[H}ardocp MSI GeForce RTX 2070 GAMING Z review

[Misanthrope]

28 minutes ago, leadeater said:

Race to first existed well before youtube reviews existed, there were a lot of low quality badly done written reviews back when those were the defacto. Only change now is the medium of the review, video, and where you get it. Won't be any different to the past, someone is always going to want to be first and many will be competing for that and we'll get mediocre content just like before.

 

Edit:

Also youtube will in fact make the issue worse, that's already a problem in general with youtube, easy fluff click bait rubbish with near zero value. At least back in the written days you had to put more effort in than just have a camera and spout nonsense after pressing record then upload to youtube. You had to actually author a written document, create the web page, have the website and domain or be part of a publishing network that has one and will let you publish.

True but news outlets of the past used to have some semblance of journalistic integrity.

 

I could partially concede that this happened before but  I still think you're downplaying how different it is now with youtube and amateurs being picked as the new professional journalists which had more control over their overall platform and a much stronger bargaining position and reputation to take care of than some stupid kids turned famous.

[leadeater]

22 minutes ago, pas008 said:

Fyi i prefer written reviews myself 

Same, having to pause videos is much harder than using pages/browsing etc

[Derangel]

To people crying about "respecting other reviewers" or whatever bullshit you're using to defend Nvidia's marketing: Should reviewers have waited to publish their 2080 and 2080 ti reviews until people like Kyle, who had to buy his cards out of his own pocket and wait until release day to get them, had a chance to get their reviews ready?

[mr moose]

23 minutes ago, Derangel said:

To people crying about "respecting other reviewers" or whatever bullshit you're using to defend Nvidia's marketing: Should reviewers have waited to publish their 2080 and 2080 ti reviews until people like Kyle, who had to buy his cards out of his own pocket and wait until release day to get them, had a chance to get their reviews ready?

 

You seem to have missed the point where this is not an Nvidia specific problem,  Also: other reviews not under NDA have waited for the deadline out of respect for their industry peers and the system.   Kyle may have been something once but he is nothing but a greedy twat now.

 

 

[Derangel]

6 minutes ago, mr moose said:

 

You seem to have missed the point where this is not an Nvidia specific problem,  Also: other reviews not under NDA have waited for the deadline out of respect for their industry peers and the system.   Kyle may have been something once but he is nothing but a greedy twat now.

 

 

Why should they wait? There is no reason to refuse to give customers information when you are not bound by a contract. Reviewers are actively withholding important information from their viewers by not releasing reviews. The hole "respecting other reviewers" idea is complete bull. Reviews should be about what is best for the customer, not what benefits the reviewer's friends or companies like Nvidia.

 

If Kyle was greedy he would have signed Nvidia's bullshit NDA and not spent several thousand dollars out of his own pocket to buy video cards. He also wouldn't have pissed Nvidia off by breaking the story on GPP. Nor would he have done many of the things he has done over the years that pissed manufacturers off.

[mr moose]

1 hour ago, leadeater said:

 

Shows in stock for me but it's unlikely that you'll get it any sooner than otherwise, at least you know you'll be first off the rank though. If anyone is brave enough and wants one they could always give it a shot and let us know 

I wonder why it shows in stock for some but not others.  Must have something to do with not actually being able to sell it yet.

[Derangel]

15 hours ago, pas008 said:

same here plus I cant read anything from this guy anymore

its from the same guy that bans people that disagrees with him

he has sprouted shit like a child millions of times about especially the death of the graphic card around a decade ago

now he is fucking other reviewers over karma is a bitch,

 

I find many comments here hilarious and hypocritical

screw ndas but we want independant non biased reviews and want it in chaotic time frame lol

screw preorders but every company does it, but its ok for amd

screw nvidia they are teh devil, but arent they pushing forward, arent they doing what millions of other companies do is protect their ip their name and push profits lol

 

 

If Kyle banned people just because they disagree with him I would have been banned a decade ago.

[mr moose]

13 minutes ago, Derangel said:

Why should they wait? There is no reason to refuse to give customers information when you are not bound by a contract. Reviewers are actively withholding important information from their viewers by not releasing reviews. The hole "respecting other reviewers" idea is complete bull. Reviews should be about what is best for the customer, not what benefits the reviewer's friends or companies like Nvidia.

 

If Kyle was greedy he would have signed Nvidia's bullshit NDA and not spent several thousand dollars out of his own pocket to buy video cards. He also wouldn't have pissed Nvidia off by breaking the story on GPP. Nor would he have done many of the things he has done over the years that pissed manufacturers off.

yeah right.   That's the problem isn't it? the whole GPP thing backfired on him and he's too salty to suck it up and sign the NDA.   You know when he is like the only one not signing it after lawyers have pointed out how it's nothing, it's because he is just milking it for anything it's worth.  That's not respect or loyalty that's just greed. 

