Game Critics and Ulterior Motives

DualShockers writes: "One site gives a game a 7.4/10.0. Another gives the same game 3/5 stars. And one more gives the game a 9.5/10.0. Which one of the three reviewers had their opinion tainted? You got it! It was the third one. But don't worry, defend your site/magazine/show, because it's all opinionated. One reviewer's opinion is different from another right? Heard that one way too many times before. Let's cut the crap. Some video game publications are being paid off by publishers to boost the appeal of certain games. These companies are being paid to cheat. To cheat the system and to cheat you all from a truly objective view of a game. And we gamers hate cheaters."

Read Full Story >>
The story is too old to be commented.
Ninferno3178d ago

i guess reviews are just too opinionated, my favorite place for reviews is you get so many reviews from people who have no motive whatsoever. maybe some fanboys, but other than that nothing. Great article... you're a genius.

BeaArthur3178d ago

I like any review that has a video accompanying it. I like to actually see what the reviewer is talking about when they are talking about a bug or how beautiful a game is.

Ninferno3178d ago

that's true, they're always so much more clear to see. i agree completely.

Hitman07693178d ago

Hmmm, video reviews eh? Interesting... : )

StanLee3178d ago (Edited 3178d ago )

Army of Two is a really bad example and I see this game being reviewed as the first was; they're reviewing the game and criticizing the game's partner AI, well, to be honest, the game isn't made to be played that way. It's built from the ground up to be a cooperative experience. Why is Left 4 Dead's score much higher by these same publications with little critique of how asinine the AI teammates are or how derivative the structure is?! Army of Two deserves a much better score than its metascore represents. It lacks polish in places and its story progression is done in a terribly poor way but the mechanics work really well, it's characters are engaging, the set pieces while generic are fun and exciting. So why give some games passes for the same thing and crap on others?! The problem is review consistency, not review scores.

Blaze9293178d ago (Edited 3178d ago )

Whaaaaaaaaaat!? No waaaaaaaaaaay! IGN, 1up, Gametrailers, Gamespot...I trusted you all!...not.

It's no secret these bigger companies are doing some under the table deals. I mean just look what happened to Jeff from Gamespot when he wanted to tell the truth - he got fired. wtf is that? EA sent out $200 checks for Dante's Inferno to the big sites as "promotion" BS

It's a shame the bigger sites keep getting all the respect, shine and exclusive stuff when they are the same ones who can make or break a game. I don't understand why publishers want to continue with that instead of trying to build up more sites reputations to help them better their games. All the big sites now are trashing Dante's Inferno whereas maybe a few smaller sites from people who actually PLAYED the game like it...but no one cares about the smaller site's opinions.

Ninferno3178d ago

unfortunately thats the reality of it. Smaller sites get big, then somewhere down the line they lose the heart and soul.

Jamie Foxx3178d ago (Edited 3178d ago )

Gamedaily,edge,gametrailers and videogamer are so obvious its terrible....just wait for their reviews of heavyrain, this isn't no conspiracy rubbish they are just blatantly four of the most bias sites out there check their 360 to ps3 reviews


Unicron3178d ago

100% agreed on AoT Stan.

And it's not "conspiracy crap," it's been proven time and again with incidents like Gertsmann's firing, CoD MW2 private hotel party, trips to Europe for MGS4, and the infamous $800 Halo 3 swag bags.

Blaze9293178d ago

I'm sorry, you're confusing the bribe conspiracy with "omg everyone biased against sony!" conspiracy.

Can you cry any louder?

Darkstorn3178d ago

I think Gerstmann's firing was for the best, or else he wouldn't have founded Giantbomb.
I think we can both agree that Giantbomb is one of the best gaming websites out there.

Rocket Sauce3177d ago

I don't disagree with the author here, but that lead really pisses me off.

If I like a movie and my two friends don't, I'm not going to call them money grubbing whores or studio plants or whatever.

+ Show (9) more repliesLast reply 3177d ago
taz80803178d ago

Video games have become a big busineess and those major sites rely on the revenue from ads and the relationships they build. Not surprised one bit if $$$ clouds their better judgement and reviews.

