When you get to see the reviews you will see objective assessments and you won't have someone who isn't interested in Wii Fit reviewing it, this was to discuss their opinion of what the companies are doing.

Of course it's supposed to be objective! These are professional journalists. Of course I'm going to go after them, because it's their job to care and it's their job to be objective.

What an awful excuse, Ck.  

The same people talking, in this shot right now -- are the reviewers! I've seen each and every one of them review DS and Wii games in the past, as well as 360 and PS3 games. These aren't separate bubbles.

If you objectively believe that Nintendo did a worse job -- if their presentations were weak or mishandled, if you don't believe their strategy will be succesfull -- then that is good journalism. If you feel that Nintendo did a bad job because you simply don't like non-hardcore gamers, that is poor journalism.

Well they need to be objective, but objective in the eyes of their consumers. 1up maybe used to be about being objective for all gamers but then they decided to be a little hard core so casual gamers stopped visiting causing 1up to become even more hard core causing the less hard core to stop visiting and so on leading to the decline you mentioned bodhesavata. So long as they make money it's no problem.

They are basically chasing the hard core audience the same way various liberal media outlets (well, essentially most of them) are chasing liberal viewers. If 1up keeps it up they could end up like many media outlets and drive away so many visitors that quality of reporting drops causing a slow permanent decline.

Either way, they still should be a little more objective. Hard core gamers would be a lot better off hearing reality from their media of choice. Then they wouldn't have meltdowns when they discover no one else thinks Sony had an awesome show and most think Nintendo had a great show.

People are people those are their opinions. Iam sure many gamers are not in love with what Nintendo is going for just like they sure as shiet were and are not happy with the PS3 price.

The show has always had a strong MS bias but they were usually very Nintendo friendly untill now. The fat dude in a hat and the shane guy i think thats his name have always been sony friendly well more then the others.

Normally I'd agree with you -- whatever sells is, by definition, good capitalism -- but there actually are some pretty well-agreed upon rules in journalism. Theoretically, journalism is supposed to be about truth and fairness as much as it is about money, if not more so. 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Journalistic_ethics

Obviously those aren't legally binding, but they are almost universally recognized (enough that they have been codified in Wiki form). Right at the top, it says: "While various existing codes have some differences, most share common elements including the principles of — truthfulness, accuracy, objectivity, impartiality, fairness and public accountability"

Now, I totally agree that the journalistic code of ethics is, by many, considered boring, and that in reality many outlets consider their point to make money, not to actually be good journalists. I recognize that. I'm not saying that such tactics are illegal, nor am I even saying they can't make money: my point is that it's simply poor journalism, regardless of whether it makes money or not. 

Again, I know 1up is not alone in this regard. I know they aren't the first, nor the last, nor the worst. But saying there is a lot of other awful journalism doesn't change the fact that this is also awful journalism.  

Stop.Right.There.

These aren't just people expressing their opinions, these are professional gaming journalists doing a professionally distributed taping. As I'm just a schmoe on an internet forum, in a totally unprofessional setting, I can express my opinions however I want. The PC platform is my personal favorite gaming platform. See? That's okay.

But the second I become a professional journalist in a professional setting, the rules change. I don't get to say that I don't care about a huge subsection of readers or their interests. That's certainly legal -- it's hard to be put in jail for any journalistic faux pas -- but it is hilariously inappropriate to make such statements.

 You can rest assured that a person who doesn't like a certain type of game doesn't review it. I thought you could have figured this out on your own. It's pretty logical :)

Just check the reviews of the casual games that are being reviewed very well on 1up.com and stop complaining that one guy expressed his opinion of casual games, a guy who isn't going to be reviewing them anyway....

Also if you are so offended by 1up why don't you just avoid it then? Since your opinion of hardcore games is supposedly that they are for teens (Even though you were very excited when the same kind of violent RE game is coming on the Wii) then you should avoid game sites because they are inferior to you.

Except I've seen Ryan O'Donnel review Wii games! I've seen him specifically say: "I don't like the Wii." Here you go:

 http://www.1up.com/do/minisite?pager.offset=3&cId=3145462

Episode 74. Right at the beginning, point blank, he says: "I don't really like the Wii." And yet he's in there reviewing Wii games in several shows (he also states that he doesn't like the DS in episode 62) . Heck, he's reviewing Nintendo's press conference in the very show we're discussing! 

As I've said already, that's obviously legal, and may even be profitable, but it's terrible journalism.