Jophiel wrote:
Because everyone who strenuously disagrees with the "movement" does so on the same grounds: that it's a front for misogyny.
You don't have the counterpoint being "I'm opposed to ethics in gaming journalism" because no one has that stance. At best, you have people saying "Gaming journalism is a stupid thing to care about". But you don't really want a show where one guy is for something and other side says "That's dumb, this topic is dumb, I'm just here for the free coffee".
I'm sure it's not very entertaining at all. But if you're going to get enough momentum going to actually fix what you think is a problem you need to make the case. Let's start here:
1) Big gaming companies aren't going to permit a reviewer to continue to have early access to their games if they give poor reviews, so you're never going to get "balanced" reviews of upcoming games. The Companies simply are holding all the cards at this point, and there's isn't enough money in "game journalism" to offset that.
2) The changes aren't necessary because there are already tons of player-reviews out there. I can go to nearly any game-review site and see hundreds or thousands of player-reviews on any released game, along side the "professional" reviews.
3) People mostly rely on "gaming news" to get updates and sneak-previews of upcoming games. There's no "ethics" involved here, as they really just want to see a couple of screenshots, a short video, and hear an update from the developers anyway.
4) Only a small number of people who play the game actually read the reviews before hand, so any concern about the companies "hyping" their game is overblown.
5) The amount of ethical conflict there is present in game journalism doesn't warrant this kind of reaction.
6) Things like movie reviews aren't really fair and balanced either, and that industry gets along just fine.
Just off the top of my head...