[Derangel]

8 minutes ago, mr moose said:

yeah right.   That's the problem isn't it? the whole GPP thing backfired on him and he's too salty to suck it up and sign the NDA.   You know when he is like the only one not signing it after lawyers have pointed out how it's nothing, it's because he is just milking it for anything it's worth.  That's not respect or loyalty that's just greed. 

You do realize that Kyle also talked to a lawyer, right? He talked to his personal lawyer, the same one that defended him against Phantom. Do you also realize that Kyle said that Steve's lawyer wasn't wrong as the situation pertains to publications like GN, LTT, etc? He's repetedly stated, based on conversations with his contacts, that the new NDA was created specifically to try and stop something like GPP from leaking out again. In other words, the worst parts of it target people like Kyle. For review focused folks (like GN, Jay, Linus, etc) it's business as usual.

 

You're trying to see things from one side with half-assed information.

 

Edit: Also, your tin foil hat bullshit falls apart when you realize he gave card a glowing review. Your entire conspiracy relies on him milking things and that would require not giving the card a fair review. Making it look bad and calling it crap would generate far more traffic and discussion than a positive, fair, review would.

[mr moose]

1 minute ago, Derangel said:

You do realize that Kyle also talked to a lawyer, right? He talked to his personal lawyer, the same one that defended him against Phantom. Do you also realize that Kyle said that Steve's lawyer wasn't wrong as the situation pertains to publications like GN, LTT, etc? He's repetedly stated, based on conversations with his contacts, that the new NDA was created specifically to try and stop something like GPP from leaking out again. In other words, the worst parts of it target people like Kyle. For review focused folks (like GN, Jay, Linus, etc) it's business as usual.

You do realise none of that changes what a cock he is, in fact it makes him worse and further explemfy's the stupidity of not signing a simple NDA and  instead taking business advice from his forum users.  

 

1 minute ago, Derangel said:

You're trying to see things from one side with half-assed information.

 

I'm well beyond taking preconceptions into such discussions,  I just call it as it is, not how I want to see it.

[Derangel]

Just now, mr moose said:

You do realise none of that changes what a cock he is, in fact it makes him worse and further explemfy's the stupidity of not signing a simple NDA and  instead taking business advice from his forum users.  

 

 

I'm well beyond taking preconceptions into such discussions,  I just call it as it is, not how I want to see it.

Not going to argue about his attitude. It is what it is and entirely irrelevant to the discussion. Kyle presented his lawyer's thoughts, as well as his own, to his audience and asked if they felt it would be worth signing even in light of it. If the community demand it, he was willing to give up that aspect of the site in order to please his audience.

 

Really? You're beyond preconceptions? I find that hard to believe since you clearly lacked pieces of crucial information and are making judgment calls based on poor information and clearly letting your own bias be the judge.

 

For the record: I'd feel the same if Steve, Jay, Linus, etc released a review early when they're not bound by NDA. While the buddy-buddy relationships between a lot of these techtubers has produced some outstanding content, the audience should be their primary concern. If more reviewers had the balls to tell companies to fuck off maybe we wouldn't have to worry about these kinds of issues as insane NDAs wouldn't be a problem.

[Delicieuxz]

15 minutes ago, mr moose said:

You do realise none of that changes what a cock he is, in fact it makes him worse and further explemfy's the stupidity of not signing a simple NDA and  instead taking business advice from his forum users.  

His forum members, his legal counsel, and his own judgment.

 

Remember, Kyle of HOCP is who broke the GeForce Partner Program story and his reporting on GPP is what led to Nvidia dropping it. And Kyle paid a price for that, in that Nvidia blacklisted him, refused to send him any review samples and stopped responding to all of his messages asking Nvidia for comment and clarification on various news subjects. Nvidia probably also stopped inviting him to Nvidia events.

 

If he was someone just looking to game things for clicks and benefit of his site and profits, he would never have done his work fiercely condemning GPP. He also likely would have signed Nvidia's new NDA after they offered him the chance, rather than criticizing it on his site and letting the forum members vote on whether he should submit to it. I see his work against GPP and his release of a 2XXX GPU review outside of NDA parameters as showing a principled consistency.

 

And, even if Kyle released his review outside of NDA guidelines exclusively for the sake of clicks, which I don't believe he did, that wouldn't counter the value of the service he did for the tech community and customers in taking on and bringing down Nvidia's GPP.

