Gaming journalism has long been a cornerstone of the gaming industry, serving as a bridge between developers and players. It was once a trusted source of information, holding developers accountable and helping players make informed decisions about their purchases. However, recent events have exposed a troubling shift in the industry, where personal politics and ideologies are increasingly influencing game reviews and coverage. This change has led to a loss of trust and relevance, leaving many to wonder what happened to professionalism in game journalism.
Dear developers, please stop making games solely for critics and reviews. Stop pushing your games into oblivion just to appease certain audiences, and start making games for gamers, the people who are spending their hard-earned money to buy your games. The reason I started Indie-Games.eu wasn’t to criticize or talk negatively about games, but rather to highlight the indie side of the industry, which is filled with so many beautiful, well-crafted games that never get the recognition they deserve.
Recently, a games journalist (from IGN) made headlines by openly admitting on social media that they would reduce the scores of future games if those games did not align with their personal politics or ideology. This shocking admission confirmed what many players have suspected for years: that some game reviews are no longer about the quality of the game but about pushing a specific narrative or agenda.
Lack of professionalism and consequences for the gaming industry
This lack of professionalism is not just an isolated incident. It reflects a broader issue within the industry, where some journalists prioritize their personal beliefs over their responsibility to provide fair and unbiased reviews. When journalists use their platform to propagate their ideologies, it not only damages their credibility but also reflects poorly on their employers and fellow writers.
The consequences of this shift are far-reaching. Players, who once relied on game journalism to guide their purchasing decisions, are increasingly turning to alternative sources such as YouTubers, Twitch streamers, and independent reviewers. These creators often provide more authentic and relatable perspectives, free from the influence of corporate interests or ideological biases.
For developers, the pressure to cater to the preferences of journalists rather than players has led to a creative wasteland. Many triple-A games feel formulaic and uninspired, as studios prioritize compliance with ideological standards over innovation and creativity. This has resulted in a growing disconnect between developers and their audience, with players feeling that their needs and preferences are no longer being understood or met.
Because of this, gaming journalism is suffering. One of the most significant issues in modern game journalism is the lack of diversity in thought. Many major gaming outlets are owned by the same corporate entities, leading to a unified and self-reinforcing narrative. This echo chamber stifles critical thinking and discourages dissenting voices, creating an environment where only certain perspectives are deemed acceptable.
Gaming journalism is at a turning point – can it regain its credibility?
It’s reached the point where even Elon Musk, a billionaire who could probably buy out the entire gaming media industry, has called out how “garbage” gaming journalism is. And I can’t blame him. Gaming journalism has never had clear guidelines or a professional pathway, you can’t study it at university, and there’s a striking lack of scientific research or academic articles on the subject. It’s an industry built almost entirely by enthusiastic individuals who love games and enjoy writing about them.
Traditionally, the Westley-MacLean model suggests that journalists serve as gatekeepers in the mass communication process. Due to their privileged role, they are expected to report news objectively and set aside their personal biases when entering the newsroom. This principle, however, often feels absent in gaming journalism. This is why I find the theory of framing particularly relevant to gaming journalism.
In the social sciences, framing encompasses how individuals, groups, and societies organize, perceive, and communicate about reality. In gaming media, framing shapes how games are presented to audiences, whether as artistic masterpieces, technical achievements, or controversial products. The way gaming journalists frame stories can significantly influence public perception, making it crucial for them to balance enthusiasm with objectivity, even in an industry driven by passion and fandom.
The gaming industry is at a crossroads. Players are no longer willing to tolerate biased reviews or ideological preaching. They want honest, fair, and professional coverage that respects their intelligence and prioritizes their needs. For game journalism to regain its relevance, it must return to its roots: informing players, holding developers accountable, and celebrating the creativity and diversity of the medium.
It's time for gaming journalism to return to its roots
There are still great journalists and writers who uphold these values, but they are often overshadowed by the toxic few who prioritize their personal agendas over their professional responsibilities. It’s time for the industry to hold itself accountable and demand higher standards of professionalism and integrity. Another issue is that smaller outlets like ours are struggling, as larger media organizations overshadow the work we do.
Game journalism used to mean something. It was a trusted source of information, a voice for players, and a check on the industry. But as personal politics and ideologies have taken center stage, that trust has eroded. The recent admission by a journalist that they would manipulate review scores based on their beliefs is just the latest example of how far the industry has strayed from its purpose. It’s time for game journalism to return to its roots.
English (UK) 
Hrvatski
1 Comment