JoelT3178d ago

many gamers out there read reviews from bigger sites, the IGNs and 1Ups if the world, and hold them up to a very high regard. There has to be some form of accountability on someone's part.

Hitman07693178d ago

I agree with you both guys. It is really a messy situation. I can see how hard it is to write a review objectionably without money involved just as a gamer there is so much information to talk about and so many viewpoints that you could represent. I think maybe reviews would be better if they discussed multiple sides to their arguments to why something is a good or a bad feature, but then wouldn't they be like 300 pages long? Interesting though how I see some people liking video reviews better. I think this makes a bit of sense because you can see what the person's writing is meaning matching up with game play footage. Either way there should be accountability. And anyone writing about games should always try to improve themselves every time they write and be as unbiased as humanly possible.

mikepmcc3178d ago

I hate to say it, but the cat's out of the bag on this one.

Game reviewers being "paid off" is an extremely, (meaning only once or twice) rare instance, and is no where near commonplace.

The grand majority of these guys are trained journalists, trained professionals, and the only difference between them and print journalists is the seemingly ignorant audience ready to make assumptions and outrages claims, spreading hate all around.

However, for some reason, people love to spread conspiracy theories, especially sites like this who aren't recognized as "official journalists" and might harbor a little jealousy.

So please, stop being sheep and wake up, this doesn't happen, it's a myth, and you all need to grow up (seeing as there isn't a single other person disagreeing with the article.)

CimmerianDrake3178d ago

Rare? You think this stuff is rare? You must be living on Mars, with your eyes shut, and your fingers covering your ears. Do you remember what happened with Halo 3? How Microsoft sent out nearly $1000 of merchandise to even smaller reviewers as a "promotion" for the game? You think this stuff is rare? It happens ALL THE TIME!!

EA, Turn 10, Microsoft, hell even SE has done it too.

If you really think this has only happened like twice, find out why Gertsmann was fired from Gamespot. Hint, he was reviewing Kane and Lynch, and the site was filled of Kane and Lynch adds, so guess who was footing the bill for the site that month.

Ninferno3178d ago

His degree in Media Communications says otherwise.

mikepmcc3178d ago

You're referring to one, isolated incident, when almost any review people disagree with is called being "paid off". Plus, he was fired because of the bad press they were getting from it, they never even proved he was bribed. It's all beside the point though.

And seriously, is your opinion really swayed so easily as to lie and tarnish your reputation because of some swanky trip you took? I'm sorry, but not everyone's like you, some people have integrity. For some reason, people think games journalists seem to be void of any morals, when they're not, they're just average people like you and me.

There are PLENTY of incidents where, even after a press event or expensive event, reviewers have given a game a horrible score. Most of these events take place because the publisher wants reviewers to experience the game the way it was meant to be, not in some crowded office. Reason why? Most people aren't swayed so easily in their professional opinions as you might like to believe, so stop projecting your opinions and morals onto credible writers.

CimmerianDrake3178d ago

That's the thing though, there isn't just ONE isolated event. Publishers bribe all the damn time, and scores are bought all the damn time. And why bring up a PUBLIC event when you know for damn sure no one is going to admit at one of those things that they are being bought off. They would lose the check and their credibility. No, these things are done like how Microsoft sent a duffle bag full of Halo 3 merchandise to damn near every reviewer they could think of, or how EA sent actual cheques out to reviewers for a favorable Dante's Inferno score.

As the saying goes, everyone has a price. You pay a reviewer enough money, you'll get your high score. I defy you to name a CREDIBLE journalist in the game journalism field. But you can't, because that would be subjective.

Rocket Sauce3177d ago (Edited 3177d ago )

If a company offers you a swanky trip right before you review their game, and you take it, you have no integrity.

I wonder how many reviewers cashed those Dante's Inferno checks.

+ Show (5) more repliesLast reply 3177d ago
Hitman07693178d ago

This is very insightful, Thank you Francois !

AzarVC3178d ago

Money affects everyone.

Show all comments (40)
The story is too old to be commented.