February 7, 2009 // 10:07 pm
- Edge was always a magazine I like reading no matter what kind of reviews they dish out, their perspectives are so well written that it's pretty easy to negate everything else that they offer.
Did their Killzone 2 review push everyone against them, although I do not quite agree with the them, since they have given both Gears of War 2 and Halo 3 a 9 and 10 respectively.
The point is not about justification in an opinion but maintaining a minimum level of consistency and fairness with all their reviews which is a rather impossible task to achieve with the enormous amount of revenues flowing from one publication to another.
Videogame companies have made reviews a mandatory tool to push their own opinion to consumers, rather than providing an honest outlook for games, this field of argument is not restricted just for Edge, but for all major gaming publications who operate in the gaming industry.
It would be rather unnatural to assume that these big companies/publications have a stake in the game itself. Fanboyism makes this proposition even worse, in addition to the large big huge corporations, the pressure of being ignored completely by a particular community also hangs precariously over the heads of these journalists.
EGM was one of the most influential magazines in the history of gaming, these guys bore through all accusations to emerge as a top brand in gaming, fans often burned effies of hate mail directing all the ire of the early death of the Dreamcast and the lousy review patterns for N64 games, during such a tumultuous age they were branded as PS fanboys.
Majority of this editorial team was carried forward to the era of the PS2, and once again they were accused of biasing their reviews to the leading console. This generation they were blatantly accused of 360 favoritism(even though its far from the leader).
The point I somehow do not understand is if they were so pro all the leaders of each generation and amassed a huge amount of funds from each winner, I do not think there was a need to shut down such a popular and successful magazine and lay off some of the most revered names in the industry.
Coming back to the EDGE issue at hand, I just feel that it entices a lot of gamers who would want to pick the profession of how to look at games in the most stringent manner, it's an extremely easy task to give the game a 10 or a 9.5 ,even while outlining its most glaring obscurities, but the principle of ethics based reviews become a rather debatable option and that's where a publication like Edge with its defining views hits everyone.
For an individual often reviewing a game means balancing a whole lot of equations in terms of access to resources from different companies for their next issues.
A positive Killzone 2 might make it all that easier to get an exclusive insight into a much awaited game title and please the simmering fanboys ever ready to strike or a negative review of the game might actually have the power to build up a brand such as EDGE and their dedication of keeping videogames a sustainable environment, but in the middle inconsistencies such as with Halo 3 and Gears 2, which I personally feel were worthy of an 8 and 7, makes the Killzone 2 review a vexed object in my books.