|
|
 |
| [Oct 11, 2012, 8:01 pm ET] - Share - Viewing Comments |
Post Comment
Enter the details of the comment
you'd like to post in the boxes below and click the button at
the bottom of the form.
 |
| 3. |
Re: etc., etc. |
Oct 11, 2012, 21:03 |
ASeven |
|
|
Prez wrote on Oct 11, 2012, 20:39:
Every gaming reviews outlet gets accused of this. You have to figure it goes on at some level, but who knows if it is only here and there or if it's a widespread practice? PC Gamer reviews have seemed less glowy to me lately, but that could just be in my head. I do know that I generally like and agree with one of their oft-used freelance reviewers, Tom Chick, so I read them a lot. I get their mag delivered to my Kindle Fire every month.
But yeah that Dragon Age 2 review made me scratch Rich McCormick off of my list of trusted reviewers.
Here's one for us old ones. Back in the 80s two of the powerhouse magazines covering game reviews were Crash! and Zzap!64. The reviews were often honest and always brutal where needed be. Fast forward to the present where one of the past editors of Zzap!64 confessed some reviews were given higher marks due to "money pressure".
You have to think, if back where game reviewing was an infant business this practice was already rather common place then such practices could only have gotten more complex and more than likely more ingrained within the game journalism group to the point where I think it's believable that paid reviews are a strong possibility nowadays. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
.. ..
Copyright © 1996-2013 Stephen Heaslip. All rights reserved.
All trademarks are properties of their respective owners.
Twitter 
