| TornadoCreator said:
Honestly tell me you don't think at least some of the critics giving out awards hadn't been bought out by M$, go on... and try to make it sound like you believe it. We're in a time where reviewers from the likes of IGN, GameSpot, Kotaku etc. may as well have the big name publishers logos tattooed on the foreheads. Microsoft got exposure because it paid for exposure. That's how it works. Sure, one or two of them may have genuinely meant it, but money speaks louder than integrity in this industry sadly. |
Actually the fact that the stuff with MS and Machinima came to light solidifies my confidence in unbiased reviewers. All gaming outlets were eager to jump that story. That's because exposing bribes is much more profitable than taking the bribes.
And yes I do think that most if not all of the professional reviewers of Titanfall were absolutely unbiased(though probably swayed a bit by the next gen hype). Even if some were paid it makes absolutely no difference. When 60 of 70 reviewers praise a game because of their unbiased opinion then that game must have something. The 10 paid reviewers also probably would've praised the game without the bribe.
Just turn it around. Have you heard anything negative from the game? MS and EA couldn't possible have successfully bribed all of them.
If you demand respect or gratitude for your volunteer work, you're doing volunteering wrong.
