I've been away from this site for a little while... I feel like I've missed something here

Pretty much every single game publisher gives out free game copies to reviewers, in advance. That's why you get reviews before release date.

You'll also notice that every single major/recognized game reviewer does review all of Nintendo's major games, in advance (meaning that they got their copies early), despite the fact that very poor reviews *do* exist. Nintendo has never speceifically threatened anyone that they would stop providing review copies. It is also completely unthinkable for any publisher to ever exclude the likes of IGN, Polygon, Gamespot, etc... in sent review copies, and these big outlets know that much.

What concerns the smaller, less recognized (wouldn't appear on Metacritic, for example) organizations, there is most definitely a certain implied pressure to please the hand that feeds them - but this implied pressure is equally existant for all production companies.

Absolutely. Since this is just a topic about a particular person not liking certain games or companies, I can let pretty much all opinions slide...  Since they are most likely not going to do harm. Validity is required when you use rational objectivity to describe your opinion.  What the user said was valid. It's up to him on how much he values it. 

I don't agree with that. It may be impossible to be completely objective, but biases can be set aside.

Hmm.

No, I don't believe they can. 

Everyone has their own personal experiences, so it's impossible to set aside bias.

Any argument or observation we make is reliant on a certain number of statements we consider true without further justification (and these statements tend to be much more specific and much less fundemental than we would hope them to be) - these axioms can be different, between 2 individuals, which can lead to different conclusions. This difference is what I what describe as a bias.

Saying that one can be without bias implies that there exist fundemental, unquestionable truths with which we may form our justifications - that cannot be, most certainly not for something as subjective, emotion-based as the quality of art, or the ethical faults of a company.

Hmm... i see.

Yeah, i would consider a bias as for example a love for X company. But when comparing X, Y and Z in certain aspects you should be able to set aside that "blinding" feeling in order to acess the situation. This pov cannot always be totally objective because of that love. But yeah... dunno if i'd call it a bias unless it had an almost irrational weight in the acessment. That irrational weight should be something that can be set aside.

It's a bit like calling a slight preference a bias. A bias is more significance than that in my opinion. But, i see what you mean.

I mean, it's obviously not possible for any of us to be 100% objective as we are humans, but it doesn't mean we can't try to get close. The pursuit is still commendable.

Post of the thread.

Even if it goes without saying, some people need to be reminded that. 

/thread

Now call a mod to close this flame war.