[Delicieuxz]

Kyle has posted the following in his thread for HOCP's review:

 

Quote

 

Update: MSI has contacted us today asking HardOCP to remove this RTX 2070 review, even though MSI had nothing to do with sourcing this review. NVIDIA's green feathers are apparently flying over this RTX 2070 review being published before its embargo date and time that is has with reviewers that signed its NDA. This is how things turn out when NVIDIA tries to force 5 year blanket NDAs down journalists throats. We chose not to sign NVIDIA's NDA.

 

Our review is 100% legitimate and we are not going to remove it because NVIDIA is throwing a fit over it being published. The fact of the matter is that NVIDIA changed its entire NDA/Product Embargo structure after we reported on GPP this year. It did this to muzzle stories about NVIDIA in the future, and it is on NVIDIA for tying that to its product reviews. It is sad that MSI is having to deal with the brunt of NVIDIA's fury over this, and to that, we are sorry that is happening. This review could have easily been over any other AIB's card, it just so happens that an MSI card was the first one that we could source.

 

 

It looks to me this new Nvidia NDA and review controversy is an extension of his battle against Nvidia's GPP. Kyle was given the chance to benefit as an individual from being off of Nvidia's blacklist by accepting the new NDA but he decided to take another principled stand against Nvidia's practices that affect the integrity of the industry and customer informedness.

[mr moose]

6 minutes ago, Derangel said:

Not going to argue about his attitude. It is what it is and entirely irrelevant to the discussion. Kyle presented his lawyer's thoughts, as well as his own, to his audience and asked if they felt it would be worth signing even in light of it. If the community demand it, he was willing to give up that aspect of the site in order to please his audience.

 

Really? You're beyond preconceptions? I find that hard to believe since you clearly lacked pieces of crucial information and are making judgment calls based on poor information and clearly letting your own bias be the judge.

 

For the record: I'd feel the same if Steve, Jay, Linus, etc released a review early when they're not bound by NDA. While the buddy-buddy relationships between a lot of these techtubers has produced some outstanding content, the audience should be their primary concern. If more reviewers had the balls to tell companies to fuck off maybe we wouldn't have to worry about these kinds of issues as insane NDAs wouldn't be a problem.

I lack no information.  He refused to sign a benign document that does not cause negative impact on his business(in fact it does the oppsite, it affords him the same options as other reviewers), he attained a card he knows should not be available and released the benchmarks knowing full well that the others will lose views for it.  To be quite honest this is as bad as Intel releasing benchmarks before NDA is up.  He is no different to the people he claims to be above.  He is a shit shoveler as far as I am concerned, because integrity is that thing that stops you from being the prick you accuse others of. 

 

 

5 minutes ago, Delicieuxz said:

His forum members, his legal counsel, and his own judgment.

2 of those things aren't looking to be good advice and the 3rd one he ignored.

5 minutes ago, Delicieuxz said:

Remember, Kyle of HOCP is who broke the GeForce Partner Program story and his reporting on GPP is what led to Nvidia dropping it. And Kyle paid a price for that, in that Nvidia blacklisted him, refused to send him any review samples and stopped responding to all of his messages asking Nvidia for comment and clarification on various news subjects.

Oh, how could I have forgotten?    What you propose here is just assumption, there is no evidence for any of that,  He had the option to sign an NDA, are you suggesting Nvidia sent him an NDA when they weren't intending on sending review samples? 

 

 

5 minutes ago, Delicieuxz said:

 

If he was someone just looking to game things for clicks and benefit of his site and profits, he would never have done his work fiercely condemning GPP.

Except that it got him a plenty of clicks and direct extra traffic to his site and forums.

 

5 minutes ago, Delicieuxz said:

He also likely would have signed Nvidia's new NDA after they offered him the chance, rather than criticizing it on his site and letting the forum members vote on whether he should submit to it.

So you agree they offered him the chance to sign it but you don't think they would send out anything to review?  BTW asking forum members what he should do is a cop out when he should be basing that decision on business managers and lawyers. not forum plebs.  Like seriously WTF? hey forum should I thumb my nose at one of the largest companies in the industry?  hurdur was the response and he did.

5 minutes ago, Delicieuxz said:

I see his work against GPP and his release of a 2XXX GPU review outside of NDA parameters as showing a principled consistency.

How?

5 minutes ago, Delicieuxz said:

And, even if Kyle released his review outside of NDA guidelines exclusively for the sake of clicks, which I don't believe he did, that wouldn't counter the value of the service he did for the tech community and customers in taking on and bringing down Nvidia's GPP.

