people should have realized this years ago with the kane and lynch debacle.
anyways i would never purchase a game based on the recommendation of the most popular sites like IGN or gamespot etc. which is like the equivalent of buying your games solely from gamestop which is also just as stupid. --- If console gaming is so cheap then why do I have to spend $600~ in order to play Super Mario Galaxy, Uncharted 3 and Halo 3?
What I think, MOST of the time, reviews end up seeming bribed due to a few things.
For one, fear of how the fanbase will react to a poor review, and because of it, getting the person in the office most likely to like the game to review it(I actually recall IGN saying the guy who was meant to review RE6, i believe, hated it so much he couldn't finish it, so they got the current guy), or beef up the score a little (what would have been a 7 gets an 8, what would have been a 6 gets a 7 etc). Famitsu is a publication that has basically said this is what they do - they review based on what the fans would probably like.
And 2, companies buttering people up and stupid reviewers falling for it. Not a direct "Here's 10 bucks, give the game an 8" but more of a "This is exactly how to play this game, here's exclusive collectibles only you have" and tons and tons of silver tongued PR specialists.
Kane and lynch provided the most often accusations actually have some water, but I really don't believe most places are bribed. I find myself agreeing with reviewers pretty often, in any case. They're not too far off the mark. --- http://i38.tinypic.com/15mk29j.jpg
While they're usually someone else's opinion just like any of ours (Just held more highly because it's their job), sometimes you can't help but wonder if they ARE, especially if their review heavily differs from the general public's opinion.
I wouldn't be surprised if it HAS happened before, and it certainly wouldn't be the last. Money talks in today's world. --- GT: Kenichi340 "What was the point of that pregnant pause!?" - Edgeworth
Honestly? Probably sometimes. Actually, I'm pretty sure that it's been confirmed to of happened a few times in some places.
Are MOST reviews paid off?
No. The gaming "journalists" just have really, really, really abysmally low standards.
"IT WAS COOL AND THERE WERE EXPLOSIONS!!!! 8/10"
"EVEN MORE EXPLOSIONS AND THINGS WERE FUN! 9/10"
"THIS ONE HAD A FLAMETHROWER IT'S SOMETHING SOMETHING HORRIBLE PUN 10/10"
Look at movie critics. Most of the half decent ones aren't going to praise the living hell out of nearly ever damned thing that's half decent. Most certainly, they're not going to go out of their way to praise derivative action non-stop as the pinnacle of the form. If game critics were applied to movie critics, the transformers movies would be the most highly rated and praised movies of all time, and anything that was slightly slow and not packed to the brim with stupid action would be doomed to failure.
Plus, really, game reviewers, stop with the god damned puns already. --- PSN: OtimusPSN // XBOX Live: Otimus // Steam: mightypotatojones Now playing: Tribes Ascend (PC)
I wouldn't be surprised if it HAS happened before, and it certainly wouldn't be the last. Money talks in today's world.
There are a few well-known cases, but the conspiracy theorists are looking in the wrong place. The more shady part of game journalism happens on the promo end, not the review. --- "'Grab the guns!' 'What about the troll?' 'Leave the troll.'"--ATHF