Friday, December 12, 2008

integrity v. credibility

Kotaku posted about a New York Times piece on Spike TV's imminent Video Game Awards. I have no interest in watching the VGAs, nor do I care to read about Spike PR guy Geoff Keighley making questionable analogies and then insisting that it is what I want to see. Still, the news is interesting because this show no one cares about is effectively trying to address one of current game journalism's inherent flaws, namely the massive conflict of interest involved in publishing a review for a game framed by gigantic advertisements for the very same game.

There will always be a place for the enthusiast sites that cover every rumor and every game with unrestrained zeal, but what step does game journalism have to take to become "respectable" in the eyes of the mainstream? I think it starts when games are covered as thoroughly as are movies, but where do we go from there, and how do we get there in the first place?