they don't like. I never even considered that it would be a major deal for them when I did the V5 5500 review, but shortly after the article was posted, I received a conference call with two of the PR reps, and they made it very clear that they were not happy with an NVIDIA affiliated site doing a review of a competitor's product. There were no complaints about the accuracy or methodology used in the tests. There were no complaints about inaccuracies or with the content in general. There was never any spoken threat of them pulling support from RIVA 3D if I chose to leave the article up, but I think anybody in my position would sense what wasn't being said.>>

Two people from nvidia called him on the phone and told him they didn't want him to post a review (that happened to be positive) of a 3dfx product. The threat was implied. The rest of the article is a bit of whining about them giving preferential treatment to the bigger sites, disregard that.

Given statements by other websites (hardocp, and others) I'm of the opinion now that nvidia directly tries to influence not only the posting of reviews but the postive/negativeness of those reviews. This extends beyond thier own product line to other competing products! Show me ONE instance where any other company called a website and told them they don't want them posting a postive review of a competitors product.

 

[Scorpion]

Selective quoting, or only quoting the facts and not opinions.

&quot;but I think anybody in my position would sense what wasn't being said&quot;

That is what he thinks and is only reflecting his frustration with his situation. That doesn't hold any factual ground. So call it selective quoting if you will...

 

[rahvin]

Scorpion,

You don't know the whole story and the other comments that have been out there. Ross has posted to a few message boards. The threats weren't stayted outright (that would be stupid of nvidia), they vieled them and implied the results. In the message board threads he stated that loss of support by nvidia could kill his site and he had to think about it before putting the article up. The guy debated it for close to a week! Now the fact is I doubt he would have considered it that long if the threats weren't real.

Maybe in your world nvidia can do no wrong and that if someone who has devoted 3 years to evanglizing nvidia hardware says nvidia offered vieled threats if he posted a postive review of the v5 you might think he is lieing or that isn't what he's saying. But in my world I believe what Ross is saying. Keep in mind Riva3d did a semi-positive review (not glowing) of the V3 and Nvidia didn't care. BUT he posts an article that says the V5 is better than nvidia at FSAA and they tell him not to post it. Nvidia almost seems scared...

 

[rahvin]

Kyle says it pretty good (on his front page):

<<We have been trying to get one of a few sites to go public with statements like this recently. None of them are willing to come forward.

Bottom line is this. nVidia has no right or place in trying to control or shrewdly manage the online media. Their PR department comprised mainly of Derek Perez and Diane Vanasse, are stepping into places in the &quot;Hardware/Journalism Community&quot; that they simply do not belong. While &quot;cutting off&quot; a site from hardware to review is one thing (which they are totally entitled to do), making efforts to control online content at hardware websites is another.

In my opinion, nVidia needs to reevaluate their wants and their needs and concentrate on building great Vid Cards, which they have done a great job of. But building great cards does not give you the right to try and censor online media. I think nVidia would make a great step in rebuilding relations with the Hardware Community by calling for the resignations of both Derek Perez and Diane Vanasse. There is NO ROOM for strong-arm tactics or manipulation in their job descriptions.

Some of you might think this is a bit harsh, but I think this is a very serious situation and an indictment of nVidia's character. nVidia has a chance to really shine here and show us what their company ethics are comprised of. Lying and manipulation are surely not on their mission statement. I simply feel as though nVidia's Public Relations employees should have a bit more pride in their products and not worry about stifling the &quot;little guy's&quot; opinion and if they can't do that, then they need to be removed from the PR positions. If they are allowed to carry on in this manner isn't it simply opening the door for other companies and PR departments to act in the same manner? We, the Hardware Community, which includes the sites, and most of all the readers, need to have this situation nipped in the bud. WE need to take responsibility for letting this happen and fix it now. You can write nVidia HERE if you would like to share your thoughts on this with them.>>

 

[Scorpion]

I just think that comment is very vague. Reading some of what else he wrote, I think he's just been &quot;freaked&quot; out by this. We don't really know what they said. But I think he's blowing parts of it out of proportion. If anything his vague comment probably will get him into trouble.

If this is true, it's almost laughable. The logic doesn't make any sense...

