Re: Sims 4 & Biases in Games Journalism

Legundo made a video discussing recent Sims 4 news that EA will not be providing Sims 4 early copies to reviewers.

Discussing the inherent biases in games journalism that come from relying on publishers to receive copies of games for review early.

I will be responding to this video as well as taking my own direction.

For the most part I agree with Legundo’s stance, but there is one part of it I actually disagree with that I will address in just a couple minutes.

Couple notes about games journalism on the whole:

  • pretty much everything about games journalism is considered unethical, inappropriate, or wrong to the overall journalistic community/ethical code
    • special treatment, flown out to events, given gifts
    • especially the free & early access copies to games
    • this immediately would throw up huge red flags to normal journalists
    • In fact, as non-gaming journalist if you’re given free gifts, your employers would not let you review them as there’s influence in receiving it free
    • People lose their jobs over this
  • yet this is how the entire games journalism system is structured, and that’s probably not going to change
    • high costs
    • everyday people as critics
    • it’s been this way from the beginning

As Legundo pointed out, Games Journalism “doesn’t have a choice” While one could argue one way or the other on that, I mostly agree with him. Games Journalism, for the most part, doesn’t have a choice on being “in bed” so much with publishers.

But we do have ways in which we can affect how much power or influence that has over us.

Part I disagree with - and I’ve seen it all over Reddit, too

“They must have so little faith in their game to do this”

Honestly, I would say in most cases (not specifically with Sims 4, per se) that would be a sign OF having faith, to me.

With how easy it is to completely fool the public about a game through bought/biased early-copy, day0/day 1 reviews (which I will be addressing in a second) if a company is concerned their game might do well, they simply need to open their doors wide and give special treatment to a ton of journalists - as is regular - and blind them rather than hide it to draw that negative unwanted attention.

To me, that assumption of it being required is nothing but bad for the industry.

There’s way too much focus nowadays on Day 1 game purchases and pre-release information and “hype.”

As PC games journalist TotalBiscuit regularly argues - this focus on Day 1 is pretty absurd and only harms the consumer in the end.

Effects such as on-disc, costly “DLC” being added into games, game experiences being limited without special pre-order bonuses for pre-ordering the game, and more are shining examples of the problems this causes for consumers on almost every game’s release day.

It’s a gold mine for publishers. It’s the bane of any non-upper-class gamer. It’s the perfect hype train for new games. It’s also pure manipulation.

My argument is that if we make a push to focus less and less on day 1 purchases/reviews, it will be hugely beneficial for the games journalism industry as well as the consumer.

No Integrity

This focus on Day 1 purchases has also created this biased system with no integrity in which publishers buy out game reviewers and publishing outlets left and right by providing them early copies of the games.

It has created a society where people are used to looking for game reviews before the game is out and expecting it. That some journalist’s jobs almost completely depend on getting a review out before the other guy.

These are the masses. These are the gamers who are fooled by the industry or just have enough money not to care.

The smart gamers typically wait a bit to get the game. Most AAA games these days need a pretty large patch within the first couple w eeks to get the game actually running in the first place. Waiting also allows the dust to settle on the bought out reviews - and the honest reviews start to surface.

No Value

Despite the fact that a huge portion of the entire industry has come to develop around this concept, the truth is…

Day 0/1 reviews are completely worthless (in most cases)

All these reviews do is to serve the publisher’s hype train for the game and provide free PR for their product.

  • All these reviews do is give gamers already buy ing the game or looking to buy the game another voice telling them “yes” they should buy it.
  • rarely is anything negative brought up
    • and when it is, it’s danced around and often then flooded with more positives
  • actual critique is non-existent

A critically thinking reader can, of course, sift through the bullshittery that is the mass of day0/1 reviews and pick out bits of information that can inform them to some degree on which decision to make when considering purchasing a game, but frankly raw gameplay footage from games serves for better decision-making influence on launch than early-access reviews do.

The Long Run

Having worked (briefly) for a couple other gaming news outlets (other than my own website) it’s pretty obvious that most publishing outlets’ concerns and focus are on the day 1 review and news.

Multiple times was I or another staff writer told that there’s no point in reviewing game X, Y, or Z because the initial launch-day view surge had already passed and they would just wait on trickled search traffic to have any hits on the review.

But honestly? Those are the hits that matter. Sure they make a tad bit less money - but who cares? I will always take a late review over no review any day. A post-launch review almost always guarantees that the proper time and efforts were put in to ensure the review was done properly and with as little bias as possible.

Hell, I’d take reviews of games from any generation on my website as long as they were well-written.

The thing is, when someone is looking for reviews on games after they’ve been released, they don’t get their information from pre-release or launch-day reviews. No, it’s the post-launch reviews that were done right and with the proper level of critiquing that provide any value to consumers.

Money

Looking at it from the outside, the immense focus on launch-day is actually pretty illogical.

It hurts the consumer, violates journalistic integrity, and provides no value at all.

The only reason it’s done is for the money.

 

If we pushed to move the focus off of day 1 sales for games, things would be a lot better:

  • j integrity
  • more valuable reviews
    • better buying decisions
  • push away from day 0 dlc and all that bullshittery
  • ideally- pre-order bonuses being more physical/for fun, not in-game content
    • still makes me mad
  • save money!
    • steam sales
    • better buying decisions
    • SALES

But some things are in our way

  • we would have to eliminate the corporate used games market
    • no money goes to devs/publishers so their focus stays on day1
    • prevents games in those markets from going on sale, costing users more money
  • We would have to show a pretty firm stand against core game content being used as quick or on-disc DLC or pre-order bonuses

What will you do?