Right off the bat I have to say that I have never been to a Review Event. I was invited to one for a Wii game, I think it was for the Conduit. I didn't have the heart to tell them that my site doesn't review Wii games or cover Nintendo news at all. So I just didn't RSVP. But apparently this kind of thing is not confined to third rate Wii titles. According to Michael McWhertor who wrote a great post on Kotaku, all the big games are doing it: Modern Warefare 2, Halo 3, Grand Theft Auto IV, etc..
The reason given in the article is that the publishers/developers are worried about the security of their game code and making sure that the media doesn't spoil the surprises in the game(somehow). I truly believe that the reason that most press go to these events is that if they had to purchase the game at retail they would never be able to review the game to be in tandem with the sites that DO go to these events. Which for most video game journalists these days this is a big deal. The review can't even be a day late or there will be lower traffic or potential loss of sponsorships.
I truly believe that SOME big sites might have an obligation to their subscribers to have this content up in a timely manner. However, if someone told me that I had 3 hours to play Tony Hawk Ride and I had to review it for my site. I think I would say,
"Well, it looks like garbage to me, so I'll just go with that."
Normally when I am pressured into reviewing something my first response is normally pretty bad. For instance, I've been playing Assassin's Creed 2 for review since a couple of days after the game's release. The game is a lot of fun, but it does have some problems that I won't go into here. But the first few hours of the game aren't very fun; unless of course you played the first game and still remember how it worked. Then you might be able to fly through the first few missions and get right to the meat of the game. I would say that if I had only had a limited amount of time to play the game I probably would have given a pass and told my readers not to buy it. And I would have been horribly wrong. This of course, can go the other way as well. The first few hours of Ninety-Nine Nights were some of the best I've had in a video game. Only by the time I reached the middle of the game, did I realize how horribly repetitive the game is and that it would probably not be getting a very good score. So what I'm trying to say here is that if you are only given a limited amount of time to review a game; the review will be colored by that fact.
I also don't believe that people playing a multiplayer only title can get an adequate judging of that game until it is out in the wild. It is certainly easy to get the gist of a game when it is being played by people who have spent hours not only building the game but playing it as well. In contrast, playing the same game; as most people will play it. With people who have only had the game a day or two. Would really change the reaction most people would have to the game.
This certainly raises a lot of questions about the voracity of reviews written during these events. Most of which got incredibly good scores. In fact, I'm told many of the reviewers who went to the Tony Hawk Ride Event gave the game excellent scores that by the rest of the journalistic community is just ridiculous and completely wrong.
What is the honest reviewer to do? Well, look at the event, look at the game, and decide if this is an appropriate venue to review the game. If not, don't go and purchase the game at retail. Then take the proper amount of time to review the game. To the gamer, I would say don't freak out if you don't get your review on launch day. There is probably a good reason that the review is taking longer. And keep your ears peeled during podcasts when game journalists start talking about how they went to that review event or other and see if the trend in scores seems to be different. Or better yet, do the general reviews from one site or another for AAA games all ways swing toward one end of the spectrum and is this contrary to your personal experience with those games? As history has proven the game industry is driven by the informed consumer and when it is not things can go horribly wrong for the market in general. I think that it is up to all gamers to make sure they are listening to the right people and not being fooled by people who simply want to be able to check their review off their "To Do List."
So I had said around the time that Halo 3 ODST was released that I wasn't going to review the game. Well, this isn't so much a review as my opinion of the game. This isn't a full review. Just a quick expression of my feelings about the game.