 

[rickn]

I for one would need more proof of this so called &quot;bad PR tactics&quot; before I would ever pass judgement. We have 1 phone call to a webmaster of a fan site. That isnt exactly ground breaking evidence of some corrupt organization out to rid the world of their competition. Heaven forbid they would want their fansites to review just their products. BLASPEMY!

The way I see it, it is a disgruntled individual pissed off because 1. his co-worker got the Geforce 2, and 2. He didn't get first review on MX. BooHoo

Show me some more proof of Nvidia's corruption, then I can reassess the situation

 

[rahvin]

Another account: copied from HardOCP BBS:

http://64.27.77.160/ubb/Forum1/HTML/005630-3.html

<<Erg, I'll post something here I probably shouldn't. Some of the events I cite in this letter weren't mean to be public event, but I trust you HardForum guys
Several months back BoomGames was given the chance to be the first site ever to see the KYRO (Power VR 3) product from ST Micro by a gentleman named Tim Chambers. It was a very nice opportunity.

We soon got a resounding promise from NVIDIA that we would be one of the first sites to see the NV15 -and- the NV11. I thought everything was great and began making other proceedings.

I called up Intel's George Alfs and left him voicemail stating that we had all three products secured and needed some next-gen processors. Then all hell broke loose.

Intel and NVIDIA are apparently &quot;tight&quot;. George Alfs (maybe stepping out of perfessionalism... can you comment?) called NVIDIA to verify our claims. Whereas we'd have expected them to be verified, Derek Perez denied all knowledge that he knew that BoomGames even existed.

That morning my site's public relations manager Tim Martinez received a call on his cell phone from Derek Perez. Perez was initially asking who we are and why we told Intel we got NVIDIA's promise. (My question here is: how did he get a phone number for a PR manager on a site that he didn't know existed, even though we publish no such information?) Tim proceeded to remind Perez of the promise, but Perez still refused.

That would have been bad, but it only got worse. I can deal with the loss of a nex-gen NVIDIA opportunity.

Tim was asked WHO was allowing BoomGames to be the first site to see the KYRO. We replied accurately, a nice gentleman by the name of Tim Chambers in ST Micro. Derek Perez's professional response: &quot;Oh, that bastard!&quot; Tim Martinez informs me that Perez's voice became very unsteady and he sort of mumbled something and hung up.

As you might imagine we left him voicemail over the next days... weeks... months. Nothing back. We spoke with another PR manager who said we'd get the products anyway (although this was given after the launch date) and I've seen nothing.

So now we've got Intel who won't return our phone calls, and I'm not going to leave something like this on Alfs' voicemail. That would be something like Perez would do.

Anyway, we went on with the KYRO. EE Times made the first announcement, then we were invited to the closed circle product demo down in Carrolton, Texas. Everything went fine, we posted.

In the end Derek Perez has caused our relationship with NVIDIA and Intel to be permanently harmed...

Any comments?


------------------
Chase Venters
Editor In Chief
BoomGames Interactive
http://boomgames.com>>

 

[rickn]

<< In the end Derek Perez has caused our relationship with NVIDIA and Intel to be permanently harmed... >>



I think they did that themselves. You dont go around trying to secure hardware by using other manufacturers promises. It almost borders on desperation or childish behaviour to say &quot;Nvidia has promised us first view on their next gen hardware, so can we get Intel cpu's&quot;

As a business person, this type of attitude generally does get you a closed door. It is unethical

It is very obvious that reading what these guys say that they have absolutely no idea how to deal with large corporations

 

[Scifione]

Why is getting a product first important?
Posting a review up first is one reason, but getting a product before it is publicly avialable is good enough. Content and interface are more impotant. Just be happy to be getting a &quot;free&quot; board to review.

Someone could do a Consumer Report stile review of product, but there are some disadvantages to that. You do not get products from manufacturers for &quot;free&quot; and &quot;before public release.&quot; Free is good! We all know how much some of this hardware goes for on the street. The people that are willing to pay the premeum for the lattest are not going to wait too long for anything. &quot;A fool and his money are soon parted!&quot; This is more expensive and bothersome, and there are not to many people willing to do it.

You will always face presure to make a companies product look good. NO company wants people trash talking their product.

And where is this complant being posted about who got what first! On Anandtech Forums! need we say more.

 

[Scorpion]

How you approach a big corporation is much different.(As I see that rickn pointed out). The way he handled it wasn't the best. I don't think there was anything wrong by saying we've got new products from &quot;so and so&quot; and we would like to get some from you to go with it. Nothing really wrong with asking. Depends on how he phrased it.

