This is why famitsu works a little better with the reviews since it goes through multiple people. There are ways around this. Though Famtisu has strange ideas sometimes.

I'm just surprised it was so focused on reviews, there is so much, especially these days, that we could open up about gaming journalism. This could've been an epic roundtable of discussion of some sort, dragging in reviewers, site editors, 'zine writers, and bloggers and just getting to the roots of the problem.

Someone should totally do that

I think the problem goes two ways, both the gaming journalists and their audience the fanboys.

Journalists in general tend to write to their base in order to get as many readers as possible. If the readers (the gamers, fanboys, etc.) want to read an article or review that reflects their biased opinion, then the journalist will have to write it in such a manner, and vice versa.

Does that mean that there are no such thing as unbiased, credible journalists and readers? Of course not. But when you are in the minority, your opinion gets swept away under the rug to make room for the majority. In this case, biased fanboys are the majority of the internets (or at least have the loudest voices), hence the ridiculous articles being published.

In some places, this becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy. For example, X-play caters to 360 owners because they are the bulk of the audience. In that case, it at least makes commercial sense.

However, in other cases, it is just arrogance. I think many Game Informer editors would rather die than say something nice about the Wii -- even though their own surveys show there are more Wii owners "reading" the magazine than PS3 owners.

Either way, it is hard to find neutral, unbiased information -- which is unfortunate.

Mike from Morgantown

You know, I didn't think of it that way before...you are right that it makes sense for X-play to cater to the 360 owners, seeing that it is only seen in America and it caters to its audience.

But then you have publications and sites like Game Informer, Gamespot, IGN, etc. that cater to the world, yet do not bother to leave their biases at the door and focus on being proffesionals. It is like as if they never bothered to mature and be grown ups.

BINGO!  Thats why demo are very good.  You can get an idea if you would like the game without reading some

review that hates the game because its anime, wii game, 2d, etc.  Or just be like me and just buy/rent what you think is good.

If its not good just return/trade-in the game and move on with your life.

well for all we know most of them sites are still catering towards their biased fans.  Heck I quit going to gaming sites now because so easy recognizable as being biased and bullshit all the time.  I only use this site because you guys all search around the net for me and post the articles and I can click on the forum link I want to read about that talks about something I am interested in.

Versus going to some site that has millions of advertising all around and their front page littered with overhyped games i dont' give a shit about. and then to read about what their "professional" journalist has to bash the system i like.

I think i'll pass and just read about new releases and look at pictures or vids that get posted here.  plus the fanboys on this site entertain me to no end with their rediculous claims 

I don't believe anyone is perfectly unbiased.  Everyone has preferences, things they like and dislike.  As gamers, we develop these traits as we play games.  We hone in on elements in games we like and learn to recognize elements we dislike.  In doing so, we build a system of preferences just by playing games.

For example, say you play games with cutscenes for a while then you run into one with an extraordinarily long cutscene followed by a boss battle where you die.  Then you discover while replaying that you cannot skip the cutscene.  At that point, you might decide that the ability to skip cutscenes is beneficial to a game.  At that moment, your preferences have changed.  Games with unskippable cutscenes are now slightly less favorable compared to games with skippable ones.

This is bias.  It's not a bad thing though!  Our biases/preferences are what make us unique gamers.  They are what define our interests.  I want a reviewer to tell me those preferences.  I want to know that XYZ game is the kind that reviewer likes and ABC game isn't.  If I turn around and say well ABC game is one of my favorites then that doesn't make the reviewer bad but it does mean that we'd probably disagree on various points.  For example, say the reviewer hates turn-based RPG battle systems but I love them.  The problems he sees in them won't bother me at all, but he'll definitely review the game with those in mind.

Asking for a completely 100% unbiased reviewer is unreasonable.  Asking for a reviewer to be honest about his/her biases is not.