PressSpotting: Bias or no bias?

  • By GS_News, GameSpot
  • Posted Jun 6, 2008 10:58 pm GMT

"This article is awful! The author is so biased!"It's a quote that should be familiar to anyone who's ever read a comment thread on a major video game Web site. The accusation can apply to a review (which is, by definition, supposed to be biased in one direction or another), a news story (which,...

"This article is awful! The author is so biased!"

It's a quote that should be familiar to anyone who's ever read a comment thread on a major video game Web site. The accusation can apply to a review (which is, by definition, supposed to be biased in one direction or another), a news story (which, theoretically, should be free from any undue bias), or, really, any piece that the commenter doesn't personally agree with. The implication, of course, is that the author is being unfairly swayed by some unseen factor (money, swag, advertising pressure, or even simple personal preference) and that therefore their reporting or opinion shouldn't even be considered.

While throwing up an anonymous accusation of bias is easy, answering the charge isn't always so clear-cut. When I put the question of biased coverage to members of the gaming press, the answers ran the gamut.

"I think people are inevitably biased, and the best thing to do is just admit your preconceptions up front," said Wired Magazine's Chris Baker. "I ... think that journalists covering games tend to get caught up in the horserace, just as journalists covering political campaigns do. Every game is evaluated not just on its own merits but based on what has come before in the console wars." Many others agreed that subtle biases get introduced into gaming coverage for a variety of reasons. "Game press tends to go with the flow," said freelancer Matthew Sakey, "so if a trend of antagonism toward one platform begins, we often see it carried along by a sort of mob mentality."

Some blamed the hype-fueled expectations of the gamers themselves for putting undue influence on journalists. "In a sense, this is what happened with Halo 2 and certainly with Halo 3," said The Denver Post's Dave Thomas. "I don't know a single game critic who would put either of those titles on their top 10 greatest games. But the gaming community wanted those games so bad, was so excited about them, that not only were you sort of strong armed into covering them, it also blunted your critical edge. ... It is an interesting case study in how fan enthusiasm creates something that looks like bias."

Of course, most journalists wouldn't admit to any personal bias in their own writing, when asked directly. Many echoed the sentiments of freelancer Kieron Gillen: "I view all the console manufacturers with about equal suspicion, and don't have an illusion that one corporation that exists to make a lot of money is somehow better than another one." Others followed the Harrisburg (Pa.) Patriot-News' Chris Mautner in insisting they were "more concerned about the individual artistic merits of a particular game" than the fate of a particular console.

There were a few journalists, though, who were surprisingly upfront and unapologetic about their personal system preferences. "Having owned all three consoles ... I felt that as a gamer, the PlayStation 3 offered much more of what I liked," said Epileptic Gaming cohost Robert Summa. "Our viewers know which systems the cast prefers and to some extent, we actually play up on that. I don't necessarily dislike any of the other consoles, in fact I think each of them brings something important to the industry in their own rights. ... As I tell my viewers: 'I'm not a fanboy. I'm just a fanboy of the best system.'"

Not every journalist is on the Sony side of the fence, of course. "I don't like the PS3 and I don't have any desire to own one until the price drops considerably," admitted Gaming Target Managing Editor John Scalzo. "I'm a little sad to say that I sometimes get a little overzealous in reporting about the PS3's troubles compared to the other two consoles. But I'm not sure I see this as a problem because everything I'm reporting on as a PS3 problem is a verifiable fact. The games are being delayed. Developers are complaining about the development tools. The system isn't selling well. And it is too expensive."

Scalzo's comments reflect what many saw as a widespread anti-Sony angle that infected much of the coverage following the PS3's launch. "I do think the press on the whole came out of the 'next-gen' gate with an angle against the PS3," said freelancer Tim Stevens. "After all of Sony's puffed chest proclamations of their complete dominance, and given how badly the company's initial E3 fanfare for the console backfired ... how could you not shake your head in bemusement at least a little at the immense cockiness the company's executives were exhibiting?" Others saw the anti-PS3 backlash as a simple reflection of the feelings of gamers as a whole. "I think the EGM cover with the tomatoes all over the machine was a gutsy move and expressed a feeling that was almost palpable among gamers and journalists alike," said venerable game journalist Bill Kunkel.

