Joseph Olin, the president of the Academy of Interactive Arts & Sciences, has taken a moment to spew vitriol all over the game journalism industry. In a recent interview, Olin claimed that, "My pet peeve is that game reviewers are lazy," claiming there are "a lot of game critics, but very little critical analysis."

"How can you review a game, how can you give a comment about a game like Grand Theft Auto 4, that has 40+ hours or more of gameplay, if you’ve only spend two-and-a-half to three hours playing it? It would be like reviewing a movie but only seeing the opening, first reel. I don’t think that’s fair, or is it accurate."

Well, Mr. Olin, I would tend to agree with you if that’s how game reviews work, but they don’t. While I can’t speak for the industry as a whole, every self-respecting reviewer I know plays a game through in its entirety before reviewing it or, if that proves to be impossible (such as the case in Grand Theft Auto 4) plays as much as possible while still being able to make a timely review. In either case, I don’t know anyone who spends less than 10-15 hours on a game before writing a review.

Another issue Olin conveniently omits is the fact that publishers determine when review copies are released, and they often do so less than a week before the game is made available to the general public. Thus, to remain relevant in the flood of information, outlets must get their reviews up at the same time as a game’s release. If you want to point fingers at who’s causing reviews to be rushed, look at the gatekeepers, the ones who wait until the last possible second to allow their products to be judged.

Finally, the movie analogy is a horrible one, and an argument the gaming press derides at every turn. Movies are, at most, a 2-3 hour passive experience in which the reviewer has no control over the characters, the narrative, or any other aspect of the experience. Also, movies are normally screened weeks in advance of their debut, giving critics plenty of time to reflect on what they’ve seen, draw analogies and parallels, and genuinely determine the worth of the film. Games don’t have that luxury. Receiving, testing, completing, and writing about a 20-hour game in the span of a few days is quite harried and hectic; the time for reflection is minimal. Also, the whole experience is interactive, much different from what one would expect in a film.

So in short, I would put forth that Mr. Olin is wrong and game reviewers aren’t lazy but rather he is misinformed. Of course, it’s easy to take shots at this side of the industry, since we have little recourse. Perhaps next time he’ll do a little more research before making blanket statements about an entire industry.

- Via GamesIndustry.biz