Why mainstream games journalism is failing the gamer

This is a subject I have been wanting to talk about for quite some time. I feel its time I finally got this off my chest, on how the current state of games journalism is hurting the very audience that supports them ,the gamer. This is isn't a rant about somebody having different opinion than my own, its about how the gaming press close relationship with the game publishers and its public relations departments and how they look out for the them instead of the hands that feeds them.We gamers have been fooled to believe that there isn't anything funny going on between journalist and PR people, but recent events suggest other wise, and many gamers have to take a stance against this and it seems many of these so called journalist hate the idea of their audience questioning their motivations when it comes to either reviewing or covering games.

Growing up with a brother who was a hardcore gamer I quickly became invested in many gaming publications as a little kid, I grew up in the 90's back when magazines rained dominate over the internet. EGM, Gamepro, and Nintendo Power I read them all. What I really appreciated was the editorial pieces that the monthly issues invested in them, there was a lot of work, thought, and care that was put in them, and they were done for the sake of the gamers because they knew in order to keep gamers coming back to another issue was to grow a relationship with them, the reviews were secondary and if gamers didn't agree with the score or the review it wasn't a big deal because a strong foundation was forged between writer and reader. You knew that the reviewer was giving an honest opinion on the game he was playing and wasn't BS'ing you, and more importantly the review put a huge standard on one main factor that seems many of these so called journalist seem to have forgotten, and that is FUN. When I read many reviews today there is a hugh importance placed on graphics and details like framerate and textures, while things like that are important they are the not the ends mean to decide if a game is good just look at Doom 3, great graphics doesn't mean a game is fun, how many people to this day still go back and play Final Fantasy VII.

Many reviews back in those days were approached with an open mind, today it seems many reviewers now already know what score there going to give the game before even picking up the controller, and rather it being 9 or 4 the reviewer goes out of there way to do that by either cherry picking details or letting things slide that the game does, that many other games do exactly the same but those get punished. For many people this isn't a big deal but it hurts us the gamers because what could have been a game we enjoyed we turn away from it because the so called reviewer decided to give it a 6 or 7, instead of us forging are own opinion, it's not fair to us and more importantly it's not fair to the developers. I can't count how many time I've enjoyed a game that has a metacritic in the 60s or 70s and hated a game in the 80s or 90s and I'm sure that I'm not alone.

There is a silver lining to all this and that is the growth of the fansites thanks to N4G and neogaf. These two sectors have become a pain in the ass for some games journalist and do everything to either ridicule or try and discredit anybody involve in these two communities driven by passionate gamers who call them out on their bullshit. What I believe bugs games journalist about these sites is that unlike in there sites they have no control over what is said, they can't control the comment section or ban people for giving there two cents about there reviews and critiquing there writing style. N4G has helped many fan driven sites to rival many big name sites and even helped gamers find an outlet with creators and fans who's opinions they can latch on too and trust. No matter how much sites like IGN, Kotaku, Polygon, or people like Stephen Totilo and Arthur Gies do, that something that can't be bought, its something that needs to be earned.