Homeworld: Deserts of Kharak Review

To See A World In a Grain of Sand

We cling to the Kapisi. Battered and fragile, it is our home now. It is a massive aircraft carrier crawling through the endless shifting sands that stretch across our planet, Kharak. Thousands of miles from home, on a fool's errand to find some MacGuffin that might save us from the expanding deserts, we are alone. When we launched this expedition, traitors and zealots destroyed everything we left behind; our only choice is to press on.

Homeworld: Deserts of Kharak, despite its otherworldly setting, creates believable drama through stellar writing. With emotive subtlety, layered characters, and a pervasive, all-consuming dread, it cinches the heart and holds you in duress. You are alone and the Kapisi is all you have. Kharak excels in generating hopelessness, and much of that comes through in the muted desperation of its battle-worn characters. They've all fought for as long as they can remember, and you can hear that in their speech. A sly comment on the radio is met with a warm rigidity. It's strange, but affecting to hear the essence of humanity underneath characters' military-forged demeanor.

Your ship is your mobile base of operations in this fleet-based strategy game. Like others of its sort, you gather resources, conduct research, and build out units, turrets, and weapons of mass destruction to field against your opponents in battle. The campaign follows the Kapisi on its journey to find a powerful artifact. At first, the ship is something to protect. It is slow, almost painfully so, but it grows with you. As you push on through the campaign, you earn and unlock more abilities for your benevolent monster. Much like the progression of the StarCraft 2 sub-series, it's beautiful and satisfying to watch the machine you spend so long guarding and protecting mature into a weapon of terrifying power.

Kharak chisels the genre down to its bare essentials and iterates upon them with tenacious precision, making for a real-time strategy masterpiece. Anyone familiar with the strategy genre understands the broad rock-paper-scissors planning that forms its backbone. While games like Starcraft are expansive and use 20 or more unit types, Kharak cuts these down to only seven fundamentals--resource gatherers, fast-assault vehicles, tanks, artillery, cruisers, aircraft, and your carrier. Each is identifiable with a simple quadrilateral, which distills a chic language to communicate only what you need. "These diamonds are flashing red, I should send my squares to help." It sounds silly, but it helps you stay informed and constantly engaged.

The strategic map shows the sensor ranges of your fleet and perfectly summarizes the complexity of a warzone.
The strategic map shows the sensor ranges of your fleet and perfectly summarizes the complexity of a warzone.

That's important, because your opponents are fast and vicious. You have to develop your strategies on multiple fronts all at once. It's a tough task to get everything up-and-running by the five minute mark, but it's critical. Without clear and concise communication between player and game, that sort of rapid expansion and management is all but impossible, but Kharak nails it.

Even if you're not following the battlefield's visuals, constant radio chatter will help you stay informed, too. And once again, sharp writing and shrewd acting both sell the world and help you play better. Whether it's a commander calmly-yet-emphatically telling you that you've lost Control Group One, or that scanners have identified incoming enemy tanks, every snippet works to break down the walls between you and the game. Certain clips are repeated too, organically highlighting their import. These touches, while insignificant keep your mind where it needs to be--planning and strategizing.

There aren’t any massive research or technology trees here. Unit and carrier upgrades are still important, but the focus of minute-to-minute management falls onto balancing unit types and their position. Each unit has a clear advantage and clear strength, and only the mighty carrier is a jack-of-all-trades. The catch there is that it resembles a fusion of the King and Queen in chess. Spearheading an assault with your carrier is a powerful tactic that can turn the tide of almost any battle, but once you lose it, you're done.

When you’re not directing the carrier’s production or resource-gathering, battles revolve around the light-heavy-ranged trio of basic units. You have to push each front and keep several squads around to guard explorers as you seek more resources to build up your forces. From there, you'll jump to light aircraft and small land-cruisers, and that's it. These developments are important, but the speed with which you can hit the technological cap means that balancing your approach and grabbing resources is more crucial than ever.

Cutscenes are sharp and communicate the story of Kharak beautifully.
Cutscenes are sharp and communicate the story of Kharak beautifully.

Refined simplicity does have its shortcomings though. And Kharak is somewhat bare-bones. The campaign, while the most compelling story I've seen in a strategy title in years, is only about ten hours long. Multiplayer and skirmish modes only have a handful of playable maps too. With only two factions and no integrated modding support, some players may soon exhaust all that Kharak has to offer. Though, if that's the price of such an ingenious game, then I'll pay it.

Homeworld was always about loneliness. It was always about clarity and focus. Kharak isn't new in that regard, but it is special. It shows us that when you get things right -- and excel -- that formula isn't easy to exhaust. Kharak does its part to add to that, though. Its use of voice acting and efficient visuals is a brilliant addition that's far from superficial. It helps narrow the scope of what you need to manage, so that it can load you up with as much as your brain can handle. It’s a fast, daunting experience that's tough to shake, making Kharak as intoxicating as Homeworld has ever been.

The Good

  • Gripping, pervasive atmosphere
  • Exceptional writing and acting sells a tight military drama
  • Focused play drops all but the bare essentials
  • Masterfully executed design

The Bad

  • Too few skirmishes and multiplayer maps

About the Author

Daniel spent 10 hours playing Homeworld: Deserts of Kharak's campaign, and another 15 hours in multiplayer and skirmish matches.
132 Comments  RefreshSorted By 
GameSpot has a zero tolerance policy when it comes to toxic conduct in comments. Any abusive, racist, sexist, threatening, bullying, vulgar, and otherwise objectionable behavior will result in moderation and/or account termination. Please keep your discussion civil.

