| Kantor said: Wherever possible, a sequel to a game your publication has reviewed should be reviewed by the same person. That's our policy, and it should be EuroGamer's policy. (1) What do you do if the reviewer of Uncharted 2 adored it, and you didn't? It's pretty clear from the review of Uncharted 3 that the reviewer didn't adore Uncharted 2, because everything he said about excessive cinematics and control being out of the player's hands applies to Uncharted 2 as well. In the event that it has to be reviewed by someone else, that person does have to take the Uncharted 2 review into account. (2) |
1. There is absolutely no reason for this to be the policy of Eurogamer. Two different people will have two different opinions, and there is absolutely nothing wrong with having two opinions put out by two people so long as it's made clear who those people are - and in this case it's very clear indeed, as each review is signed off on by the person who wrote it.
2. Reviews are not products or commodities meant to be targeted at specific audiences, they're opinion pieces meant to communicate the pros and cons and overall picture of a game viewed through the lens of a particular value set. You're not writing it for the guys who love Uncharted, you're writing it for everyone, including the 200 million gamers who do not play Uncharted games. As such the only thing thatm atters is the perspective of the person writing it, and making your piece different to suit the opinion of someone else entirely is dishonest journalism and irresponsible reviewing, because it does not communicate the value of the game as you see it.
This review was fine as a piece of writing and communicated valid criticism. It's fine not to agree with it and even debate the points of contention, but anyone who attacks the integrity of the review itself or questions the process behind the review is badly missing the point.