Nintendo's Wii, on the other hand, is generally seen as getting an easier ride from the press on its way out of the gate, an attitude some say was all about expectations. "I think the general press reaction was based on surprise," Sakey said. "In 2005, my own opinion of the then-Revolution console was that Nintendo considered it an afterthought, something they 'needed' to produce to stay in the game, nothing but a distant second to the DS. I suspect many members of the press felt similarly until the control scheme was unveiled, and even then it wasn't until we saw early titles in action that the press was convinced." Of course, the system's low cost and stratospheric sales were bound to have an effect on coverage. "When they put out a system that was reasonably priced and included a great piece of software, how could they NOT look good?" Kunkel asked rhetorically. "I don't expect this to change because who argues with success?"

These initial takes on the systems may be changing with time, according to many journalists, a trend that Sakey blames on changing facts on the ground rather than shifting biases. "I do think the press is losing patience with the fact that while the Wii may be revolutionary from a control perspective, but that you can count the number of really important games for the platform on one of Bart Simpson's hands," Sakey said. "Similarly, I think the PS3 is out of jail and will receive more complimentary coverage in 2008, especially if Sony is savvy when it comes to price cuts." Stevens similarly sees the press softening to the PS3, and thinks that "most of the media now seem to be hoping for a come from behind victory for the console." Of course, the change in tone might come too late to change the initial impressions of each system. "The steady barrage of '2008 is the Year of the PS3' and 'the Wii is just a fad' articles are increasing all the time," Scalzo said, "but neither seems to have any effect on how those two systems are perceived by the public."

In the end, while coverage may occasionally be colored by personal opinion, most journalists try to be fair and balanced in their coverage of the never-ending console wars. "I think most of the people working in this business understand that there's nothing to gain from playing favorites," said Giant Bomb's Jeff Gerstmann. "All these supposed payoffs that we're all getting to fix review scores at major outlets don't actually exist--at least, not in North America. ... Most of the people in this line of work spend their work hours surrounded by every console and a game-ready PC. Unless they're sleeping with PR people or something ... no one has any real reason to develop a bias in the first place."

For more about PressSpotting, check out the introductory column.

Kyle Orland is a freelance journalist specializing in video games and based out of Laurel, MD. He's written for a variety of outlets, as detailed on his personal site. He'll never break your heart.

Questions? Comments? Story ideas? Bitter invective? Send it to Kyle.

271 Comments

  • EnigManic

    Posted Jun 10, 2008 3:12 pm GMT

    Hvac0120, your argument has more holes than swiss cheese. If you honestly think GTA4 deserves a ten, then you have no clue how an honest review system works. Furthermore, I'd love to see you prove that "millions" of people enjoy the game despite its flaws.

    Second, you are ignorant or just a fanboy if you say we are biased for stating FACTS about the content of GTA4.

  • Hvac0120

    Posted Jun 10, 2008 7:46 am GMT

    @EnigManic

    What exactly am I being biased about?

    Of course I disagree with the GTA statement because I enjoy the game even for it's lack of "features" (as you two say). So I guess it's biased to like a game? Okay. Whatever... call me guilty for agreeing with millions of people that GTA 4 is a great game. I can handle it. GTA SA is a great game too. If you don't like 4, then go play SA until the next GTA comes out. I think that the reviewers forgave the lack of features because the game focused more on detail. There is just as much detail in the game as there were features in SA. Also there are tons of improvements on driving, cinamatics and gun-play. If you enjoy the older games, you should be fine with the new controls. Even with all of its flaws it is still one of the best games so far this console generation. That is why reviewers gave it a 10. Halo 3 certainly had a lot of problems too, but it also received a 10 for refinement and it's innovative features.

    You can't be mad that the majority enjoys a certain game and recommends it. You have to understand that not every game is for everyone. When so many people review the game and score it a 10, it's hard to argue that bias is the reason behind it.

  • Serious

    Posted Jun 10, 2008 2:04 am GMT

    If i could hand out a Pulitzer Prize for on target article this would be it. Its been long unsaid how bias many in the gaming industry media can be. I mean they were all over the price of the PS3 and yet no one complained about the Xbox 360s Red Ring of Death woes. It was downright sloppy journalism. The Wii which was really selling was looked at as a casual gamers toy. And the PS3 was a joke. No one spoke of all the special features that made up for that price. WiFi,Bluetooth,Blu Ray, HDMI and Larger HDD. Thank you for truly shining a light on a topic I've never seen covered. I feel a little vindicated now.

