Over the past couple of months, I’ve noticed a change in the landscape of reviews around the internet. Traditionally, there were a number of large sites that could be trusted to “professionally” review a game. You know who I mean without me needing to name them. I think this has begun to change.
It’s going to be very difficult to talk about this subject without naming names but in the interests of professionalism I will try to avoid specifically calling anyone out on what I believe to be their shoddy work.
It first struck me a month or so ago when I read a review on the website of a magazine which I have genuine respect for. The review was for a game I had just reviewed myself and it was abundantly clear that the reviewer working for this website had not played the game in question for longer than an hour or two.
He mentioned things in the review which simply weren’t true and the only reasonable explanation was that he hadn’t got to the part of the game which made them untrue yet. I was shocked and more than a little disappointed. The website in question even issued a statement claiming that their guy had finished the game and standing behind the review. I understand that it’s important to back your staff but surely not at the expense of honesty or reputation when the evidence is so clearly contrary?
This brings us to the seemingly growing trend of not actually playing the games that you are supposedly reviewed. No outlet will ever admit to this (except us) because if you come out and say “yes, we reviewed that game without actually playing it to its fullest” then you are admitting that you sold the game – and your readers – short. I am reasonably sure of at least one growing outlet that definitely does not play the games it posts reviews for. How can you adequately pass objective judgement on something if you don’t know all it has to offer? You can’t. It’s dishonest and it harms our industry.
In my opinion, this happened just this week with an extremely poorly-written appraisal of an upcoming Move title from one of the big outlets. The reviewer misquoted controls (which have since been edited out, mostly – without referencing the original mistake) and claimed that they were detracting from his enjoyment of the game without actually knowing what those buttons were supposed to be doing. It’s like me saying that a piano is out of tune because I can’t play Rachmaninoff’s third on it. I can’t play the piano and I’ve never tried to learn so why blame the piano makers?
So why bother? The answer is simple: traffic. If you don’t cover as many games as possible you limit your chances at search engine hits and you seem less professional to your readership because you have gaps in your coverage. You see, contrary to what some might want you to believe, high traffic is essential to profitability with a website. If you don’t have the traffic then advertisers don’t want to pay you for adverts, no matter what your advertising model is.
This is the reason for those sites which post multiple sensationalist headlines out of one interview. It’s the reason for most of those sites which post the “announcement of an upcoming announcement” news stories. It’s the reason why many outlets focus on negative stories: negativity is popular. It’s also the reason, sadly, that some sites or writers rig their reviews. All of which brings us nicely to the sites that post artificially low scores for highly anticipated titles.
Now, I’m not suggesting that simply because a title is highly anticipated, it should automatically get a positive score. That is just as bad as the negative scoring trick used by some, it deceives your readers. We try to use the full scope of our review scale on TheSixthAxis and we occasionally moan when it’s clear that others are only using the top third. It is fairly obvious though, that sometimes writers and outlets will purposefully approach a game negatively in the anticipation that it will create a bit of conflict and drive a lot of traffic.
Various outlets have been accused of this and, while it’s not always a fair accusation, I think that it does occasionally have a solid basis in truth. It happens too often and scores from individuals are often too disparate in comparison to the general consensus to be a coincidence. This would be easily accounted for if it was a rare occurrence but certainly not at the regularity with which it happens.
I’ve always been of the opinion that some of the most talented writing on the internet is on small, independent blogs. It genuinely annoys me each year when the nominations for the Games Media Awards are announced in the UK and they’re the same limited selection of outlets, owned by the same couple of publishers or media outlets. Independent outlets and the talent they employ don’t get noticed by most.
So how does that leave the future of games reviews? Well, there are talented people out there who are willing to work for free when they’re not on freelance assignment (Jen Allen and others at Resolution, Lewis Denby and of course, certain TSA staffers all immediately spring to mind) so there’s no shortage of youth and enthusiasm. We just need the established industry giants to take notice. Or we’ll overthrow them.
Note: for the sake of clarity, Lewis Denby has pointed out that he no longer works for free – he earns a living writing about games and doesn’t have the time to invest in unpaid work. He retains that independent spirit though, surely a good sign for the future!
tonycawley
Oh I don’t know, I suppose it’s like any industry, you can start off with the best of intentions, but the higher you climb, the more corrupt it becomes, and you end up getting trapped in that corruption. If anyone off TSA was offered a job with Future Publishing writing for Official Playstation Magazine, let’s say you were offered 50k for it (a bit over the top, but just for arguements sake), you’d probably take that job. You then have to follow the editors orders, he tells you to do this, that and the other, you do it, you’ve now become corrupt. Like I said, like a lot of industries really.
