It’s all well and good to say that developers have no incentive to provide poor review copies, but it happens – I’ve seen it. And, if it happens a lot from prominent developers, there is a temptation for the reviewer to simply write off “small” problems as things that will get fixed before retail release.

Not that I would ever accuse my colleagues at PCG of this sort of professional malfeasance, but it happens.

The problem here is that a print outlet that has offered little more than exclusive reviews for many years is finding itself unable to keep up with the internet for reviews. Monthly print publications always have a problem with timeliness, which means that you can’t target the pre-order audience. And, though I’m a broken record on this point, this is why print has to move past the preview/review mindset unless they can offer something unique or insightful to those forms.

PCG has become the “column magazine” to me, but as much as I like many of the writers there, it’s getting harder for me to recommend it as a window into what is happening in PC game today.

This post will fall on deaf ears as usual, but I felt obligated to say something after I gave PCG the benefit of the doubt in response to the recent issue’s editorial.

The successful merging of journalistic integrity and video games is a rare thing, and nobody should continue to make excuses that reference the “target demographic”. They will read anything.

What bothers me is that being the only PC Gaming magazine left in North America, they have the opportunity to create a new standard, but they won’t. Publishing casual reviews for casual gamers seems to be the order of the day, and as long as it continues to work financially they are going to continue to do it.

I know I’m wasting my time complaining about this stuff, but it makes me feel better.

I think I felt a little spittle on that one. =o

It seems to me that PC Gamer Magazine attempts to bring us the news of the gaming industry. This includes reviews of current games. News, by its very nature, is largely incompatible with the timing of a monthly periodical. Factor in the ridiculously short attention span and novelty demanding nature of the magazine’s chief target market, and you have one hell of a lot of pressure to hit the sweet spot of being relevant, informative, AND entertaining.

Journalistic integrity takes an awful beating at the hands of commerce.