  • EnigManic

    Posted Jun 10, 2008 1:46 am GMT

    @keyser27 - Your post was right on the money.

    Hvac0120 - You are the one who is biased, and your fanboyism shows. Everything Keyser said about GTA4 was dead accurate. He wasn't offering an opinion, he stated facts! GTA4 DOES NOT have as many features as SA, there are less weapons and less variety of vehicles than earlier GTA games or even SR. The cell phone DOES ring multiple times during missions and the bowling and dart games ARE bad. The physics for the bowling and pool are sub-par and the darts game is way too easy.

    So it is perfectly clear that multiple reviewers gave the game an unfair score and I agree that there was payola involved. But I guess you think that sounds really far-fetched. As if radio stations don't do it to help promote certain musical acts.

  • CageFury

    Posted Jun 9, 2008 5:36 pm GMT

    "BELIEVE NOTHING AND FIND OUT FOR YOURSELF."

    Spread the word brotha!!

  • Proust

    Posted Jun 9, 2008 3:27 pm GMT

    Reviewers are fanboys like everyone else, it just comes with the territory and anyone who has been reading reviews for a long time knows this. Of course you have sites like 1up or kotaku (and many others) which are clearly there to benefit, in this case, 360. The PS3 attacks post launch were extreme in my view and have slowed down because of an increased PS3 fanbase. Those attacks have hurt the game site industry more than the PS3. Anyway, gamespot isn't the worst and isn't best when comes to impartiality but I enjoy the site nonetheless.

  • 4quarters

    Posted Jun 9, 2008 3:02 pm GMT

    Look at the article title" PS3 power hungry as 3 fridges".........biased, HELL YEA!!! The 360 is only minimally less power consuming, not enough to say "it" doesn't consume "as much as 3 fridges"!!! Many articles are worded just to raise someone's ire!!!!

  • Autolycus

    Posted Jun 9, 2008 3:01 pm GMT

    so to sum up the article, everyone, including news, is biased. BELIEVE NOTHING AND FIND OUT FOR YOURSELF.

  • Shomb22

    Posted Jun 9, 2008 2:31 pm GMT

    WTH?! Wherse MS in this article?!!! This is crap! Is MS too good to be in biased discussion? X360 must be the perfect console, according to mmahh.. Send it to Kyle.

  • BigSmitts07

    Posted Jun 9, 2008 1:46 pm GMT

    you can write as many articles and complain all you want..fany boys will forever be around as long as games are around...it comes with the territory...i hate them as much as the next guy but they will always be here...to tell the truth, with out them i wouldnt have the entertanent of reading there fights =P

  • CageFury

    Posted Jun 9, 2008 1:41 pm GMT

    They are reviews about video games.. get over it. You guys act like lives hang in the balance..

  • Hvac0120

    Posted Jun 9, 2008 11:59 am GMT

    @keyser27

    You are a true example of the starting quote for this article. You were responding to this article, yet you insisted on putting your personal biased view of GTA 4 on here thinking that you would...what?...change peoples minds?

    I completely disagree with what you say about the game, but here is not the place to debate the quality of GTA4.

    You may not agree with what all of the journalists have said about GTA4, but to make them seem wrong for doing so is crazy. Rockstar and Take-Two did not buyout every single game journalist and tell them to put a 10 rating on it. It is simply a mutual agreement. This is the worst example of a biased rating you could have even used.

    I don't think you should have even posted in here. Your points are worthless, your post is (in itself) completely biased against GTA and your post is barely on topic.

    Thanks for giving us a shining example of that quote. It was good for a good laugh! (yes I'm laughing at you, not with you!)

  • keyser27

    Posted Jun 9, 2008 11:10 am GMT

    I used to just think it was this site that had gone downhill. But when EVERY site jumped the shark to give GTA 4 of all games a 10, I've lost my faith in all reviewers.

