1. Journalists must be required to complete the single-player story mode of the game they're reviewing (if it exists) and participate in at least 20 hours of multiplayer (if it exists). With Sandbox or open-world games that have many sidequests, they must complete at least 75% of the available quests in the game. With sports games, they must have played all the modes extensively and have the appropriate game saves. They must then upload a screenshot of their game save as well as pertinent statistics or if possible, upload the whole file into the review. The purpose of this is to prevent partial reviews from getting posted. There are many irresponsible reviewers who play a game halfway or take part in only one online match then make a score.
2. Journalists must have played at least 3 other games of the same genre to qualify to review any game. For example, if I were to review NBA 2k15, I must have played NBA 2k12-14. This is to ensure that the reviewer understands and appreciates the genre to a certain degree. There are reviewers out there who make scores on games they don't like from the very beginning and they tend to allow their prejudice to cloud their reason.
3. Journalists must make their scores based on the launch day product. It's unfair for the public if they create their scores after patches have fixed the game breaking issues that the disc came with. In cases where the online component is a major deal but is broken on launch day, the review can be put on hold while servers get back online - after all, the review is about the game, not the server. If the issue persists past the first two weeks, then the review can be posted. This may sound unfair but you can't give WoW, for example, a 0 because servers are crowded on launch day and you can't log in.
4. Journalists and gaming publications must sign a contract that states they did not accept any money or favors from publishers or any other individuals as they review a game. While this won't necessarily prevent them from actually taking money, it will give gamers leverage if a particular reviewer is found to be corrupt later on.
5. Gaming publications must only hire reviewers who actually play games consistently and not as a casual hobby. After all, the people who check out reviews and care most about the outcomes are core gamers so the reviews they ought to see must come from their own ranks as well. This means that a woman, for example, who plays Call of Duty for an hour a week can't be allowed to post a review on it.
edit: btw, these are just suggestions.. no need to get too sensitive.
