Think of the term “Games Journalist.” What comes to mind?

If you are like most gamers, you will have many possible descriptors, and very few of them will be positive. They are lazy, incompetent, biased, inconsistent, ignorant, dispassionate, overworked, and/or whatever “woke” means this week. Each of those descriptors is based on a slew of accusations, of varying veracity.

Before we begin, my credentials: I am an active games journalist who has occupied a variety of roles over the last 4 years, from guide writing to reviews to video production, at a small, guide-focused gaming outlet. Before that, I was a freelance writer for several years, and — of course — I’ve always been an avid gamer. Additionally, I have numerous contacts in and out of my outlet who have a decade-plus of experience, who I’ve conferred with about this article.

The purpose of this article, then, is to explore the many reasons people have for hating games journalists, determine the accuracy of those claims, and try to suss out what should be done (and how that differs from what likely will be done). For clarity, I am dividing the many critiques of games journalism into 5 primary categories, which we will tackle one at a time:

• Journalism is Dying: Games Journalism is just following larger, worse trends.
• Games Journalism is Biased: And those biases impact coverage heavily.
• Games Journalists Don’t Do X: Because you have to have some expectations.
• Game Criticism Sucks: Reviewers, specifically, are the ones who are bad.
• You Don’t Engage With Games Journalism: Sometimes, it’s on you.

Do note that, for each point, I will label whether it is Valid, Somewhat Valid, or Not Valid, for the sake of simplicity and readability. I recognize that this does scrub away some of the nuance, though each point should be clear enough to provide some of it. Note that by using “Not Valid,” I only mean to imply that an issue is not systemic, not that it has never occurred.

With that out of the way, we have a lot to cover; let’s get started with broader arguments based on the idea that journalism, as a whole, is dying.

Journalism Is Dying

There is a common belief, bolstered by… Well, the modern world that we live in that journalism as a whole in the West (the only market where I have any expertise) has cratered in quality in modern times. Trust in media, whether it be mainstream or social, is at an all-time low. And games journalism, — though lower in stakes — is no exception. The following reasons come from that perspective: that games journalism sucks because all modern journalism sucks.

• Games Journalists Chase Clicks: Valid
• Games Journalism Doesn’t Make Enough Money to Be Good: Valid
• Most Journalists Aren’t Experts: Not Valid
• Games Journalists Do Nothing Useful: Not Valid

Games Journalists Chase Clicks

Guilty as charged.

This, the most common criticism of all online media — whether it be written or video — is just a fundamental fact about how modern journalism works. Clickbait headlines, sensationalist stories, and interest-pulling thumbnails are all part of this reality, and they do all contribute to an overall lowering of quality across all news (and, in fact, all content) online.

Unfortunately, unless everyone starts getting really cool with subscriptions again really fact, it’s also just the only way that any journalistic outlet can make money. The modern web runs on ads, and ads pay more for content that gets clicks.

I would also caution that this reason for the rise of journalistic ineptitude has less of an effect than you might think. While those click-generating techniques are certainly annoying, and can let some truly awful outlets keep afloat, the content that comes after those clicks is still important — if it sucks, viewers will leave, and the piece of content will be deranked on search engines. This means that, while there are negative consequences of click-fueled journalism, it still doesn’t explain just how dismal the reputation of journalists is a whole.

This issue is Valid, so what is the solution? Honestly, there isn’t a great one—unless people suddenly get cool with subscriptions again, we’re stuck with this system.

Games Journalism Doesn’t Make Enough money to be Good

This is a more specific version of above argument: the idea that, while all journalism has to just barely pull through via use of advertisements and click-generating tactics, games journalism is in an especially rough place because games journalism barely makes any money and so needs to fish even more desperately for errant clicks.

¹. Meanwhile, Condé Nast, the publisher of Vanity Fair, Vogue, and the New Yorker, makes approximately $1.7 billion dollars in revenue annually². So, yes, gaming news simply does have limited resources to work with. The biggest fish in our pond would be guppies in the ocean.

