Why Logic doesn't matter pt2

So if everyone remembers I recently wrote a post about the problems plaguing the game industry, but today I'm taking aim at a different beast... game criticism. You see I stopped caring about game criticism, like IGN, OPM, or even Escapist Magazine, a long time ago. And the reason is actually quite simple.

"Awesome" has been devalued.

I want you to engage in a little thought experiment here, I want you to go to a major game criticism/news site, like one of the ones I listed above. Check through ten reviews of AAA game titles at random, and count how many times you see 4/5, 5/5, 10/10, 9/10 8/10. You'll probably end up with at least 70% of them falling into this "Awesome" category. Now in any other society this would be because all of these games really are game-changers, or pieces of game history. But in this world, it isn't because of quality, not even close. Now while this is obviously subjective to taste, I'm fairly certain that you'll find that you disagree with at least 2 of the games you found. Now I have a few reasons why this might be... and no I will not be mentioning the possibility, though it is possible because it can't be easily disproven, of reviews being bought by publishers, I like to challenge myself. 

1.) Fanboy Fear

Now this is quite possible that regardless of whether the critics dislike something they give it a good score because they don't want fans of the game to be upset. The effects of which can be seen in the numerous occasions where reviewers like Yahtzee of Zero Punctuation, don't give great reviews to games that have a lot of fans. Now while it may seem silly for critics to be afraid of fans, with one bad review fans can go from people who really like a game, to trolls that will clutter up your message box with hate mail, or more distressingly to those that run the websites, they'll stop visiting them. This is why, for example, it would be a rare sight to see a critic dislike Uncharted. Even if they don't like the latest installment if they say it then they'll run the risk of pissing off fans who may stop visiting the site and bring down overall traffic.

2.) They have to play nice with publishers

Again, I'm not talking about critics being bought here, I'm talking about per-release copies. You see let's say, for example, that you give a terrible score to a new game from EA. Now the game in question may suck, but let's say that EA doesn't like the fact that you gave their game a bad score. Now let's say, mostly because its a certainty nowadays, that they have another game coming out this year, that they decide not to give you a copy of before release. Now you're in deep crap, because your review of this new, assuredly also AAA release, will go out quite a bit after everyone else. Now this isn't too terrible if for example you're The Escapist, and you have a bunch of video producers that provide you with all of the traffic that you need, but if you aren't you may have just screwed yourself. Review copies, and the swag that goes with them, are little reminders from the industry that if you don't play nice that they'll stop playing with you. But these aren't the only problems...

Bad for everyone, especially the little guy

Now one of the reasons that getting a new Intellectual Property off the ground in modern gaming is the fact people like what's familiar to them. But this is a well-worn excuse that I think doesn't give the human race enough credit. For one thing, and I know its strange to say, you have to give people a little more credit. Some people will go out on a limb and buy new things, they will try to have new experiences, but not blindly. I'm going to give you all an example here, let's say that we have three games in front of us, God of War: Ascension, The Walking Dead: Survival Instinct, and Asura's Wrath. Now I would rate these games all between 6-7, depending on how fair I'm being forced to be, but if the average consumer were going by reviews, the only choice is the one that, In My Opinion, is the worst of the bunch, Ascension.

Now this isn't some hipster, you should always support something just because its not a franchise thing. While I would say that Wrath is the game that the player should pick up, its mostly because while at the end of the day it's not great combat wise, it is an unusual experience. The story, the writing, pacing, and even visual style want to be an interactive anime, and it succeeds at doing so. Which isn't to say that Survival Instinct isn't also okay. In this day and age of quick-time-events and scripted cinematic action Survival Instinct is a breath of fresh air, a short, unchallenging, repetitive, breath of fresh air. But neither of these games got the 8's and 9's of GoW's latest outing. Now one might say that this is because of personal preference on the part of the critic themselves, but if that's the case then where are the critics who value innovation, improvised gameplay, or anything of those sorts, do they exist outside of TGWTG.com or are they and Yahtzee it?

Conclusion

Now obviously all of these problems are things that aren't easy for consumers to fix, but it's good to be aware of the issues growing in the industry, and what they may affect. It's difficult to gauge what everyone's response to these ideas will be, so I'll just say this. I don't have know what really goes on behind those closed doors, I don't know if my theories are true. So I'd like to encourage you to leave comments with your own ideas on what may be wrong in the games industry and in game criticism. Because, as cliche as it is, knowing the problem is the first step in combating it.