Speaking of suspected illegitimate game coverage, Variety's Ben Fritz had something to say about IGN's recent exclusive first review of Grand Theft Auto IV. While quite distinctly giving the benefit of the doubt, he asks this:

"I'm not saying that "GTA IV" doesn't deserve a 10, or "Mass Effect" its 9.75. But how can we trust a videogame review when the outlet running it has been given a major commercial favor -- one that's worth money -- from the publisher of the game? You never see a paper or TV station getting special access from a movie studio or TV network or book publisher to run an "exclusive review." Imagine the L.A. Times or Roger Ebert touting their "exclusive review of 'Iron Man.'" Absurd, right? So why do we tolerate it for a videogame?"

It's an entirely legitimate point, and for the sake of fairness in the industry, there's really no reason one publication should be granted access to a game earlier than any other. Though an even earlier review was removed courtesy of Rockstar, it's still somewhat suspicious.

Fritz says in the name of striving for this fairness, "any self-respecting publication with a "Grand Theft Auto IV" review ready should be running it now" (so as to defy the agreement between company and publication).

In all honesty, I find it more than just a little disheartening something as seemingly innocent as gaming can't even remain uncorrupted. It's games, people. Games. You know, those things you'd pop in the plastic box thing hooked up to your TV as a child and play for hours on a Saturday morning? Those were the good days. Now we have multi-million dollar budgets, retailers and developers dying left and right, companies buying out coverage and media outlets gladly happy to accept. Oh video game industry, where did you go wrong?

All I have to say is, thank gosh for Metacritic, where probably only 50% of the reviews are tainted.