Editorials

Who needs games journalists anyway?

January 19, 2012, Author: Ray Willmott

We’re living in a different era to just a decade ago when PC Gamer and Gamesmaster were in their infancy. With people gaining increasing interest in gaming and a growing celebrity presence within the industry, suddenly this has gone from being a nerdy past-time, to a global phenomenon. It’s reached a point when you may ask: Why would PR want us ranting and raving lot running down their games with attempts at eloquent prose?

Why should developers be interested in a 2,500 word breakdown of a game’s fundamentals from someone who has played the game for 60 hours, basically to reach the conclusion that it sucks, and may only be read by 10 people, when Justin Bieber can write a 140 character Tweet to his 10 million followers thanking a company for giving him free stuff and saying its awesome?

What about all the TV ads with Robin and Zelda (she’s named after a Nintendo game, you know?) Williams playing pretend bow and arrow in their living room, or Harrison Ford meeting his virtual successor, Nathan Drake in Uncharted 3? These simple adverts will probably affect more people than any website or magazine ever could.

The times are changing, and it does make one wonder if the face of games journalism as we currently know it will ever be able to catch up.

Let me get this out-of-the-way right now. I’m not suggesting This Is My Joystick review games based on how we feel a PR will react, nor am I suggesting that any PR companies out there ask games publications in any way, shape or form to review a game in a certain way. That’s a stupid misconception which needs to die; we’ve certainly never been put in that position.

We’re an opinionated site with varied views and ideas and not just a bunch of robot monkeys. We all have our own perceptions of what we like and dislike, just the same as any other gamer.

That said; just because one person’s experience was a bad one doesn’t necessarily mean that any of our other reviewers share in the same views, or indeed you, the player. It’s one opinion, and will be agreed upon as much as it will be disagreed upon. The internet gives us all the chance to have a voice. For example, Debbie adored Dragon Age II last year, and called it one of her Games of the Year. Me? I found it a massive disappointment.

Another wild theory that should be put to bed is that journalists write merely to appease PR and developers, knowing that if they’re too snarky or vile in their commentary, they’ll never be dealt with again. It’s farcical.

Justin Bieber: Corporate shill. Bet you did love it... FOR FREE!

Even if you look at a banner ad plastered all over a site, then read the review thinking it would be impossible for that site to say the game sucks. It’s rubbish. That reviewer is going to tell the truth, they’re going to give you their honest verdict, simply because, we’re all in an honest trade.

It’s worth more to any magazine or site to get it right than it is to make up a silly story, only for everyone to wonder where the fuck the verdict came from? Believe me; it hurts your reputation in more ways than one.

Don’t get me wrong, sometimes reviewers will score a game higher than you expect, they’ll also score it lower than you think it deserves, but that’s the nature of the opinionated industry we work in, and utterly supports my earlier point.

Journalists don’t get paid off to be nice, they don’t get money under the table or receive a pat on the head if they give a game a thumbs up when it shouldn’t have one. In fact, they’re the only genuine voice the industry has left. If we lose them, we lose the whole purpose of the gaming critique system. Get rid of that, and everything is thrown into disarray.

Just like any other product available for purchase, games need to be scrutinised for quality control. If they expect to go on the market for an RRP of £45, then there needs to be a justification for that. Reasons need to be given in order to explain that price point.

People shouldn’t be expected to simply buy these expensive products, and then find out the quality for themselves without some system in place to help guide them beforehand. That’s a Trading Standards practice which needs to be adhered to, and the same rule applies to anything that’s available as a service with a price, be it DVDs, Board Games, or food.

The sad truth is, on extremely rare occasions, some site or magazine verdicts get chastised by people affiliated with the product in question. One only needs to look at the backlash Eurogamer received last year when they slated Duke Nukem Forever. The Redner Group, who at the time, were representing 2K, jumped on the site, saying their verdict was venom-fuelled and that they would be blacklisted by 2K. Sure, it didn’t take 2K long to respond by not only firing The Redner Group, but also saying they maintain a solid relationship with the press.

That still goes to show you how active some company representatives can be when their lovechild comes under scrutiny. If a representative on behalf of a company like 2K can make that sort of threat to a site the stature of Eurogamer, even if the stance was later retracted, then they clearly feel that they can live without that promotion and coverage, but can they?

Certainly not. Even if 2K resurrected Michael Jackson to tell you that the King is Back, only then for Duke to fill him full of lead and say ‘Fuck that, I’m the real King, baby…’ … that would still only work for a select bunch of people. Sure, it would be the PR stunt to end them all, and would shift a truckload of copies, but there are still going to be people, like you, reading this niche article who actually care if the game is any good or not, not if it has been endorsed by a celebrity.

Katy Perry signs on for the Sims why?!

This is still a worrying scenario for the games journalist. The fact is, people are closer to celebrities or recognised figures than they’ve ever been. Through reality TV shows, magazine spreads, literature and social media, people are able to see the ‘real person’ behind the glitz and the glamour. You’ll get ‘grounded tweets’ from Cheryl Cole telling you about her favourite TV shows, and learn more about Lady GaGa from candid interviews. People feel more connected to these ‘larger than life’ individuals than ever, and because of that, are more likely to identify with the things they endorse or condone.

I’m painting an overly morbid and slightly eccentric picture, perhaps. The fact is most PR know the importance of the sites and magazines that cover their games. They’re grateful for the coverage, regardless of the verdict, and good friends are made throughout the industry between press and PR. Likewise, the majority of press are respectful to PR, they don’t get personal with their work, and don’t break embargoes. I can speak from experience when I say I’ve met some wonderful people in this industry, many of whom I speak to on a daily basis and consider friends.

Yet, these are certainly changing times, and this is definitely not the same industry we knew a decade ago. Should we be scared by that? Yes and no. We don’t all like change, but we’re well aware that the gaming industry is always going to keep evolving. As the newest systems hit the market with the latest technology, it’s obviously going to open up more doors, create new opportunities, and require unique coverage.

At the same time, this is an infant industry that needs constants and stability in order to keep it from burning itself out. Those employed as critics help keep things in check, and their knowledgeable opinions are as valuable to a thriving industry, as any million dollar smile from Katie Perry.