Kovacs
£50K a “bit” over? Trust me, games journalism jobs pay a LOT less than that.
tonycawley
I guessed that, but I axaggerated the pay to make a point. If I had said they offered you a job for 18k, nobody would want it as you can’t live off that these days.
Kovacs
Funny you should mention £18K. Without naming names, I’ve heard of a recent position advertised by an established publication that is offering LESS than that.
hannes_truce
I would say that figure is around 3k a year too much – you earn more working in Greggs
Amphlett
Great article CB.
TSA is the only site I regularly read and trust (check my stats, I’m on the site virtually all day (don’t tell my boss!)). The only time I’ll go elsewhere is for review of games which you haven’t reviewed, and then I’ll exercise extreme caution.
Bilbo_bobbins
snap, me too.
Yahavage
Overthrow the oppressors! Viva la Robolution!
Yes it sucks when these guys do this, writing any old tosh so they can meet this weeks quota or whatever. However the more edmucated amongst us know not to take these reviews seriously, and so it won’t impact on us buying/not buying games. Of course it does suck that it may affect someones purchases who is maybe not so clued up on the games market, maybe parents buying a gift for a child, my only suggestion to that it – make sure you let them know what you want well in advance :) Drop plenty of hints!
woodsy321
Id suck his D!ck for 50k a year, never mind be corrupt….
moshi
What a intelligent reply
Tuffcub
Firstly, stop being crude young man. Secondly, you can make that in a a couple months not a year.
tonycawley
Is he that good at sucking that he could make 50k out of it in a couple of months?
BrendanCalls
Another issue that raises it’s head is who the actual reviewer is. For instance, next week Call of Duty is released and TSA will obviously be covering it in some element of a review. However, who on TSA get to review it can make a big difference to how it is scored. Would Tuffcub give the same score as Nofi, would Dan give the same score as Kris?
Rhetorically, do sites (TSA excluded, because I know and trust the site and staff) give certain reviews to certain writers because the editor can almost predict how the review will go. Any editor who know’s his staff will know who will enjoy Black ops and those who wouldn’t.
Also tonycawley makes a good point about corruption breeding corruption at the higher level
Kovacs
Thanks for mentioning me.
;)
The fact is, all review scores are subjective. All review scores are managed by the site’s Editor, Peter. When reviewing games, the best person is picked to review the game. You won’t find me reviewing FIFA for example. You will see me reviewing weird Japanese shit.
tonycawley
LOL!
MrSpeedyGonzales
You can always tell TSA work hard on writing their reviews simply because they don’t release them as quick as possible(to be the first one, like some other websites)the reviews are well thought out and very well written. The conclusions always reflect what I think about the game.
MrSpeedyGonzales
I just realised there have been two articles in two days on bad reviews/mis-leading reviews, must be finally getting to everyone!
tonycawley
I wouldn’t say I always agree with TSA opinions, but then you can never agree with someone all the time can you? The point is, you know that what they write on here, they actually mean.
kevatron400
Rushed reviews like that are almost as bad as “First” comments. They don’t benefit anybody.
Grey_Ghost13
Won’t be too long before TSA does over throw them all. Bring em down – hard. Readers may be thickly, but the majority are not thick, and after a while they will begin to realise that what they read is not what they are experiencing and in the end will look elsewhere. Where TSA will be waiting with it’s honest, oringal and unique approach to covering our favourite pass time. Keep it up TSA!
Foxhound_Solid
Excellent article.
Also completely smashing the nail on the head.
Corruption follows Accountants. Accountants have had their grubby mitts all over the gaming industry for a while now and its starting to show…
Its sites like TSA that will shine during this and will get the out right respect it deserves…
Blayney
There seems to be a growing discontent with areas of the industry in TSA-towers atm. Lots of articles giving an interesting insight into all of this recently. Enjoying it as always here.
Tuffcub
Sadly you are corrrect. I wouldnt touch ING with a barge pole most days (srsly, get a decent designer) but I went and read there awful “The Fight” review just to see how bad they thought it was.
jakeBG19
that review is what made me leave IGN,I’ve only been on this site for a week or so (was on IGN) and i can already see its much more professional and they seem to actually play the games they are reviewing,plus i don’t see ad’s every wheres so that’s a plus to