me.  Share this post  Link to post  Share on other sites  I think objectivity is important when reviewing, but that doesn't have to mean it's exclusive to having an oppinion, or even being subjective during the review. If you take anything to it's logical conclusion it becomes useless.  Journalism is a trade and as such comes with the same responsibility that all other jobs come with - the Spiderman clause - with great power comes great responsibility.  When Reviewing a game and scoring it, rather than critique or commenting, you are putting a line in the sand and giving it a place in the world. As a professional journalist, you will often be asked to review things that you wouldn't normally play, and while a lay person will give oppinion, I would expect a trained journalist to review and score a game on it's merits irrespective of their personal preference. They really should know the difference.  I wouldn't want it to be souless and without oppinion, but I would want it to be fair when it comes to scoring.  If you hate StarWars would it be fair to mark the graphics on the new battlefield down because you are sick of X-wings?  Similarly if you are obsessed with starwars is it fair to score Battlefield High on Value when it feels like its the absolute minimum they could get away with putting out and is totally lacking in that area.  I think IF you are scoring a game, as a journalist, it should be based on your knowledge of the medium and you should know what is "your feelings" and what is "the game".  If you can't give a fair score on what the game is, then you stick to commentary and critisism without score.  I've noticed both Rob and Danielle manage to do this even when they are just talking about a game, they both recognise when they love something because it appeals to them personally vs what is a good game in general. This is the sort of thing I think we need to see more of.  Share this post  Link to post  Share on other sites  I don't know any of the background here, only what was mentioned on the 'cast, but I really don't think it's that cut and dry. A Let's Play is, necessarily, a derivative work (and arguably a public performance) and a Let's Play with no commentary or other transformative qualities really doesn't have a leg to stand on in a legal copyright sense, or even in an "that's an OK thing to do" sense (In my opinion, YMMV).  If That Dragon, Cancer had been a film I think we'd all agree that sticking a recording of it up on YouTube is a pretty not cool thing to do, so I'm not sure why it's different for what seems to be a linear, narrative driven game. We go and see movies at the theatre "sight unseen" all the time, or we choose to wait until it's available for steaming or on DVD or whatever because we'd prefer to experience it that way, or maybe we decide not to watch the movie at all because it might upset us.  I