    It's truly about hype now, as no one I know who has played the game for more than an hour ever says it's a 10. It's a GREAT game, but it is in no way a 10. The missions are repetitve and boring, the acting marginal AT BEST, and the story is identical to every other GTA. VC or SA both had much more features, better music, and *gasp* things to actually SPEND YOUR MONEY ON. This one has (poor) multiplayer and a cell phone that rings 4-6 times during every mission later in the game. The minigames (bowling and darts, anyway) are EMBARRASSINGLY bad. The cars look great, the city is VERY well done, but try climbing a zig zag stair case. For my money the best new addition was the police computer, which is AWESOME. The interweb, TV channels, and talk radio are VASTLY overrated and not very good, by GTA standards.

    Yet every reviewer gives it a ten, despite most reader reviews on most web sites putting it at an 8 or 9. Generally, a Halo 3, Uncharted, or Super Mario Galaxy getting an 8 or 9 review score will show the readership up in arms, despite the fact that game sites should be a little tougher with their reviews... hence the term "critics". 4 was a disappointment, both in terms of what it actually brought to the table after the STELLAR VC and SA, and how the press was in the tank. Good? Yes. Amazing? Not even close.

    Smells like Payola to me. Is Take-Two paying reviewers?

  • Darth_Tyrranus

    Posted Jun 9, 2008 10:48 am GMT

    punkpunker, that is not from the Dark Knight, it is from Thank You for Smoking.

  • Solid_Snake56

    Posted Jun 9, 2008 10:47 am GMT

    To be perfectly honest this site has become a joke since the Gertsman issue...what once was an amazing site has become run of the mill shlock and has lost all credibility

  • necronaux

    Posted Jun 9, 2008 10:45 am GMT

    It's like any 'review' based systems (games, movies, books,etc.). You read several reviewers comments, find one (or a few) that match or come close to your own tastes, and stick with them. Realizing they are someone elses opinions, and even if you agree with one most of the time, eventually, you'll disagree on something.

  • Hvac0120

    Posted Jun 9, 2008 9:34 am GMT

    As of two days ago I officially own a 3 current-gen consoles. Why would anyone spend ~$1,100 on consoles alone? Wouldn't it be smarter to figure out which console offers the games and services I prefer and then make a buying decision on that; followed by the purchase of several of the top-ranking games for that console?

    In theory; yes. However, this generation has provided us with a variety of choices. Wii has innovative motions controls and kid-friendly and party games. Xbox360 has Xbox Live (including Video Marketplace & Arcade). Playstation 3 has Blu-ray, motion controls, FREE online play, web browser, and the ability to run a computer operating system (if purchased separately).

    Each of these consoles also offer exclusive games that grab my attention:

    Wii
    * Mario Galaxy
    * Zelda
    * Wii Sports

    XB360
    * BioShock
    * Halo 3

    PS3
    * Heavenly Sword
    * Ratchet & Clank
    * Metal Gear Solid

    Out of all generations of gaming that I have been through (first console owned was a Sega Master System 1986), this generation is the hardest to find a favorite. I enjoy the innovative control scheme provided by the Wii. The PS3 controllers (both SixAxis and Dualshock 3) have been my favorite since DualShock 2. The Xbox 360 controller took the top spot on my list of favorite controllers when I purchased it Dec 2005.

    I think the problem is that journalist are all getting the same news and putting it out at the same time. So you end up hearing the same news story with the same perceived bias across all forms of media for video games. I think that the problem is that the news media has too much competition and nobody is being completely original and coming up with stories that nobody else has. It's hard when there are so many competitors.

    If the media can break out of their BORG hive and start exploring alternative ways of reporting some of this information, we may start to see the perceptions change.

  • KevComesRipping

    Posted Jun 9, 2008 9:03 am GMT

    BLAAAAWWWWWG!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
    This guy is biased towards news columns instead of a blog where this belongs.

  • okassar

    Posted Jun 9, 2008 8:20 am GMT

    I don't know and I don't care if Gamespot is bias or not,the top reason I use it is for the reviews,and hell,I've never bought a game that was lower than a 9 and a lot of times 9.5 and I don't have a single game that sucks.I love Gamespot for that.And no,don't think if a game is 9 or higher on Gamespot it's the same everywhere else,reviews can vary significantly.So for reviews,Gamespot is good,but I also like it because of the articles.Who cares if they have a bit bias in them,it's always amusing to see a fanboy fight and the articles are usually interesting.

