Comment on More than 1,200 games journalists have left the media in the last two years | VGC

• sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works ⁨22⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

  But weren’t game reviews essentially ads paid by the publisher? Because that’s what it looks like from the outside, since the reviews are increasingly poor quality that largely focus on positives and ignore negatives. Some games that completely flopped due to technical issues got glowing reviews by journalists, probably because they were paid handsomely for that review.

  I think game journalists should avoid advertisements as much as possible because once they rely on it, the temptation to allow their content to be colored by whatever attracts advertisers is too much. They should be solely focused on attracting readers, which means they need to be reader supported.

  source

  • ampersandrew@lemmy.world ⁨22⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

    It’s a symbiotic relationship that advances goals for each, but no, they’re not paid ads, and it’s been debunked over and over again. Some game reviews higher than someone feels it should, and they conclude it only could have been paid off, but it wasn’t. Here are a few things that do happen that influence review scores though:

    • Publishers know which outlets review their games well, and they prioritize giving advance copies to those outlets and not others; this is why you’ll see the average score drop by a few points after the game’s official release.
    • The person on staff who liked the last game in the series, or other games in the same genre, tends to keep reviewing them, because they enjoy the work more, and that review better serves the overall audience. This can explain why a genre-defying game like Death Stranding reviews in the low 80s, but then the sequel is reviewed by people who tended to appreciate the first game, and the sequel reviews higher.
    • Publishers know which version of their game is best, and they’ll send review copies of that version. That means they send the PC version of Cyberpunk 2077 when the console version is broken, and they send the console version when the PC optimization sucks.
    • When a game is online-only, publishers like to host on-site, curated review sessions with optimal network conditions in a space where all the reviewers definitely have someone to play with. Review outlets have become skeptical of reviewing games this way, and you’ll more often see “reviews in progress” of games where they want the servers to “settle” first. I was surprised to see MS Flight Simulator 2024 actually held to account over its broken online infrastructure, as you’re correct that, historically, they’re not held accountable, but that’s because of this change that review outlets have made in how they cover games like this.

    source

    • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works ⁨19⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

      This makes a lot of sense.

      It would be nice if multiple people reviewed each game, and then they discuss before publishing a review. That’s one thing I really like about Digital Foundry, though they focus way more on technical details than overall gaming experience, but it’s very fun to see what each reviewer has to say about a given title.

      source

      • ampersandrew@lemmy.world ⁨19⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

        That’s often a matter of resources. Staff sizes are only getting smaller at these outlets, and there are more games released each year than ever before; and they’re trending toward being longer on top of that. Being able to get multiple people to review a single game is a luxury, one that Digital Foundry can afford when they just need to benchmark a typical scene in the game.

        source
  • Bazoogle@lemmy.world ⁨22⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

    In America, they are legally required to disclose paid reviews. If the company pays for the review they legallt must disclose it

    If you receive free products or other perks with the expectation that you’ll promote or discuss the advertiser’s products in your blog, the FTC Act applies to you.

    ftc.gov/…/ftcs-endorsement-guides-what-people-are…

    source

    • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works ⁨21⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

      Is that actually enforced? If so, what’s the explanation for reviewers giving suspiciously high reviews to AAA games?

      source

      • ampersandrew@lemmy.world ⁨21⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

        Is that actually enforced?

        Surprisingly so. There’s a huge difference in online advertisements pre- and post-Fyre Festival.

        If so, what’s the explanation for reviewers giving suspiciously high reviews to AAA games?

        They liked the game more than you. I promise you it is that simple.

        source

        • -> View More Comments
      • Daxelman@lemmy.ml ⁨21⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

        As someone who’s done this before, let me tell you it’d be much easier for Toby Fox to pay me to give Undertale a good review than it would for Ubisoft to pay me to give Rayman a good review.

        source

        • -> View More Comments