Too Human, developed by Silicon Knights, was receiving a lot of criticism on the NeoGAF forums, and President Denis Dyack had had enough. He began posting his own replies to the criticism, calling out those who were for the title, and reprimanding those who weighed in against it. Essentially saying that once the game was out, all critics would be silenced, Dyack at the very least kept interest in the game alive with his involvement.

It's difficult to say whether or not this was an example of a developer unable to restrain himself from becoming personally affected by criticism, or a masterful management of the game-buying audience, because whichever it was, it had the effect of keeping the name of the game fresh in players's minds -- a noteworthy feat, given the title's nearly 10-year development cycle.

Whatever the final product ended up being, this was a case of hype working in the favor of the developer. People couldn't wait to get their hands on this game to see for themselves one way or the other how it played. The actual gameplay was nearly beside the point; people just had to know. And that's the sort of advertising you just can't buy.

In general, it's generally accepted that the best advertising is word of mouth. You're much more likely to trust the word of a friend over anything you might read in a professional's review. But even that relies on trust, and the shared ideas of what makes a game playable. This can be achieved with game reviewers too, but it's a much more lengthy and impersonal process. You'll need to follow a reviewer long enough to see if your tastes match theirs in order to trust their thoughts. And even then, there are bound to be instances where your opinions will differ. Finally, let's not forget what Gerstmanngate taught us.

Giant Bomb's Jeff Gerstmann, while still a reviewer at Gamespot, had the misfortune to actually speak his mind about the quality of Kane and Lynch: Dead Men. For quite some time prior to the title shipping, and certainly well before Gerstmann's review, Gamespot had been featuring the game quite substantially with full integration on its site. Clearly, Eidos was putting a ton of money behind this game, betting that doing so would ensure massive returns.

What happened next is still the subject of speculation. After giving the game a negative review, Jeff Gerstmann was subsequently fired from his position, leaving many to assume it was tied to the review. Gamespot's executives insist that Gerstmann had a history of problems with the company that led to his eventual dismissal. It's been bandied about that Eidos, furious over the review after spending so much on Gamespot, put enormous pressure on the gaming site to have Gerstmann removed. While the full story may never be known, Occam's Razor suggests that it's the simplest answer.

As you can see, this is an example of how not to promote a brand. Once out in the public, any game is subject to the whims of the audience. It might sell well, it might not; this is quite out of the developer's hands. Any attempt to massage expectations is typically met with disfavor at best, and outright backlash at worst. It's likely that both Gamespot and Eidos's reputations will never recover from Gerstmanngate, John Romero will think twice before making outlandish claims, and Denis Dyack now has a much more difficult task ahead of him with the next two sequels in the Too Human trilogy -- if they ever get made. The lesson is clear: it never pays to try to manage how players will perceive a game. The best a developer can do is to focus on making it a game they themselves would want to play, and let the PR team do its work without additional interference. Simply let the gamers know that your game exists, and they'll do the rest.