Previews, Reviews, Commentary and lies.
The games press has been dubbed as “corrupt, lazy and fundamentally stupid.” Source writer Kieron Gillan tells us this and also gives us an insight as to why these views may be held about the games press. He highlights key issues that game journalists today face which fundamentally make it difficult to write a good article about a subject that truly deserves it without cutting corners. He expresses a lack of time being a big issue, and that riders simply cannot spend too long on any given subject as the deadlines for most magazines and articles are tight.
This results in unrefined and often rushed reviews and commentary making its way as a staple in game magazines, videos, journals etc. Without the commercially driven pressure on deadlines I'm sure many journalists and reviewers would like to refine their opinions on the topic they are talking about. Of course there is always going to be reviewers who simply Write decent review but maybe without the turnaround pressure the games press would have a better name overall.
That mainly applies to the commercial sector of game press. Such as magazines. Certainly in my experience I have owned and read many gamer mags and can agree that not all articles seem worth the buy to read… but for the most part they are better than what I could find on the internet and more concise.
On the other hand there is other forces driving the games press and ranking systems are an important part of their roles in influencing games sales. What is more, where does an objective ranking system fit in if anywhere?