GamerNode: Columns - An Open Challenge to "Fair Journalism"

Hello I'm an active user on N4G, and a PS3 Fan, I've just registered here to give my comments:

This is like the 2nd article I've seen on your website concerning this, which is all and good but what about the Biases and Double Standards in our own Industry? I've yet to read an article concerning this, and yet you're website devoted 2 articles to this, which IMO is not that a big of a deal. Why would the other media takes us seriously when our very own isn't any better?

Here are a few examples:

1. The BIAS and DOUBLE STANDARDS by the Gaming Media

This is what I wrote on Gametrailers concerning their MW2 review:
This is the BS excuse Shane said when they gave 9.3 on UNCHARTED 2:
___________________________________________________________________ As far as people's criticisms of the review are concern, what I saw the most was people were upset that I dinged it so much for it not being original. And that's the comment I saw the most on message boards and our comments. And the truth of the matter is it's not original. It doesnt really do anything that hasn't been done in other games.

And people say: oh well, you compared it to Gears of War, why did Gears of War get a higher score? Gears of War 2 was released a year ago. The original Gears of War was released way before that. So the expectations change over time. You can't just create a me too game where you grab all the best features from all the games that are over a year old and expect to get the same score a year later for those same features.

Now, honestly, there was nothing original in Uncharted 2. To be perfectly honest with you, the 9.3 that game got is about as high a score as a game like that is ever going to get on GameTrailers and that's the bottom line.

When we review games, we put an extremely high emphasis on originality. Why do you think Super Mario Galaxy scored so high? It's because it did tons of things that no game had ever done before. It's platforming upside down in that game. I was platforming around round levels in that game. There's nothing like that in Uncharted 2.

And again, I've said it a million times, the game is freaking incredible. The last line in the review says: go buy the game. If you have a PS3, go freaking buy it. What more can I say? But at the same time I cannot sleight the other games that did go above and beyond and did take a risk.And that's what Uncharted 2 doesn't do. There are no risks associated with that game at all. They played it completely safe. They took things that they knew were accepted and people loved and build it into one game. And that's fine, there's nothing wrong with that. But you can't expect a score of a 9.8 or a 9.5 and higher if you're doing something like that.
___________________________________________________________________

I want to hear what's his fricking excuse on why a game with no ORIGINALITY, one that played it safe, and was more EVOLUTION than a REVOLUTION, but got a 9.5 score.

Yeah, I know it's 0.2 difference, but it's the inconsistency of the scoring that puts a doubt on their credibility. Why would we trust what score they put, if it comes from someone unprofessional and have double standards for certain games.The only conclusion I can come up with this, is that not only Shane and GT is bias against the PS3 and its games, but they are also lying hypocrites.
___________________________________________________________________
Ok let's take this into perspective, you see there Gears of War 2, an example he used, a game not much different than the first, and comes with a broken multiplayer yet gets a 9.5, while Uncharted 2 not only was better than the 1st one in many ways, it also has great online multi-player which was smooth-as-butter and yet was nitpicked to death, why?

IGN isn't any better. They gave MW2 10 on graphics while KILLZONE 2 only got 9.5, Why? Is it because it's a PS3 Exclusive? Or do reviewers gives scores based on hype and not on its own merit?

Also when they've reviewed RATCHET and CLANK ACIT, they've use UNCHARTED 2 as a benchmark for their graphics, that's why it got only 8.5. Why didn't they use KILLZONE 2 to benchmark both HALO ODST or MW2?

Here's another concerning Gamesradar's bias against the PS3
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=14375076&postcount=15542

2. What about the whole debacle concerning Gran Turismo 5: Prologue?
Many websites slammed the game for being a glorified demo, a demo which was done on a new engine , 76 cars and 16 player online racing for $40. And yet they seemingly have no problems recommending LEFT 4 DEAD, 5 maps for $60. How about ODST? You'll get a short SP, 3 new maps (If you've bought all the prev. map release), 1 new online mode for $60. Believe me, you will find no shortage of articles on the net trying to jutify it's price point.