I don't care what anyone thinks his motivation was, what he actually did was a dick move, he was doing to the industry and consumers what Intel just did with pre NDA benchmark publications.  

[Derangel]

2 minutes ago, mr moose said:

I lack no information.  He refused to sign a benign document that does not cause negative impact on his business(in fact it does the oppsite, it affords him the same options as other reviewers), he attained a card he knows should not be available and released the benchmarks knowing full well that the others will lose views for it.  To be quite honest this is as bad as Intel releasing benchmarks before NDA is up.  He is no different to the people he claims to be above.  He is a shit shoveler as far as I am concerned, because integrity is that thing that stops you from being the prick you accuse others of. 

 

 

2 of those things aren't looking to be good advice and the 3rd one he ignored.

Oh, how could I have forgotten?    What you propose here is just assumption, there is no evidence for any of that,  He had the option to sign an NDA, are you suggesting Nvidia sent him an NDA when they weren't intending on sending review samples? 

 

 

Except that it got him a plenty of clicks and direct extra traffic to his site and forums.

 

So you agree they offered him the chance to sign it but you don't think they would send out anything to review?  BTW asking forum members what he should do is a cop out when he should be basing that decision on business managers and lawyers. not forum plebs.  Like seriously WTF? hey forum should I thumb my nose at one of the largest companies in the industry?  hurdur was the response and he did.

How?

I don't care what anyone thinks his motivation was, what he actually did was a dick move, he was doing to the industry and consumers what Intel just did with pre NDA benchmark publications.  

Hoooooooly shit dude. No, this is NOTHING like what Intel did. Jesus fucking Christ.

[mr moose]

1 minute ago, Delicieuxz said:

Kyle has posted the following in his thread for HOCP's review:

 

 

It looks to me this new Nvidia NDA and review controversy is an extension of his battle against Nvidia's GPP. Kyle was given the chance to benefit as an individual from being off of Nvidia's blacklist by accepting the new NDA but he decided to take another principled stand against Nvidia's practices that affect the integrity of the industry and customer informedness.

So he's after cheap clicks, it's been explained over and over again by several lawyers now that it is not a Blanket 5 year NDA for everything, the NDA for any one specific product ends when that information is made public.   Surely people aren't that dense to be tricked this easily by misrepresenting a legal document that has already been published and analyzed by the relevant industry professionals in the open.

[mr moose]

Just now, Derangel said:

Hoooooooly shit dude. No, this is NOTHING like what Intel did. Jesus fucking Christ.

Releasing benchmarks before NDA is up?  it's exactly the same. 

[Derangel]

Just now, mr moose said:

So he's after cheap clicks, it's been explained over and over again by several lawyers now that it is not a Blanket 5 year NDA for everything, the NDA for any one specific product ends when that information is made public.   Surely people aren't that dense to be tricked this easily by misrepresenting a legal document that has already been published and analyzed by the relevant industry professionals in the open.

You're engaging in confirmation bias. You want to believe they're the bad ones so you intentionally look for and only consider that which confirms your stance.

[Derangel]

4 minutes ago, mr moose said:

Releasing benchmarks before NDA is up?  it's exactly the same. 

I'm having trouble even comprehending what lead to that insane leap of "logic". Intel PAYING for misleading, incredibly incorrect, benchmarks for the sole purpose of making their product look better is the same as publishing an early review? What the fuck!?

[Delicieuxz]

Just now, mr moose said:

Oh, how could I have forgotten?    What you propose here is just assumption, there is no evidence for any of that,  He had the option to sign an NDA, are you suggesting Nvidia sent him an NDA when they weren't intending on sending review samples? 

Kyle's reporting on GPP, telling the public that GPP is bad for them, is what the negative public sentiment about it boiled up from.

 

Kyle reported he was being fully sanctioned from Nvidia communication and benefits after his reporting on GPP. The next successful contact he had with Nvidia was when he, reaching out to Nvidia about the RTX program, was offered the new NDA to sign to be able to receive a review sample from them.

[mr moose]

Just now, Derangel said:

You're engaging in confirmation bias. You want to believe they're the bad ones so you intentionally look for and only consider that which confirms your stance.

Do you know what confirmation bias is?  I don't think you do,  You see I haven't said I only see bad things, in fact I even said he might have been something good once.  But these things he is doing now are bad.  That's not confirmation bias, that's appraising individual events on there own merit. 

