Originally Posted by RiccochetJ
Brad responded to this post in the Bombcast thread.
Here it is:
Originally Posted by rudds
My argument was that Skyrim is the most robustly successful execution to date of the Bethesda RPG formula, a formula that I think is currently the best thing going in games (and I'd be thrilled to see someone else come along and do it better, because lord knows Bethesda's implementation ain't perfect). Saints Row is kind of a trifle as open-world games go, and the humor missed for me as much as it hit. I really enjoyed it but in my mind it's not GOTY material just because of its (admittedly delightful) subversive qualities.
If you've been with the podcast from the beginning you can't have missed the Fallout 3 discussions that took place for months on end ad nauseam, so you know we all sincerely really like that kind of game. Please take this as evenly as possible, but the idea that a stupid statue entered into the thought process in any way, even subconsciously, is offensive.
The bolded part of your quote is the most distressing, though. If we aren't capable of deciding for ourselves which games are a "big deal" and how much coverage a game warrants, purely based on how much the audience cares about it and how much we're interested in it, we shouldn't be doing this job in the first place. I like to think the number of QLs and reviews we post for smaller downloadable and indie games is a good offset to coverage of big, hyped retail releases.
As has been pointed out in the other thread, you're creating a no-win scenario in which we either admit we're compromised, or it turns out we're compromised anyway and just don't know it. The only solution at that point is to decide whether you trust us enough to keep listening to what we have to say. I do hope our track records speak for themselves in that regard.