3. What about the XBOX LIVE vs PSN debate? Many sites would list Twitter, FaceBook, Last.FM as the reasons why the $50 a year Live is superior to the free PSN, and yet they seemingly forgot that the PS3 has a web browser, that allows you to access this. How convenient, eh.

4. What about the Shortness of the Single Player Campaign? It seems to me that XBOX 360 exclusive or Big Name Multi-Plats gets a pass here, and even if the review did mention it, they have an excuse for it, and never gets penalize. Can't say the same for the PS3 exclusives like KILLZONE 2, UNCHARTED and of course the much-maligned HEAVENLY SWORD, they all got dinged fo it.

5. What about the "Sony is teh Doomed", "Sony should leave the Videogame Industry", "The PS3 slim won't save the PS3" articles that abound the net? You would have thought, that the success of the Slim would have stop this articles, but lo and behold http://www.n4g.com/ps3/NewsCom-426681.aspx?CT=2 Damn, this industry wouldn't have been what it is right now if not for Sony. Hell, their beloved MS would not be making the XBOX, had it not been for the success of the Playstation Brand. It's saddens me that Sony is not getting the respect that they are due, when they have done so much for this industry.

6. Fanboy Developers: Gabe Newell's coment on the PS3 http://www.1up.com/do/newsStory?cId=3156403 or Chet's http://www.n4g.com/ps3/NewsCom-423844.aspx?CT=2#Comments
How in the hell do they know, have they ever made a game for the PS3? I know they like the XBOX 360 and MS but should that even be said? Do we even deserve that? It's like Ken Kutaragi raped their wives or Sony dropped a bomb on their homes, or something, for them to have this inordinate amount of hate for the PS3 and it's fans.

7. Jim Sterling from Destructoid citing www.destructoid.com/fact-ps3-fanboys-are-the-worst-149259.phtml Wow! a fellow N4G user named Callahan09 gives the perfect answer to this. This is his response concerning Chet Faliszek's statement saying that the "360 community head and shoulders above PS3", his words:

"Well, in case you didn't happen to notice it, PS3 fans criticize Valve IN RESPONSE to Valve criticizing the PS3. It's not unprovoked or unwarranted. People are always complaining about how bad "PS3 fanboys" are, well, does nobody stop to think that PS3 fans are fed up with being treated like second-class citizens by a majority of the gaming world? We've got developers, publishers, and so-called journalists giving us and the PS3 crap at every corner, and it's been going on systematically since before the PS3 came out. Every piece of good news about the PS3 has been consistently met with damage control and FUD. The behavior of PS3 fans in defense of their preferred gaming platform is totally warranted in my opinion. The PS3 and its fans are subjected to an inordinate amount of criticism and hate from all corners of the gaming world. If you like the PS3, you're labeled a fanboy. Well, I'm just a PS3 fan, simple as that, because it's a nice machine with a lot of good features and games, and I think it and its fans deserve more credit than it gets".

Now tell me why is their BIAS and DOUBLE STANDARDS against the PS3 and it's Games? Why is their no article citing this?

Sorry for the long post, I just want to get my point across. I don't begrudge your website it's articles concerning the double standards and bias by other medias concerning our games, because I feel the same. But why point out such deficiencies in others when ours is not much different? Maybe we should clean up our own backyard first of such garbage before we go on looking at others, you know, Just saying.

Peace!

Reintype,

I'm glad you're passionate about something you care about, but there is one simple difference here. While the QUALITY of games and how they compare to one another from a critical perspective is an entirely opinion-based issue, there is no subjective component to an argument that videogames are indeed governed by a ratings board, that there ARE warnings in Modern Warfare 2 preceding the questionable scene, and that Mass Effect contains no frontal nudity. The opponents of the games industry are providing MISINFORMATION, while any bias from individual reviewers and personalities against a particular platform is only an expression of their preference.

