Please note that most of this post is speculation, before going ballistic about me making "baseless accusations". I figure most of you read reviews of games you're going to buy on major gaming sites (and in printed papers (?)) before actually making purchases. I'd also say reviews in general exercise at least some influence in what games end up being commercial successes as they make it easy for the customer to avoid buying duds and get the most out of the capital put up. As a result, corporations strive to please reviewers by developing products in accordance with their preferences. After all, as regular customers, shouldn't they reflect what the general customer would want in a certain product? And even though it might cost developers more to make products conform, wouldn't it pay for itself in the end as favorable reviews provide boosts in sales? Though the answer to these questions may seem obvious, I'd say there is a backside to this; when reviews become mere tools in marketing and publicity. The outfits the reviewers write for (and this is especially true for Internet sites) usually depend on advertising to make ends meet, and as a result, they'd naturally want a good deal of visitors. The easiest way of accomplishing this within this certain field (i.e. gaming) would be to provide the most reviews of new games as those are what a large portion of the consumer base is considering to buy and wants advice on. Now, step back for a moment and think about how reviewing outfits get ahold of products to review. That's right, they're supplied by the vendors, which is all fair and good, right? After all, why should reviewers have to pay for the products if their reviews end up providing hefty profits for the manufacturers? I'd say there is a glaring error in this as it creates a conflict of interest.The outfits end up being dependent on vendors supplying them new material to review in order to attract visitors and get advertising revenue. And as we all know, all humans are susceptible to greed. By favoring products from certain vendor, reviewing outfits will end up getting favored by the vendor in question (as in being offered exclusive previews and other things generating high volumes of visitors and, in turn, more money) and vendors will gain customers -- a win-win situation. Why be satisfied with less when there's more? Why be objective when there's more personal profit in not being so? I'd very much like some input on this or on subjectivity in general concerning reviewers (and in particular game reviewers). ... lastly, I'd like to excuse any grammatical error(s) I might've made while typing this up. By the time I'm done, I usually end up detesting my writing, which results in it not being checked (I s'pose it has something to do with my non-existent self-confidence, but that has nothing to do with this).