Perez's actions on the other hand sound more along the lines of the owner of a car-dealership; not a professional.

Another thing that has occured to me are all these 2 people claiming they called them and had a personal conference with them. How are they getting their numbers if they don't give out this information?

 

[The Wildcard]

Hmm well reading what Riva 3D's website said, I can sympatize with their feelings. It can be hard for a smaller site, such as Riva3D, who is trying their best to get as many visitors and exposure to their site. Admittely, Anandtech, Sharky and Firingsquad are like huge powerhouses in the online hardware community, and so it can be hard for smaller sites, such as Riva 3D to compete.

But what i don't understand is his claim that Anandtech, Sharky and firingsquad can release reviews first and without permission from nvidia. I don't think that's true. I have read many reviews on firingsquad where they begin by saying...&quot; now that the NDA period is over, we can......&quot;

But speaking from personal epxierence, i like reading reviews from many sites, and not just one. If both anandtech and riva3D reviewed teh same product, i would read both.

I think what Nvidia did was hardcore business. Looking out for the compnay's best interest and not caring about anything else. Heck, that's their job. And unforutnatley, hardcore business can be bad sometimes which it is in this case.

 

[GQ]

Talk about a Nvidia love in, do you guys think it's okay for them to try and control what you read now? I wondered how they managed to &quot;sell&quot; T&amp;L a year before any games used it. I can now see that some people don't question anything they do, oh brother..

GQ

 

[rickn]

GQ: not at all. I'm not so narrow minded to know there are always two sides to a story.

 

[HappyGamer2]

i wonder how much money gets passed under the table for these reviews, no nvidia won't do that......... sure.......TandL ......it's the greatest thing in the world well before any game has it............i heard rumors a while back about nvidia and guillemot pressuring people (reviewers) and under the table cash.......it maybe true after all

 

[Michael]

GQ - I am somewhat surprised that all the regular posters here that reference &quot;poor&quot; PR in their signatures have not commented on this subject. In general, there are less and less people here who like 3dfx cards. That partially is due to NVIDIA trumping 3dfx in specs for the past 6 months or so, but it is also due to the extreme negative reception that any post that says anything good about a card other than a 3dfx card. Many of the anti-3dfx posters have been using professional, disruptive tactics to break up threads and discussions.

I do agree with rickn that there are two sides to the story. The NVIDIA PR people know that laying low is the best choice right now so we are unlikely to hear their side of it. Although the purest in me is upset by the &quot;censorship&quot; the realist in me knows that a medium supported by advertising and sponsorship/free product is inherently corrupt.

I have wondered about Anandtech's coverage of 3dfx over the past while. The latest article on BX133 not including any 3dfx cards did make me pause. It would be unlike Anand (based on the way his reviews have run for years) to really be &quot;bought&quot;, but there sure is lots of smoke around to indicate there might be a fire. That said, IMHO, the reviews still are as fair as they ever have been. It would be nice if the site would publsih their standard test settings and they really should do a full-up V5 review now that the retail cards are out (complete with correct screenshots and animated gifs to show FSAA in action).

I have been coming to this site for years and I like the way it has grown and the community on this BBS, so I plan on being here for a while into the future. I like both NVIDIA and 3dfx as companies, but companies are not people and I judge them by different standards.

Michael

 

[rahvin]

Michael that is one thing I've been wondering. There are a dozen people on this board with sig files that slam 3dfx for PR moves and we have here a blatent attempt by nvidia to get a V5 review removed and NOT one of those people has commented. Seems in these people's minds it is OK for nvidia to coerce websites into carrying reviews only they approve of but if 3dfx does the typical marketing gimic of saying theirs is better than someone elses they are the devil incarnate.

Myself I wondered about the lack of voodoo's in Anand's latest reviews too. I wouldn't think he could be influenced what with his breadth and size.

 

[KarlHungus]

Perhaps 3dfx refused to send Anand any release cards due to his positive nVidia articles?

I generally despise PR, but accept it as a necessary evil.

 

[EMAN]

Even though nVidia is wrong, they can do whatever they want. They have a right to keep the boards if they want to. That's why they don't give out boards to hardocp anymore. Isn't the world corrupt?