Game Journalist Can’t Decide Whether To Take Cash For Good Review Or Take Cash For Bad Review
Respected games journalist Caleb Harris remains paralysed with indecision this morning, unable to decide whether it would be more profitable for him to write a good review or a bad review of the latest AAA release.
As the clock ticks down towards embargo, Harris is weighing his options: accept the oversized novelty cheque from the publisher in exchange for writing gushing praise about the game, or rely on the guaranteed sweet advertising revenue from writing a hate-filled, negative review that everyone will rush to read?
“If the game is bad, the publisher will hand me more of those lovely brown hessian sacks with dollar signs on them,” he mused thoughtfully.
“But if the game is good, and everyone else writes a good review,” he continued, “I can write a really negative piece with a misleading, clickbait headline to trick people into coming to my failing website so I can cash in on the ad revenue.”
“Plus that would absolutely tank the Metacritic score, which is something real games journalists like me enjoy doing,” he added.
This gut-wrenching decision is yet another layer of frustration for Harris, who doesn’t even like video games, and certainly won’t be playing this one for more than a few hours before making up his mind.
“This is the last thing I need,” he moaned. “It’s hard enough figuring out how to spend the thousands of dollars that will soon appear in my own personal bank account without needing to waste time playing the stupid game.”
“This is a real, genuine problem that games journalists actually face, and I am one,” he concluded.