That said… Gaming is the largest entertainment medium (and art, ahem) on the planet. Yet, its journalistic side remains tiny, fragmented, and widely disliked However, given other reasons on this list, I have my doubts that any influx of cash would do much for the industry. Rather, the lack of money in games journalism is a symptom of larger issues—it makes things worse, but it isn’t the root cause.

This issue is Valid, so what is the solution? The solution to this is, quite simply, for games journalism outlet to do better. Fix other issues on this list, and more resources will pool. Though games journalism will never be as lucrative as other kinds of reporting.

Most Journalists Aren’t Experts

This is the weakest of the broad-scale complaints, though there will be more specific versions of this issue that will hold more weight. But, as a whole, most journalists working today — even in the games industry — have some expertise that qualifies them for their position. Additionally, a creative industry like gaming is one that does have — and should have — a lower barrier to entry than more technical fields. While there are technical niches within gaming, the idea that you need a degree or substantial expertise in order to write about a subset of art and culture is… Well, elitist.

To give credence, it never hurts to have greater expertise in a subject, and I myself not only have a relevant degree and several years experience in professional writing (and amateur game design), but I also want to learn more, gain greater credentials, and generally improve my craft. But, again, I would not hold the entire industry to that standard, nor would it be better for it. Not only this, but games journalists do often have direct access to more specific experts like game developers, publishers, and tech enthusiasts, for when expertise is required (as can be the case for more advanced journalism).

This issue is Not Valid, so why do people think this? People think that journalists — and games journalists specifically — lack expertise as an explanation for why they disagree. If someone agrees with a journalist, this aspect will never be questioned — it is only questioned because appealing to authority (or lack thereof) is a quick way to dismiss an argument one dislikes.

Games Journalists Do Nothing Useful

I mean that’s, like… Your opinion, man.

But yeah, even if we accept that video games are important to cover — which is not a given, even as someone who thinks they are — it is undeniable that most coverage of games is not exactly earth shaking. The vast majority of advertisement money comes from game guides, and then most other coverage is news that can be covered by the headline (“Game X releases Update Y”, “Studio B announces Game B”).

Interestingly, it is the exceptions to those categories that people have a problem with, however. I’ve never heard someone complain about typos in The Gamer‘s guide to get every strawberry in Celeste⁴, nor the excessive editorializing done on Rock, Paper, Shotgun’s article on Baldur’s Gate 3’s Patch 7⁵. No, it is the relatively rare journalism that actually does verge on what people call “important” — reviews, previews, editorials, interviews — that people seem to have a probelm with. If your main critique of games journalism is that it’s useless, then why not critique all the useless fluff that it produces?

This issue is Not Valid, so why do people think this? Because it’s an easy way to dismiss are argument you are losing to say “it doesn’t matter anyway.” This critique only has merit if you don’t believe games are important, or if you target actually unimportant coverage first. The former describes someone who has no stake in this conversation, the latter describes someone who is trying to hide their own biases. That is all.

That is it for Part 1 of this 5-part series. Come back for the next post, where we will explore arguments about bias in games journalism. Try to keep an open mind.

1. According to Zippia.com. https://www.zippia.com/ign-careers-661189/revenue/.
2. According to Zippia.com. https://www.zippia.com/conde-nast-careers-19968/revenue/.
3. Custom by Cody. “This GAME is getting a HUGE Update.” YouTube. February 4th, 2025. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MEUnRygl_Is.
4. Blackman, Talisa. “Celeste: How To Get Every Strawberry.” TheGamer. October 14th, 2023. https://www.thegamer.com/celeste-all-strawberries-guide/.
5. Reuben, Nic. “Delayed Baldur’s Gate 3 patch notes reckon you’ve all been eating too much delicious, irresistible soap.” Rock, Paper, Shotgun. July 23rd, 2024. https://www.rockpapershotgun.com/delayed-baldurs-gate-3-patch-notes-reckon-youve-all-been-eating-too-much-delicious-irresistible-soap. Also, this article is actually really good. No shade, Nic.