  • Phazevariance

    Posted Jun 9, 2008 8:07 am GMT

    Nintendo wii is ok, but the graphcis in most games are terrible and there is way to much shovelware, but the first party games nintendo makes, are very often fun and enjoyable, and end up with game of the year tagged on them, not because nintendo is nintendo, but because htey make good stuff. But hteir hardware is seriously lacking this generation. The 360 and ps3 are pretty close to neck and neck, except for exclusives, and the fac tthat ps3 always has some kin dof hinderance that lowers the quality of each game but just the slightest, which explodes in forums with "mine is better than yours" battles over and over again.

    So if everyday people feel that love and hatred for each console, why wouldnt the writters and journalists that are also gamer sand people? I don't think ps3 is out of the jail house yet...

  • punkpunker

    Posted Jun 9, 2008 8:06 am GMT

    not related to article but just to add, why is the article picture is Harvey Dent form the Dark Knight movie??

  • cheeseychips

    Posted Jun 9, 2008 8:04 am GMT

    i treat reviews like this. A review is one person's opinion and I make my own mind up on whether i find a game good or not. We're all biased to some extent. Take MSG or Halo. It doesn't matter what anyone says about them fanboys of the games are so blinkered they will love it and try to beat down anyone elses opinion if they don't like them.

  • sscloud123

    Posted Jun 9, 2008 7:33 am GMT

    plaestic, you know why they gave Mario Galaxy GOTY 2007? Because people have long sussed up that they have microsoft d*ck firmly shoved up their behinds so in a poor attempt to seem fair they gave Galaxy GOTY. I wouldn't be surprised if it physically sicken them to write that and not some other 360 FPS.

  • raahsnavj

    Posted Jun 9, 2008 7:32 am GMT

    Of course there is bias. People like to 'know' they made the best choice. Pride is a Human trait. They want to set the trend of what is cool and what isn't. Just because you are a game critic doesn't make that trait of human pride disappear. What Jeff says is probably the right way of seeing it though... if you have everything, all the time, then what bias do you have? And that is where the amount of time reviewers and critics spend on a typical game. There is only so much time in the day... and bias is going to push you one way or the other.

    Bias always exists.

  • MrLetty

    Posted Jun 9, 2008 7:08 am GMT

    This is the way i see it..i treat game reviews like movie reviews, Sometimes the one being bashed is the best one. Take Zohan for example im in tampa and critics here did not like it.. I thought it was hilarious.

  • Spartan1017

    Posted Jun 9, 2008 7:05 am GMT

    man, that article is so bias... haha

  • kos1085

    Posted Jun 9, 2008 7:02 am GMT

    zzzzzz.......fell asleep reading this long article.

  • humblumi

    Posted Jun 9, 2008 6:21 am GMT

    Gamespot is trying to justify the fact that they're totally pro-microsoft...

    I'm sorry, but to be a good magazine it shouldn't be biased, review should take in consideration technical aspects and other issues, not personal preferences... For example... give GTA4 a complete 10 is not real, the game is very good but it's not the best graphics around, the game is repetitive etc.... Check haze review (not talking about gamespot now)... there are so many different reviews on line, that is really hard to figure out the reality about the game, other problem is that people grade the game for the hype, they expect a fantastic game, the game is good only, so everybody grades very low...

  • zgreenwell

    Posted Jun 9, 2008 6:16 am GMT

    This article is so biased!

  • amentet

    Posted Jun 9, 2008 5:36 am GMT

    mmm....i just notice something weird regarding gta4: nobody said that it was a perfect game....just a simple "yea...it is a good, you should check it out"....regardless of that, it won almost a perfect 10 from reviewers.......and thats pretty different thing if compared to games like zelda: ocarina of time wich was generally considered the best game in history with a perfect 10.....I wonder how gta$(sorry...caps locked) won the perfect 10.

  • plaestic

    Posted Jun 9, 2008 4:26 am GMT

    "Ha! An article on bias from gamespot, the most pro-360 anti-wii people around."