 

Not signing the NDA was his choice, it wasn't a corrupt legal document, it was a transparent legal document that has been reviewed publicly by more than one lawyer.    Releasing benchmarks early knowingly to the detriment of the industry was also a choice he made,  tryig to misrepresent the NDA as an excuse for doing it is also a choice he made.   I am not looking for reasons to hate him, he is giving them plainly.  Anyone with half a brain  who remembers the GN videos on the NDA plus the numerous other resources we linked regarding their usage and limitations, would see straight up that he is repeating tired old rhetoric that has been shown as unrepresentative.

[mr moose]

2 minutes ago, Derangel said:

I'm having trouble even comprehending what lead to that insane leap of "logic". Intel PAYING for misleading, incredibly incorrect, benchmarks for the sole purpose of making their product look better is the same as publishing an early review? What the fuck!?

What has Intel paying for them or their accuracy got to do with anything? I never said Kyle's was inaccurate or that he didn't pay for the GPU.   Intel released benchmarks to make them look better, Kyle released his benchmarks to make him look better.  They both released pre NDA benchmarks to sell their wares.

 

 

1 minute ago, Delicieuxz said:

Kyle's reporting on GPP, telling the public that GPP is bad for them, is what the negative public sentiment about it boiled up from.

 

No shit.

1 minute ago, Delicieuxz said:

Kyle reported he was being fully sanctioned from Nvidia communication and benefits after his reporting on GPP. The next successful contact he had with Nvidia was when he, reaching out to Nvidia about the RTX program, was offered the new NDA to sign to be able to receive a review sample from them.

Exactly, he was offered an NDA and product like everyone else.  He chose not to sign and instead went this other path.   His only reasoning is that he has a bee in his bonet about Nvidia and is milking it for all he can.   Don't be surprised if Hard OCP doesn't exist in 5 years or that he will have anything to do with it the way he is going.

[Blademaster91]

1 minute ago, Delicieuxz said:

Kyle's reporting on GPP, telling the public that GPP is bad for them, is what the negative public sentiment about it boiled up from.

 

Kyle reported he was being fully sanctioned from Nvidia communication and benefits after his reporting on GPP. The next successful contact he had with Nvidia was when he, reaching out to Nvidia about the RTX program, was offered the new NDA to sign to be able to receive a review sample from them.

And going against the NDA and possibly getting a card that shouldn't have been for sale yet doesn't make him some hero, it is clearly screwing over every other reviewer when all he had to do was sign the NDA that keeps the reviews fair while also making sure everyone releases their articles at the same time. I haven't trusted HardOCP ever since that GPP fiasco that amounted to nothing anyway, yet some people are still stuck on that negative sentiment generated for some attention to his forum.

[Derangel]

6 minutes ago, mr moose said:

Do you know what confirmation bias is?  I don't think you do,  You see I haven't said I only see bad things, in fact I even said he might have been something good once.  But these things he is doing now are bad.  That's not confirmation bias, that's appraising individual events on there own merit. 

 

Not signing the NDA was his choice, it wasn't a corrupt legal document, it was a transparent legal document that has been reviewed publicly by more than one lawyer.    Releasing benchmarks early knowingly to the detriment of the industry was also a choice he made,  tryig to misrepresent the NDA as an excuse for doing it is also a choice he made.   I am not looking for reasons to hate him, he is giving them plainly.  Anyone with half a brain  who remembers the GN videos on the NDA plus the numerous other resources we linked regarding their usage and limitations, would see straight up that he is repeating tired old rhetoric that has been shown as unrepresentative.

con·fir·ma·tion bi·as

noun

 

1. the tendency to interpret new evidence as confirmation of one's existing beliefs or theories.

 

 

Everything you've posted has looked to me like a clear case of confirmation bias. To quote you "I call it as I see it". You've already established that there is no need of anything other than feelings to make bold claims.

[Derangel]

2 minutes ago, Blademaster91 said:

And going against the NDA and possibly getting a card that shouldn't have been for sale yet doesn't make him some hero, it is clearly screwing over every other reviewer when all he had to do was sign the NDA that keeps the reviews fair while also making sure everyone releases their articles at the same time. I haven't trusted HardOCP ever since that GPP fiasco that amounted to nothing anyway, yet some people are still stuck on that negative sentiment generated for some attention to his forum.

Amounted to nothing? You mean besides Nvidia backpeddling hard on GPP? Or how about that brief time where AIBs were moving AMD cards off their established gaming brands onto new brands? And then all of sudden that stopped being a thing when GPP went away. Then mysteriously this new 5-year very weirdly written NDA pops up and Nvidia forces people to sign it and enacts far more restrictive control over review samples. I'm sure that was all totally a coincidence and had nothing at all to do with GPP fallout.