Game Reviews Fixed?

[dave is ok]

Look at the evolution of sports journalism. The video game industry is comparably in its infancy, I don't think it's wholly implausible that good gaming journalism will never happen.

VSPN will save us.

[ferricide]

certain large & influential companies are notorious for witholding review copies and/or advertising unless they get their way *coughcoughNintendocoughcough*. And thus, you'll find certain companies' games invariably garner stratospheric review scores for everything, Mario Sunshine - er, I mean boring, or not.

i don't think that's how nintendo operates -- at least not my experience of doing this professionally for the past five years. certainly they are not the most forthcoming company, but i think it has to do more with US/japan communications woes and arrogance than what you describe. they're trying to get better but something seems to be holding them back. it's just the way they've always done business -- from a position of power.

and this thread is funny, equating every publication with others ... the practices of different companies, and i've worked with/at several, at this stage of the game, are vastly different.

people continually misuse the word 'journalism' as well. are you comparing game mags to pulitzer-winning investgative journalism -- or i should say, your vague notions of such since i doubt any of you actually read it -- or entertainment weekly? think about what you're saying before you say it. games magazines aren't meant to be hard hitting. they're designed to be entertaining and informative. i can't speak for other publications and publishers, but i think ziff davis mags do a good job of that by and large, and without much of the unprofessionalism or bias you describe. then again, i work here so i'm inherently biased, right -- both towards the pubs because i know how they run from the inside and am friends with the people who write them, and also because i'm partial to the company's mags.

[Mzo]

You do this for a living.

Do you feel it is possible in any way that a score of 9/10 for an unfinished Driv3r build could have been an honest mistake?

Have you ever reviewed an unfinished game and let the promises of what will be included (or fixed) in the final affect your score?

[Diff-chan]

people continually misuse the word 'journalism' as well. are you comparing game mags to pulitzer-winning investgative journalism -- or i should say, your vague notions of such since i doubt any of you actually read it -- or entertainment weekly?

I am comparing game mags to good game mags. My favorite videogame mags were Next Generation and about... 1999-era Computer Games Strategy Plus (I havent picked up an issue of that mag for maybe two years, but it was still very good when I did). Both magazines had great writing, dripped professionalism, had great interviews, concise reviews, enlightening previews, had a functional but attractive design, came up with new features which were interesting and great fun to read, had a bare minumim of shitty jokes and Simpsons references, and most importantly were straight and honest with the reader so you can build a relationship with the writers.

The average videogame site/magazine today has huge, bloated reviews, worthless interviews that ask the same questions as everyone else, the same fucking features as everyone else (top 100 games ever! - NG started that btw), boring previews, cluttered design (IGN, EGM especially), TONS of crappy jokes, and unprofessional reviews which slag on shovelware. Its just garbage. And yes, the same sort of people who will write such crap are more likely to do things like give an unfinished Driv3r a 9/10. When you suck at what you do you're gonna make mistakes.

I dont think there is a shortage of great videogame writers - Tom Chick and William Trotter immediately come to mind. These are the types of writers who I immediately set out to find when I opened up a new copy of PC Gamer (when it was still good) or CGS+. So its not like good quality videogame journalism is some pie-in-the-sky. It's been done, its been done more than once, and its definitely attainable again as more people play videogames. But the mags and sites dont care about doing it because people read the shit they put before us anyway.

[Joust Williams]

"Reviews are absolutely necessary"

You've proven this to be false. You've admitted to the horrible quality of them, yet you play games you enjoy. Amazing how that works out.

And I used to read PCG and CGSPlus back when I was a huge PC fan. The reviews weren't that good. Maybe you've grown up.

[ferricide]

Do you feel it is possible in any way that a score of 9/10 for an unfinished Driv3r build could have been an honest mistake?

no, but that's the british press and that shit is weird. and i'm aware that similar things have happened in the US as well. i'm not defending these actions at all. in fact, i think it's godawful, and i don't think you have to look hard to see who's doing it. it's pretty obvious to us, at any rate.

but i don't believe i said this never happened -- what i said is that it doesn't happen everywhere; you can't equate publications. just because certain websites are run certain ways doesn't mean that a print magazine from a different company is therefore shit. how does that even make sense? yet that's what certain people were essentially implying.

Have you ever reviewed an unfinished game and let the promises of what will be included (or fixed) in the final affect your score?

not significantly unfinished, and no significant features. nothing beyond something incredibly specific and small. something like "there's a possible bug with a conversation with NPC Y in town X." something inspecific i might let slide is like, "there are typos we're still cleaning up." stuff that won't affect the overall gameplay of a game in a big way. if it's something that a review might hinge on, nope. have i reviewed games that aren't 100% the same as the code that's on the discs in retail stores? of course.

[Mzo]

I wasn't accusing you of anything or trying to make any points... I just wanted to know. Thanks!

[dave is ok]

Ok, sorry, instead of "hard-hitting" how about "honest". I've dont read enough video game reviews that drop all pretense and tell me a game is shit. Instead they monday morning quarterback every problem in the game (well, the multiplayer seems like an afterthought..), or try to find some demographic it'll appeal to (...but if you enjoyed "insert so-so game title " then, you're bound to find some good and hours of fun in this title.). Sorry to pick on your lifes work, but video game reviews are shit, and pretty much always have been, the hands-on's and features are allowed to be fun and witty and entertaining to sell some advertising, but when I read a review I just want to know if I game is worth my time and money. End of story.

[Diff-chan]

"Reviews are absolutely necessary"

You've proven this to be false. You've admitted to the horrible quality of them, yet you play games you enjoy. Amazing how that works out.

I usually use GameSpot, now, actually. Its not great but its probably the best game site on the internet. Also I use GameRankings to get an aggregate.

But then again I dont buy or play many games. I probably bought... 5 or 6 last year and played a dozen, and Ive bought 2 so far this year and played maybe 3. And both of the games I bought this year (UT2004 and SWG) were heavily influenced by peer pressure.

If I didnt have reviews to read I would be lost. Like I said, if you have the time and desire to play every game that interests you... that's great but not everyone does.

[NeoZeedeater]

William Trotter

That's the war game guy from PC Gamer, right? He plays one niche genre and gives every game in it 90%+. I haven't read PC Gamer in ages though. I got sick of all the juvenile console bashing.

Actually, I rarely buy any mags anymore at all. It makes me sick how many people who know so little about gaming actually make a living off writing about it. I probably wouldn't be so bitter if my financial situation wasn't so dismal.