    You know they gave Super Mario Galaxy the 2007 GOTY, right? On to the topic of bias. Eh, I've come to this site for a while and I've seen bias in the form of generous reviews in which the reviewer had already enjoyed previous games in that specific series or genre. Nothing too far out there but Greg Kasavin's Virtua Fighter 4 review comes to mind. Jeff Gerstmann's review of Mortal Kombat 4 for N64 does as well. You simply have to identify those as "enthusiast" reviews. If you don't share that enthusiasm you owe it to yourself to get a good 2nd or 222nd opinion. However if you are a big fan of those games and genres then reviews like that let you know "oh yeah, it's that good." While that may be bias, and the type that's referred to in the article above, it's not malicious in any sense. Gamespot is being accused of being malicious and I simply do not see it. I don't see the PS3 versions of games scoring lower simply because they're on the PS3. I see some scoring lower because the actual quality of the game has been degraded on that console. Need for Speed ProStreet and Orange Box are examples where this has been the case. There are many others where the differences are nil and negligible. Remember, Gamespot is just about the only site I see posting positive future outlooks for the PS3. Analyst's claims that the PS3 will sell 110M units by 2011, while quite hard to swallow, show up on the site frequently. Posting these types of articles, painting a bright future for the PS3, isn't the act of a media company out to see a technology company fail.

    To conclude, Gamespot reviews games, not consoles. Sure the reviewers might find more enjoyment out of a game than the next reviewer and review it as such. Asking them to do anything less would be a disservice to the games themselves, but I've never seen them put down any console. Even the Ngage. I think the problem we're having here is Sony fans not getting the coverage they were used to seeing last generation. You gotta talk to Sony about that, guys. They simply aren't making the news they were then.

  • NinjaMunkey01

    Posted Jun 9, 2008 3:31 am GMT

    Gamespots reviewers are only human which is why you must take reviews with a pinch of salt. they will have biases. If you read some user reviews they are very biased.

  • cocomacoco

    Posted Jun 9, 2008 3:07 am GMT

    i think this article is pretty fair, and is kinda a subliminal info for everyone on why sometimes they have to bias a bit, i understand, and money moves the world, and the opinions as well, so understand, nobody has bought GS, its just business, and i believe that at least 88 percent of the times, i agree with GS, more than with any other website around, except for GTAIV, 10 of 10?, give me a break, its worth than San Andreas by all the miles around the two of them, but that's just an opinion, i'm a GTa fan, and i got the game, regardless, but that's all it is, trends, i got this and that, etc.

  • EnigManic

    Posted Jun 9, 2008 2:32 am GMT

    Gifted_One, you're showing a different kind of bias by saying the Wii isn't for the hardcore gamer. They have many fun games and their 1st party ones are usually, if not always, top notch.

    I get really sickened by how many people limit the definition of a "hardcore" game to one with impressive graphics. Read my latest blog. graphics aren't everything, and if it's that big of a deal to you, then complain about the lazy 3rd-party devs who don't even try to make a good-looking game for the Wii.

    Oh, I forgot. The Wii has crappy graphics. That's funny, considering Nintendo has made some decent-looking games. And there are plenty of games for the Wii which are original, challenging or just plain fun, albeit the graphics.

  • MasterCorban

    Posted Jun 9, 2008 2:30 am GMT

    So basically Gamespot says its written by normal humans who have failings. Lets face it-its difficult not to have a bias-try and watch a game of footy and not pick a side to support!

  • sscloud123

    Posted Jun 8, 2008 11:55 pm GMT

    Ha! An article on bias from gamespot, the most pro-360 anti-wii people around.

  • CureForLiving

    Posted Jun 8, 2008 11:32 pm GMT

    There is more bias towards the platforms then the games on those platforms, but generally its good to get information from several sources, even if a article is bias its still has to contain some truth, and from several viewpoints on the same subject a better picture can be obtain of what it true.
    But I have to agree it seems the PS3 is finally getting out of the doghouse.

  • CageFury

    Posted Jun 8, 2008 10:27 pm GMT

    "but when Im bored and have nothing to do I like to come here a rattle the fanboys up a bit"

    Who doesn't? Should be an official sport.

