In every other form of mainstream entertainment media the journalists (critics/reviewers) for the most part act as a solid front-line of defense for consumers against poorly made products. The critics (again for the most part – there are of course exceptions) are actually critical of the particular media that they cover because it helps to motivate the various artists to strive to do better, as well as serving the intended function of the job – to objectively inform the public. These critics don’t act as mouthpieces for pre-release hype of the products. Nor do they splash full page ads for the media they review on their websites or beside their columns. They realize that things like these constitute as a huge conflict of interest and very much go against being able to present themselves, and their opinions, as objective and not influenced by them being beholden to publishing houses and production studios. Also, as a rule, when writing a review they don’t allow themselves to be swept away as adoring fans. A state of detached professionalism is maintained in order that when assessing something they don’t dismissively hand-wave away problems (sometimes major problems) that can and will adversely affect the enjoyment (as well as the objective quality) of the product by others.
Perhaps most importantly of all though, these critics/reviewers of other media show a level of competence for actually understanding their media, which in turn instills a measure of confidence and trust in their readers. For example, looking back at Dragon Age II we see that the game received numerous high marks and superlatives from professional games critics. However, we don’t see any of those games critics having issue with the fact that a mage, or mages, in the party aren’t recognized as such and immediately sucked up into the overarching Mage/Templar conflict of the game as they should be. From both a story standpoint (except for a few throw away lines) and a game standpoint, magic can be blown off everywhere around Kirkwall with absolutely no reaction - unless the very rigid script dictated it to be so.
Now imagine this same thing happening in a book, in a movie or in a television show. Professional critics of those other media would absolutely lambaste the (media respective) piece, and rightly so. Why? Because something like that is demonstrably terrible. It ruins narrative cohesion (goes against the rules established in the narrative for no reason whatsoever - other than convenience for the developer). It also ruins the tone and atmosphere (in DAII’s case - both for story and for game). But, with nary a word from professional game critics on the subject (as well as no mention of many other glaringly obvious issues concerning both narrative and game play) and a similar lackluster approach to other games, the question of competence, and of knowledge related to the medium, rightfully comes up. And subsequently as a result, we have to question whether these game critics can actually create professional, insightful reviews for the medium. Are they truly able to take all of the disparate artistic endeavors which go into creating a game into consideration, and then knowledgably relate the good and the bad of each to their readers? Are they then able, after getting a handle on the parts, to put together a picture of the whole as they once more weigh the good versus the bad on the larger scale? Do they keep in mind the nature of the medium, and its intrinsic strengths and weaknesses, so that they can relate where games excel as artistic examples of the medium and where they stray too far from the medium as they try to be something else? Not as far as I have seen.
All of these things covered above we expect from critics/reviewers - because it’s their raison d’etre, and because it’s what is considered the professional standard of being a critic. Unfortunately, where gaming “journalism” is concerned, we all too often receive exactly the opposite of what is expected, the opposite of what is professional.
Looking at the impact of critics opinions on entertainment mediums from a birds-eye view, one of the most telling things for me is the fact that professional film, literature, and television review scores are almost always lower than reader/viewer scores – upwards of 90% of the time. While, on the other hand, “professional” game review scores are almost always higher than the user scores – again, upwards of 90% of the time - and when looked at collectively for AAA titles the overwhelming majority of the scores sit between 75 and 95 on a scale of 1-100. Even more damning is the fact that such a large percentage of those AAA titles actually score at or above the 90 mark. No artistic/entertainment medium is so top heavy with quality releases and must have titles. That top tier is reserved for the very best of the best and not everything that gets produced by studios X, Y and Z This perpetually ongoing situation serves to make the “professional” games critics look deservedly ridiculous (and anything but professional) not only to gamers, but also to anyone on the outside of gaming looking in.
While a fair amount of distrust concerning game review scores has always been floated around, games “journalists” and game publishers have been able to maintain plausible deniability by perpetuating, and hiding behind, the defense that the reason people question the awarded scores is because those scores simply don’t match the opinion of those making the accusations. Unfortunately, the fact that there is some truth to this line of defense lends an air of credibility to it, but it’s certainly not the whole story. Even more unfortunate is the fact that currently this is used in almost all cases where a portion of the consuming public questions a game’s review scores and is given more surface level credibility because (invariably) gamers who like the game in question back up the perspective without thinking – without looking at the bigger picture. This has led to the knee-jerk reaction of branding anyone and everyone that questions the scores (and actual quality) of game X as being somehow, in some way “entitled” and/or as a conspiracy theorist. However, when you pull back and actually look at that bigger picture and consider not only the overall trend of game review scores skewing to the extremely high side of the scale, but the manner in which gaming “journalists” conduct themselves and the perpetuation of their opinions in comparison to the journalists of other artistic mediums, it is pretty obvious that something is rotten in the state of games “journalism”.
