| Nem said: Welcome to the sham that are commercial reviews. Learn to ignore. The excuse that its a different reviewer is weak aswell. A publication has to mantain consistency. Its not today, fanboy of system A gets to review game from system B and tomorrow fan from system B reviews the same game but it scores higher even though its a worse version. It isnt the publication of journalist X, its IGN. But welll... we already knew they were bad. Too much water. |
That's utterly ridiculous. The moment an editor tells a writer to write a review based on someone else's opinion, that's when credibility is lost. Telling the reviewer the score they need to hit based on another work would be a failure of journalistic integrity. Any writer worth reading would refuse immediately, and rightfully so. That's a horrible, awful suggestion. I'm sure some editors might tell a reviewer to lie for the sake of "consistency" but, as a consumer, that's something I would not accept if I knew it was taking place. I have far more respect for an editor that lets a writer write their own work without pre-setting the outcome in advance.
