Let me counter not by talking about Play, but about GameFan. At the time, we were always being told the exact same thing. And, let's be honest - sometimes, our scores were totally off. (I gave SamSho IV for the NeoGeo a 98/100... yikes.) But, we never proclaimed to be "profesional gaming journalists" or expert reviewers or anything like that; we were gamefans, we loved games, and we loved talking about them. Instead of saying "here's what's good, here's what's bad, here's the final result of those two," we'd often go into the parts of the game that we loved, that made the game enjoyable to whatever level it was. Our style was more casual, like one gamer to another, saying what they could look forward to from the game. Is that the proper way to do a proper review? Maybe not. But then, like now, there were plenty of other magazines out there going down that route, so we wanted to be an alternative, a magazine where even if you didn't agree with our opinions, you knew we loved video games and were at least passionate about what we wrote. .... So, you know, "going soft" on a review could also mean "appreciating the things it did right, and judging it according to the enjoyment you'll get from it." It all depends on how you look at things. (And, btw, I'm not saying that is Play's official stance, or my official stance. I'm just saying.)
Log in to comment