Moving on, extreme defenses of a platform are equally as detrimental to one's credibility as extreme attacks. Your post at GT did not show up, but I'm deducing that you were somehow upset at the astronomically high score that publication gave to Uncharted 2, because you thought it deserved an even higher one. Maybe Uncharted 2 is your favorite game, but it's not necessarily the best. I was personally a huge fan of Assassin's Creed, or delving further into the realm of the 'console wars,' Too Human. Many people, in my opinion, missed the greatness of these games in their critiques, but their opinions combined with my own presented a well-rounded look at what may or may not be interesting to the gaming community as a whole. If gamers often agree with me, they can continue to read my reviews, confident that I will not steer them wrong, and if they find, for argument's sake, Shane from GT to best sum up their own opinions, then they can rely more on what he says. This is all a matter of opinion, and the divide is not between platforms, but between games.

You also have to realize that the same person isn't reviewing every game. Even here at GN, where we value honesty and integrity and adhere to these tenets in the face of whatever consequences they may bring (yes, publishers have gotten mad at us), sometimes scores can seem slightly incongruous, and that is because we have different personalities reviewing different games. As the website director, I don't choose the score for every game, and nor has Brendon done so, but I will, on occasion, recommend a modification based on the words written within a review and ask the individual reviewer to reconsider. Sometimes they do, and sometimes they don't, but it is a matter of remaining consistent with THEIR words and our ratings guide, and not with MY feelings or the scores that might have been given for that game by OTHER reviewers (unless of course it's a team review).

I agree with you about PSN. I find its savings to easily justify the few features it doesn't have, and I feel it offers others that make it superior to $50 XBL Gold service. Unfortunately, Sony hurt themselves by failing to gain the higher install base early in this console generation, so more people play on XBL. When all of one's friends are playing together on one platform, where's that last person going to go? Sony had it rough this generation because they made one mistake after another after another. I personally feel they are just now coming into their own, 2 years later. This is my OPINION. Note that I didn't say that the PS3 breaks TVs when you attach it, or that the 360 requires gasoline to operate correctly -- that would be MISINFORMATION.

It's futile to fight to the death over opinions that have no conclusive evidence for correctness on either side. There is no way to scientifically test that one is better than the other because they are different hardware with different features and different user bases, they play different games, and they run those games via differing processing methods. If the two played all the same games equally as well as one another, offered the same online services, and had all the same features, design, and controllers, but then one company released 20 exclusive games for one of the consoles, then there would be a valid argument for that particular console's superiority... but it doesn't work that way. There are too many variables.

Finally, the PS3 is not your mother, it's a tool for you to enjoy games. If you've chosen to align yourself with one console for whatever reason (financial limitations, lingering sense of loyalty, controller preference, hatred of slot- or tray-loading drives, disc format, etc.), that's your choice. Enjoy what you have on your console; maybe one day you'll add the other one to your personal gaming world and be able to enjoy everything that IT offers, too.

As for the bias and double standards within the gaming industry, there's no article HERE because we look at things with discerning eyes and lack of any bias. What we see is a childish argument between some members of the gaming community, but little to warrant a response. Some fans forget why they play games, and are hypersensitive to criticism of things they like. Yes, I'm suggesting that you are being too sensitive about this. Relax and have fun. The PS3 isn't going anywhere (that's my OPINION again).

But if you LIE about what's in videogames to sway the opinions of a massive group of Americans AGAINST the videogame industry, we will respond, and we will respond with vigor.

*applause*

Dear Eddie,

You have just delivered the Gettysburg Address of gaming. Congratulations on your success, and your fervor for gaming and journalism and game journalism that supports this site.

Cordially,

Dan "HELL YEAH" Crabtree

Reintype, clearly you missed the point of what I was trying to say.

What I'm getting at here goes far beyond the petty (yes, that's right, petty) XB360 vs PS3 vs Wii fanboy war. This goes beyond the PC boycotts and the Gerstmann issue and everything else that gaming journalism has done wrong.

