Editorial: How Much Does Integrity Cost?

I have a habit that helps me with my work on reviews, not to plagiarize, but to see if I can find good/bad things in games that other reviewers may have noticed. I've found redeeming factors in awful games, and terrible issues in games that I liked. It helps me see things in perspective, and if I disagree with those reviews, no harm done. I'm a gamer, and I know that games do not need to be picture perfect to be amazing, such as Splatterhouse, Mass Effect, or even the most polarizing game I've seen to date. Oddly enough, it's this one game that got me to seriously think about what is wrong with "game journalism." Of course, it's fitting that it would be Duke Nukem Forever, again that caused a controversy about whether it even existed for 14 years.

As the reviews trickled in, I saw nothing but overwhelmingly negative reviews. At first, I thought it was due to a culture barrier, due to the reviews being mostly European. As the American reviews popped up, they weren't much better. The game was lambasted because of level design, graphics, and, most of all, the character of Duke Nukem not maturing with the times. These reviewers expected Duke "Womanizing, One Liner Spouting, Ass-Kicking King" Nukem to be a mature character instead of what he's been for the past 14 years. These are the same reviewers who praised the game's demo last year, cheering that Duke was returning. I started asking myself, "What the hell gives?"

Then I saw, let's call them... HappyStaff and their review. The first two paragraphs bashed the character, and then the boring gameplay, despite saying that the shooting parts are fun. The rest of the review was talking about how Bulletstorm was a better game, ending it with praising the latter game. The review wasn't a review, it was an ad for Bulletstorm, a game, that while great, has nothing to do with Duke other than being published by 2K's competitor, EA Games. This is where I started smelling a rat. The same day, the game came in the mail. I popped it in, played it it for a bit, and had a hard time putting it down.

The level design is good, the graphics suffer the Unreal Engine Pop-In Textures Glitch, but are still good, and the game is a load of fun. Duke's jokes, also, make references to new movies and games more than '90's movies, which is something reviewers apparently missed. Oh, and the humor has gotten more subtle and adult, while still being an "immature game." I went from throwing poop to getting a joke about Duke being an objectifying ass in twenty minutes.

Comparing games is one thing, but when you're reviewing a game, and end up digressing to talking about how great the game you're not reviewing is, either you don't know how to review, or you're being paid off. I've seen exactly one review that gave DNF a respectable grade (not counting my own) by a professional reviewer. I've seen two negative reviews for it from non-professional reviewers and regular, everyday gamers, and one of those was complaining about people reviewing the game. The gamers are loving the game, while most reviewers aren't. Who are you, as a gamer, going to believe?

I have a few theories about this. Either reviewers are bitter about the 14 year wait for the game, they haven't played it (an Escapist reviewer admitted to not even finishing the game because he didn't want to), or they're being paid off. I can believe that some reviewers honestly did not like it. That's fine, everyone has their own opinions. When every reviewer sites the same flaws, and outright go against the general consensus of what the audience is saying is when it get's truly bizarre. A lot of the time, gamers and some of the more reputable reviewers agree pretty closely on games. DNF has to be the largest schism I've seen between the two parties. At the time of writing this, DNF is holding an average of 8.9 out of 10 by gamers, and a 5.466667 out of 10 by professionals.

You might ask, "Aren't you a game journalist?" I don't think I am. I have always considered myself a gamer first, and a reviewer second. I've been playing games since the Intellivision, and I love seeing how far they've come. In light of recent reviews, I'm proud of that fact, and the one that I will never garner enough popularity to be corruptible. Should I actually get a job offer from a big name magazine, I will decline it on principal of wanting my opinion published, not what the editor or game company want me to say. That's also why I enjoy my job at OSDB; they want my opinion, not for me to broadcast theirs.

Gamers, do yourself a big favor. Find an independent reviewer, it doesn't even have to be me. By all means, shop around, and find one you can trust. Don't give these big names the time of day, because, frankly, they don't deserve it. Their integrity is flawed if they can't help but mimic each other, showing no sign of free thought. Listen to your fellow gamers. They're the ones who should get paid for reviews. Because the professional reviewers care about a paycheck, not the game.