As a person that have been a videogame journalist for some years writting in
a now sizeable website, I am currently
making a bi-weekly videogame podcast, and that have also worked as a PPRR (in other non related areas, mind you) here are some random thoughts on the subject:
- As someone acutely pointed out, the whole "sameness" between reviews is suspicious because well, it is not normal.
Different people have different tastes, and the game that to some person is genious, to another one is unplayable. Thing is, there is a huge hivemind - like mentality among reviewers that it is fueled by... the audience. No, not videogame companies: readers. Try giving a bad review to a flagship title, a stablished franchise or a media darling and see the tsunami-sized shitstorm coming your way. Accusations of being a "hater", "xboxer/sonier/nintendite", "sellout" or "elitist" will hit you forth and back and most importantly, rather than mark you as an independent writter or give presige to your site, most times it creates the very opposing effect: visits are cheap, but devoted readers are valuable and (easy) to loose out to a hissy fit (Gamespot VS Zelda anyone?).
- A big part of PPRR consist in building good relationships with the press, but it is always up to the writter to fall for it or not
The whole "journos are bribed" is an overreaction towards a very common practice in almost every field. PPRR consist, in essence, in rubbing the media (and public) shoulders. You can do it so by giving exclusive information, merchandaising, whatever. As PPRR I do not expect to "buy" anything, much less a journalist. You "trow in" favours, hoping that something sticks. The ball is always in the court of the journalist: being able to cut off any kind of emotional bond that you have with the object of your critic is an unvaluable quality for any journalist, and one necessary in order to make a decent critic. There is no dylemma between being having integrity or career, you can have both, and it always up to you to withold the first. I have recieved my fair share of merchandaising goodies, yet it did not prevent me to pan to hell and back whichever game I deemed unworthy, or put it a low score, even if by putting "human faces" to the team behind the games did refrain me from putting vitrol inside my critic, which is, afterall, one of the PPRR's main fuctions (to prevent catastrophes from happening, rather than to actively pursuit "hits").
- Some developers can take constructive criticism, other ones don't.
And by "not taking constructive criticism" I mean "they take it personally, will not talk to you, will not tell you "hi" and "will activelly barren you from any event". As I said before, the level of, hum "passion", if not outright fanatism that videogames elicit is something that permeates the whole "videogame culture", developers included. Also, you should add to that the fact that small review sites are extremely dependant of freebies in order to conduct critic with a regular schedule. Movie ticket costs 9 euros, while a blockbuster game can add up to 60 euros. Do the math, is simple. If a videogame studio want to shit on your videogame journalist career, boy, it does have the means to do it so, it is a very asymetric relationship.