Now, I’m not going to get into the myriad motivating factors for why the system exists as it does (as that is an essay all unto itself) beyond saying that although some corruption definitely exists (it is an 8 billion dollar a year industry after all) between (some) publishers and (some) games “journalists”, there are other factors at play as well. Some of the factors are personal in nature – quests for legitimacy gone awry for some “journalists” – while other factors are more benign than outright mutually agreed upon instances of corruption – wanting the extra free advertising that comes with proclaiming something superlative, a game of the year candidate, etc. – but no less detrimental to the overall state of things.
Thus we arrive at the current situation kicked into gear with Mass Effect 3. With the confluence of the objectively bad (read poorly written) Mass Effect 3 ending, BioWare’s response (a combination of pulling inside their shell and a continuation of their recent history of smugness) and the overwhelming positive reviews of the product by games “journalists”, reviews which ignore not only the problems with the ending but all of the other problems within the game as well, all hell has broken loose. Never before has a game release and games “journalism” in general been put under such intense scrutiny and criticism by so many at one time with a singular point of focus.
Quite simply the dam broke and the games “journalists” panicked. This situation provided them a chance to self-evaluate and a chance to evaluate the merits of the overall system in place. They could have directed their energy to creating a standardized review system that uses a scale which makes a semblance of sense. They could have reevaluated the multiple conflicts of interest present in the system as well as those areas that are merely perceived as conflicts of interest, but they didn’t. That would have taken some soul searching and some self-actualization and an ability to admit being wrong, which from their responses thus far shows them to be wholly incapable of. Unfortunately, (and expectedly) the “journalists” for the larger gaming sites/publications showed everyone where their priorities and loyalties really rest - with serving the largest publishers (and subsequently the developers that fall under the aegis of them) rather than with the consumers and/or with journalistic integrity.
I’m certain that some of these “journalists” actually believe that they are working in the best interests of the games industry (while some definitely fall into the less than ethical motivating factors listed above), even some of the most absurdly vociferous of them. I think that they believe that they are fighting for the recognition and the legitimacy of the medium by taking the stance that they are. Unfortunately, by ignoring the bigger picture and the overarching problems, and not actually taking up the mantle of being reporters and presenting the whole situation, factually as it exists, they are further perpetuating the problem. Those that are falsely throwing around artistic integrity (I will expound on this for anyone that wishes – it’s another long topic all unto itself) and accusations of entitlement are not only making the situation worse but are revealing a contempt for the consumers of games –the very people that they are supposed to be serving with unbiased reviews and articles.
What publishers/developers and games journalists fail to understand is that when looked at from the outside they are held in as much a sense of ridiculous contempt as the gamers that they continually portray as the bad guys. What they also fail to understand is that to continually generalize any consumer-minded gamers with the worst of the ‘fit throwers’ is also to undermine the legitimacy of the industry. The bottom line is that gamers (we are the very worst consumer group out there, being ruled more than any other group by “But I want…” rather than informed purchasing decisions) publishers/developers and games “journalists” are all equally responsible for the poor perception of games and the games industry by the mainstream media and the public at large. Until they come to that realization and actually do something to correct that highly questionable course that they are on, true legitimacy will remain a pipedream.
In order for games “journalists” to be taken seriously, to be considered the vanguards of the artistic medium of games like critics for other artistic mediums are, a number of things have to be done.
Intimate knowledge of the various artistic endeavors and how they come together as a game, along with truly understanding the nature and strengths of the medium have to be exhibited.
The current 75-100 review score scale with way too many AAA games coming in above 90 needs to go and be replaced by a true 1-100 (or 0-100) scale.
Standards of quality comparable to what the other entertainment mediums have in place need to be defined and enforced for games.
Standards of quality comparable to what the other entertainment mediums have in place need to be defined and enforced for games critics/reviewers and their reviews. (Linked to #1 but also covering professionalism and application of the knowledge from #1.)
Sensationalism in “reporting” needs to disappear and be replaced by cool professionalism that presents the ‘who, what, where, when, why and how’ of news topics/issues. Games “journalists” need to stop generalizing and demonizing gaming consumers and approach any problems that arise from a neutral perspective while providing a look at the bigger picture.
The five items listed here are only the beginning of what needs to be scrutinized and subsequently accomplished. And although I just mentioned it above I have to reiterate this point because of its importance – games journalists have to take responsibility for their part in the poor perception of games, gamers and the games industry by other media professionals and the public at large. If this current crop of games “journalists” can’t and/or won’t come to terms with the situation and their part in it – then its time for them to go elsewhere as they are sabotaging the chance of the medium ever getting the recognition that it deserves.
Modifié par HanabPacal, 01 avril 2012 - 10:43 .
Retour en haut
