LogFAQs > #978995629

UshiromiyaEva posted...

Also, critical consensus in the PS360 era was basically worthless, it was a low point for gaming journalism. Reviewers praying at the alter of mainstream appeal, an era where reviews were actually being bought (though we got GB out of it, so all's well that ends well?), xenophobia left and right. Bad times.

Feels like Bioshock Infinite may have been the straw that broke the camel's back.

Im not sure this is accurate? I mean I dont think reviewers were worshipping at the altar of mainstream appeal any more than they were before. If anything it got better, reviews from that period were part of what allowed smaller critical darlings like Braid to break through. I mean it was a time when the most popular console of the generation was straight up rejected by large parts of the industry. Doesnt really fit.

To my knowledge there was never a known case of a review from a significant publication directly being bought, though there was pressure put on outlets by publishers like the Kane & Lynch fiasco. This was common practice before that generation, and got better during. On the other hand its worse now because of influencers. There is of course no excuse for the shameful anti-Japanese sentiment of that era, which was unfortunately spread across the whole industry from devs to even the audience. Lastly Bioshock Infinite is a game that came out and got a gradual backlash with time, the audience and critical reception were the same at launch. Not really the fault of reviewers.

I dont know, I think its much worse now with media companies dying left and right, look at Vice right now. Or the 90s when all these issues were worse and you didnt have the people doing actual journalistic work that you did later on.

But also it doesnt matter because Arkham City was the best received by the general audience, not just critics anyway!