This has everything to do with giving our industry AS A WHOLE some credibility.

This media outlet LIED about Mass Effect, the guest calling it "playing porn" and "alien rape." The host of the most recent episode said that you "play as a terrorist" in Modern Warfare 2. Neither of these things are the case, which is something you and I both know very well.

These false reports give all of gaming, from the players to the publishers to the journalists, a bad name. It makes us seem like we are barbarians with an insatiable appetite for destruction. We do not condone "alien rape," nor are we enjoying "being a terrorist." The "rape" was an OPTIONAL love scene brought on by your character's interaction with the alien (not to mention the alien initiates the lovemaking to being with, can't rape the willing). The terrorist scene is meant to invoke strong feelings of hatred towards the main antagonist, not to increase support for terrorism!

Yet you say that we cannot say anything as journalists because we don't support one single company as much as the others? What does fanboyism have to do with ANY of this? This is about bringing a positive light on gaming as an industry, about saving the face of the hobby which we all hold dear, not about "ZOMG sony is teh uber!!1!1!!one!"

Furthermore, you have already proven my next point, but I'll say it anyhow: why do you put so much importance on the ratings? Our scores are not the end-all-be-all. We, as journalists, do not control your free will. If we give a game a 7.5, that doesn't mean you're not allowed to buy it and enjoy it, it just means that that particular person only liked enough of the game to give it a 7.5. Just because the games don't get the score you want them to does NOT mean that we are biased against the companies that produced them. By their very nature, reviews are OPINIONS. The media outlet I speak of tried to pass LIES as FACT, which is unacceptable, not to mention fireable, for a professional journalist.

If you want to stay quiet because gaming journalism doesn't think the way you do, fine. I, and those with me, however, will fight for the industry we know and love, so that you can continue to forge those opinions of us when more games come out. You're welcome.

The videogame industry and the impact it has on society cannot be ignored or trivialized. As the demand grows for more intriguing, engaging and entertaining games it will be incumbent upon developers to deliver the goods that consumers will anticipate and require. This industry promises to be the major competitor for the patronage of the movie-going audience of the future insofar as it is innovative in ways that capture the attention and imaginations of the public. The potential for growth is awesome and so is the responsibility of all representatives and spokespersons for the industry to "watchdog" various media zealots who simply haven't got a clue about the videogame experience but who bash for the sake of bashing and stirring up predictable (and hysterical) reactions. The gameplay for journalists, I believe, is relentless correction and education - wherever and whenever the situation arises. Keep up the good work!

An entity in existence does not actively manipulate that which has no will to be manipulated. You cannot hit me because I tell you to. I cannot 'make' you. I can inspire you to be a little more motivated, STFU, and clobber me in the jaw- but I can never, EVER, 'make' someone hit me.

This game- as all art does - is inspirational. It creates a thought, and thanks to generations of an institutionalized, disassociated sense of entitlement, we don't perceive that our reaction to something is our own responsibility. In this case, the thought is uncomfortable, and broadly targeted, soas even one among many ignorami may grasp at least a small bit of the thread trailing into something so much larger than their combined, smug sense of self-worth. They observe, and have a knee-jerk reaction because this is not the comfort zone their elementary schools told them they would always have. They don't have their mother's tits to cry into. They don't have dad patting them on the back, handing over a cold beer. They have to stop and observe that everything outside of their white, padded box is covered in shit and fire. We say things like, "This game will make my child a terrorist", not realizing that you are afraid of becoming something for fear of not knowing what you really are. We say this, not realizing that our failure as a society will do more for turning our children into shrieking Allah-bombs than one piece of polycarbonate matter.

Accepting responsibility for that fact is sadly another story. We are the nation of "Never a Wrong Answer" and "Fifth Place Prize"; misinformed and medicated- and happy as hell inside of that psychological, plastic bubble.

I think that sums of the combined worth of the reporters you draw fire on here, Jason. And I think that takes care of the misplaced ire in the first comment.