Ausgamers Give Battlefield Bad Company 9 out of 10 ... What The?

I like the Ausgamers site. Always have. With the addition of Steve Farrelly writing their reviews they had, I believe, become critical of the games they had been reviewing. So much so that I was actually reading their reviews rather than just going straight to the score and moving on. Let's face it. Games reviewing is nothing special. You hardly find prose you want to read and the content is usually pretty boring.

Today they published their review of Battlefield Bad Company and they gave the game 9 out of 10. If you hadn't guessed from some of the stuff that I have posted about the game Bad Company would have to be one of the worst games I have ever played. Without a doubt it is a relatively soulless shooter. Yes, the script is interesting and funny at times, however, the game is poorly implemented. How then does Ausgamers get to the point where they give this game 9 out of 10?

I honestly don't know. Anyone who has played the game and has a long history of gaming behind them would have to see the poorly constructed mechanics which run the game. This cannot be glossed over by a funny script ... or, maybe it can. As Dan at Ausgamers is quite taken with the game. He points out that the environment is destructible but does not point out that certain objects are not. These objects can get in the way of maneuvering vehicles to the point where it is frustrating.

What is the deal with these games? Frontlines Fuel of War I mistakenly purchased because it was given good reviews. I liked the first level of the game, but then found out that the rest of the game was sadly lacking. Definitely, alongside Bad Company, it was one of the worst shooters that I have played.

This is the greatest problem with the gaming industry. The reviewing process is fundamentally flawed. Games journalism has succumbed to the corporate interests which control them.