Board Thread:General Nerf discussion/@comment-27306930-20190908040035

May I take a moment to make another one of my infamous and clearly controversial observations? I find product reviews where the blasters have been "donated", (aka sent to the reviewer for free) tend to be highly favorable. Take Jared Guynes recent review of the RIVAL Knockout.

Technically and objectively, he did a nice job. He described the blaster and its features accurately, demonstrated real-time loading and firing, and put it on his chrono to get some real data. But from a subjective standpoint, I totally disagree with his assessment and final evaluation of the Knockout.

He seemed enamored that Hasbro sent him a Knockout early, for free, and told him exactly what the protocols were for releasing his review. I get it. I've received many free products for review. I was pretty particular about which I accepted. And my reviews were honest. When I liked a product I would write about it. When I didn't I just remained silent and thanked the vendor.

So that's where I call BS. Dollar for dollar, feature for feature, the Knockout doesn't compare with blasters like the Kronos. The priming cycle is weird and counterintuitive, the priming handle is comically large, the rate of fire is significantly lower, and it comes with almost no ammo. So why is Jared's review so overwhelmingly positive. He didn't even mention one flaw or lacking feature.

Primarily, I think it's because he doesn't want to jeapardize his relationship with Hasbro. He's probably spent a lot of time cultivating that relationship, and his associated youtube channel. And who'd want to wreck that. Free stuff is awesome, right?

Look, I like Jared. I like his videos. I like his channel, the content, and his production quality. But I think he let us down with that Knockout review. In my opinion that wasn't an honest review. 