The job of reviewing video games is becoming quite the ethical minefield. With very public instances of publishers pressuring critics to keep quiet and stick to embargo dates there's more and more talk about how game reviewers should behave. Both MTV and Variety have fired bold shots across the hull of video game journalism. Steven Totilo started the conversation by proposing a "Reviewer's Bill of Rights," motioning for the granting of more breathing room to the beleaguered critic. Variety's Ben Fritz continued in his self-appointed role as journalistic watchdog by returning fire. His "Bill of Responsibilities" laid down the law with regards to disclosure, use of review code and even how much of a game reviewers should play (Fritz says, "all").
In response to all these grim calls to action, GameDaily are going to get downright preachy and argue for good writing over angelic behavior. Whether you're reviewing a game as a product or examining it as a work of art, how you make your arguments is, in my mind, much more important than where you're making them from. Hence, the "Seven Deadly Sins of Video Game Reviewing."