9 comments on “On Skyrim and Bias

  1. I think a reviewer’s disclosed bias can aid the reader by revealing whether their tastes are similar. For example, if I were to read a line from a Skyrim review that said “I loved Oblivion to it’s toenails, except for those stupid Oblivion Gates.” I would immediately relate. Either this reviewer has performed some ninja-like telepathy on my brain, or perhaps we just like the same types of games, and share some of the same annoyances. This would make me more likely to trust whatever comment regarding Skyrim that followed it.

    Biased side-note: if you really loved Skyrim, you would play it on a PC.

  2. Agree 100%. Anyone who thinks that any journalist is an unfeeling automaton with no opinion on any story they work on is just delusional.

    In the case of games reviewing, why would you want a game that you are anticipating and contemplating dropping $50-60 of your money on to be reviewed by someone with no connection or investment? Especially in the case of a high-profile game series like TES, I want to hear the opinions of people that sunk days of their lives into the previous games and are still coming back for more. Otherwise, how do I identify with the reviewer?

  3. I don’t really care about the bias, I care about how unprofessional this is.

    I remember you guys always complaining about dealing with gaming PR, but how do you expect them to treat you when you portray yourself like this? If any of my clients saw me in a video like this I can guarantee I would lose half my contracts over night.

    I think you’re a funny guy Justin, but it’s instances like this that hold back games media from being taken seriously.

    • The very good news, and the very lucky thing for me, is that I could give two adult shits about what gaming PR thinks of me. I care about what readers think. That’s not a hostility towards PR mind you, it’s a recognition of who my audience is.

      If readers want to paint me as someone who gets ridiculously excited about some video games, I can live with that. If they want a hollow, faceless “professional” then they are very clearly barking up the wrong tree.

    • There seems to be a disconnect in your reasoning, Platinum… Video game developers and publishers are not “clients” of reviewers and journalists.

      That would kind of defeat the purpose.

  4. Well said. I’ve never understood people who wanted, as Jason said above, some manner of inhuman review-bot writing about games. That’s the only way you can ever have a 100% unbiased, totally “objective” review… and it would be the most BORING shit to read known to mankind.

    To paraphrase (and likely butcher all to hell, since my memory is shoddy) a quote by Ryan Scott: “You want an objective review? Fine. This is So-and-So Game. It comes in a box. It costs X dollars and you can play it on Y system. In it, you can do things, shoot people, etc. It has this many levels. The end.” Who in their right mind would find that worth reading? That’s a bullet point list from the back of a box, not a review.

    Maybe it’s just because I came up from the 1UP community and I was used to connecting with the staff there via blogs, podcasts, video shows, social media and the like, but I ALWAYS prefered a critic who I could relate to as a human being with their own tastes, likes and dislikes and general quirks rather than some faceless byline who I knew nothing about and felt no connection to.

    Personally, I loved the video. Fuck ’em if they can’t see a joke right in front of their noses and keep on doing what you do best, sir.

  5. You know what kind of reviewer I want to read reviews from? The ones with a personality.
    And any reviewer that will make a video of them hugging a game and spinning in circles is the kind of guy I want to read reviews from.

Leave a reply to Dan Huffman (@danielhuffman) Cancel reply