  • sparkypants

    Posted Jun 8, 2008 10:12 pm GMT

    Regardless of whether or not the articles are biased or not people need to take into consideration that this is only one opinion and while it may not line up with yours, its just one of many thoughts on a subject. Just because hes an editor doesnt mean we need to treat his views like they are that of god, hes just one guy being payed to voice his opinion. If you agree great if not...oh well.

    and @bennae66

    I come here for the simple pleasure of messing with fanboys, I like getting into silly little arguments about things that dont really matter and I like seeing people get all rattled up over something so small, Its alittle bit evil I guess, but when Im bored and have nothing to do I like to come here a rattle the fanboys up a bit

  • Futil1ty

    Posted Jun 8, 2008 10:00 pm GMT

    This article is awful! The author is so biased! Halo 2 and Halo 3 are still great games!

  • bennae66

    Posted Jun 8, 2008 9:32 pm GMT

    id like to know why (if so many ppl think gamespot are biassed) bother to write in these forums and read the articles. they dont have to click a link to get here, they dont have to 'put up with console xyz bashing' ignore. close browser. turn off. go back to playing your only and favorite console. i think thats pretty simple. i own a 360, a bluray3, a wii, a psp and had a ps2, xbox, gamecube, dreamcast and more all the way down the line. i like to think as a gamer that buys each system i am not biassed. i go where the games go. none of the game companies 'owe' me for my loyalty. none pof the game companies have a heart of gold and love me. they are all corporations. i bought a business to make money. i look after my clients but anyone who starts or purchases a business and claims its not to make money is full of it. the point im trying to make is i havent found gamespot biassed at all thats why it to this day is the ONLY website (at all - period) that i am willing to have a yearly fee deducted from my credit card because i love the coverage. ign is good but i feel they are too lenient with thier reviews. i like gamespot because they pick and pick and pick. i read the dog and lemon guide of cars; i subscribe to gamespot for my games info.
    -unbiassed opinion from a 28yo gamer.

  • YunalescaFFX

    Posted Jun 8, 2008 8:50 pm GMT

    Gamespot is biased... but I won't say to who mainly!! IGN seems more fair but still biased aswell. Eitherway to say no one is biased is complete trash simply because people are people and often we incorporate outside influences (NOT talking about money) that shape the way we view things. But I like this report 'cause it honestly states it out and clear

  • CageFury

    Posted Jun 8, 2008 8:43 pm GMT

    Great read, it's great to hear these "critics" reflecting on their own writings and that of their peers. Here's my two cents: We are talking about video GAMES here. "Games" being the key word. I realize there is a lot of money to be made, but for the most part, I think it's really all just about entertainment and artistic expression. I feel that these "critics" should be viewed in the same light. Allow them speak their mind and then evaluate their opinion on your own terms. I feel that we, as a society, should probably be a little less critical towards the industry as a whole and really... just relax. Let's all just ride this wonderful entertainment tsunami until it crashes onto the beaches of evolution.

    PS: I'm drunk.

  • gumoverbridge

    Posted Jun 8, 2008 7:46 pm GMT

    not what I thought this article was going to be about. I figured he'd be talking much more about bias in reviewing games. specifically relating to catering to the folks buying the advertisments and funding the paychecks of the writers.
    got a question though, is the public opinion shaped by the writing or does the writing shape the public opinion? for example, a year ago, did the PS3 not sell well b/c the press wrote it was bad so the public didn't buy it, or did the public decide it was bad and the press mirror that opinion.
    just looking at public opinion and writing what people want to hear, that the worst kind of bias if you ask me

  • ThisIsntLeonard

    Posted Jun 8, 2008 7:38 pm GMT

    Hmm, let's see. This basically tells us that Gamespot isn't biased when they say things like: The PS3 is the best built system when it comes to features, but lacks in games and sales; the XBox is the most-used system, with great online support, but over 25% of their systems end up biting the dust conveiniently outside the typical warranty deadline.the Wii is the most user friendly, and at a low price, but lacks room for downloadable content and aside from some major credible release titles, releases a LOT of stupid f'n games.

  • SambaLele

    Posted Jun 8, 2008 6:55 pm GMT

    What is this? Gamespot trying to regain some honor?
    Nice attempt...

  • GatCloudX

    Posted Jun 8, 2008 6:18 pm GMT

    everyone is baised against ps3 and i think they just need to let it go personally i dont think it costs that much and im not rich or anything i bought one why cant people who probably have a little more money than me seem to afford one

advertisement

Hot Stories

Newsmakers

Featured Stories

Submit News

Got tips? Send them in!