Alan Dang from Firing Squad has written an interesting and valuable article entitled “The 5 Problems with Videogame Journalism” (http://www.firingsquad.com/features/problems_with_video_game_journalism/default.asp) that is well worth reading. More people in the industry need to devote time to reflecting on their role in it.
Online games journalism is simultaneously a gift and a curse for games publishing. Potential purchasers have access to numerous reviews which, in combination to online advertising, offers massive potential for publicity and marketing machines to raise awareness of any particular game. Regrettably, as Dang points out, videogame journalists write in less than ideal conditions and are increasingly failing to reflect the interests, experience and needs of gamers. As a result, reviews can be inappropriate tools for gauging the virtues of a game. Consumers of these reviews must be increasingly critical of what they read, thereby diminishing the value and original purpose of game reviews.
I firmly believe that over-valuing game reviews written by professional journalists is rife in the industry. Warner Brothers even have an overt policy whereby they analyse the collective of reviews by professional game journalists (at sites like http://www.gamerankings.com/) to determine if a game is successful and, more specifically, if a franchise has been successfully implemented (see http://www.looksmartbasketball.com/p/articles/mi_zdoup/is_200505/ai_n13462821). Warner Brothers even stated they would fine developers/publishers if the average score was less than 70%! I would hate to be in a position of developing a franchised Warner Brothers license knowing that most videogame journalists seem to have a significantly negative bias against games based on movies.
It seems to me ensuring a more balanced approach video game reviews could be realised via WWW sites that collate the opinions of gamers. These opinions could be gathered from multiple sources – blogs, forum commentaries and online polls to name a few – collated and analysed a professional journalist. It is noteworthy that many of the bigger sites include an average reader score, which I personally find highly beneficial. I would love to see a site developed where gamers could register to receive review copies of games in return for a written commentary and rating. Whether or not gamers are selected randomly from the registry or a system is utilised to recognise more “successful” reviewers, will depend on how important it is to avoid creating a new set of semi-professional game journalists. The obvious conundrum of a contributor reviewing too many games and consequently becoming jaded would need to be avoided.
By the way, I know Microsoft has tried a process like this before and public betas provide similar outcomes as well. I think that the increasingly popularity of blogs over the last couple of years suggests that it might be time to promote a review paradigm of the masses communicating with the masses (i.e. many reviews written for many readers).