Avatar image for purplegamer
PurpleGamer

7

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

I am becoming so disappointed in this generation of gamers. A new game is released with only 5 maps (just one for each number of players), horrible AI, super short Campaign, and a $60 price tag, and the reaction is a "shoulder shrug"; "They might fix it in the future"; "DLC will make it good"; and "That's just the way things are". Really???

Every time a gaming company get's comments like the above after releasing a game like this, a dozen more companies see it, and start rubbing their hands together saying "Do you see that boys, it's time for us to make some crap of our own and sell it at AAA prices".

Sad to say, this generation is really starting to earn their nickname: The Eloi Generation. I won't be surprised if they start playing air-raid sirens when they release games in the future to call in the gamers to buy it. . .

5 • 
Avatar image for Bahamut50
Bahamut50

721

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 16

User Lists: 0

@purplegamer: Yeah no offense, but back in the day we had games release completely broken on the nes and snes, or released feeling otherwise incomplete and all i could do was sit there and say "Welp... there goes my money. Guess i'll return it". I'm SO HAPPY that they can update games that they might have released too early. THIS ISN'T NEW.

2 • 
Avatar image for Kunakai
Kunakai

912

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 4

User Lists: 0

Edited By Kunakai

@purplegamer: "A new game is released with only 5 maps (just one for each number of players), horrible AI, super short Campaign, and a $60 price tag," -

The important thing to note here is how that game still has 100 times more content than the games of your generation. It can also be updated, unlike with your generation.

2 • 
Avatar image for MirkoS77
MirkoS77

18096

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 0

@purplegamer: have you played this yet?

2 • 
Avatar image for freds_dead
freds_dead

37

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@purplegamer: Games are considerably more complicated these days than the "generation" you're referring too - even with AAA budgets. Do you really think they want to release buggy games, or the developers are simply just lazy? I get the impression you're not considering things beyond the surface level here ... comparing games of today to games of yesteryear most certainly isn't apples with apples.

2 • 
Avatar image for T-ESI
T-ESI

89

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 6

User Lists: 0

@freds_dead: Complicated ? More flashy for sure but they don't feel more complicated at all, at least in terms of gameplay.

2 • 
Avatar image for drumjod
drumjod

855

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By drumjod

@purplegamer: "I am becoming so disappointed in this generation of gamers."

Not thinking very deeply about that statement are you?

3 • 
Avatar image for zerohournow
Zerohournow

705

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 5

@purplegamer: hopefully those damn kids will stop skateboarding on the sidewalks too grandpa

7 • 
Avatar image for Gelugon_baat
Gelugon_baat

24247

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 656

User Lists: 4

@purplegamer: I would agree with you, but what did you yourself buy recently?

Upvote • 
Avatar image for Richardthe3rd
Richardthe3rd

3844

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 0

Have only played through the tutorial so far, but it definitely feels like Homeworld. The mechanics are there, the aesthetic is great, and the gameplay feels meaty. If this is what we get from rekindling the series, I'll take it and have already supported it with my dollar.

Great review. From what I've played so far, it's obvious that there's a lot that went into making this that isn't apparent on the surface, though improvements to AI and additional maps can and should come. I think adding these as a free post launch patch will incite more support and sales.

Homeworld is a series that really needs to shine again.

2 • 
Avatar image for bfa1509
bfa1509

1058

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 5

User Lists: 0

Looks like a game from decades ago. Not that there is anything wrong with that.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for deviltaz35
DEVILTAZ35

8490

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

Edited By DEVILTAZ35

@bfa1509: Yeah it's no Ashes of Singularity in the looks department but it doesn't have to be. I am sure it has a loyal following. I picked up the originals remaster in the steam sale for 11.95 over Xmas . Haven't had a chance to play it yet. Missed it back when it was first released years ago.

This looks ok but i'd probably only pick it up when it's a similar price to the 12 bux or so in a sale.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for T-ESI
T-ESI

89

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 6

User Lists: 0

@deviltaz35: Looks aren't everything. I've played Homeworld 1 & 2 and they were instant classics. I can't say the same about Stardock's games. Either they were a mediocre experience, needed a mod to be enjoyable or downright disappointing. Looking at vids of Ashes of the Singularity makes me wish for an updated version of Supreme Commander. But I can already tell AOTS will fall short of that in gameplay.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for deviltaz35
DEVILTAZ35

8490

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

@T-ESI: Perhaps, though it has had some good writeups already.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for tr4newreck
Tr4newreck

674

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

Edited By Tr4newreck

too much passion, not enough objectivity...

no ultrawide support

terrible ai, absolutely terrible AI... bears worth repetition...

no keybinding...

10hrs campaign

5mp maps, only 1...1v1 map

full price for half a product... 40-30 price tag at best...

Upvote • 
Avatar image for ShimmeringSword
ShimmeringSword

107

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@tr4newreck: Worse is that "10 hour campagin" is if you suck or play in an extremely completionist "gather all the resources" way. I beat it on the hardest difficulty in just 6 hours and only failed one mission due to misunderstanding an objective.

The whole game was a cake walk (on hard) until the last 2 missions where their solution is to just make you fight armies 10x bigger than yours.

2 • 
Avatar image for tr4newreck
Tr4newreck

674

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

@ShimmeringSword: yeah 10hour campaign is generous of me to say

Upvote • 
Avatar image for d-man
D-Man

409

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 5

@tr4newreck: If you are so stingy with your cash and picky over marginal issues that you can't take a few risks, find a different hobby than gaming.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for tr4newreck
Tr4newreck

674

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

Edited By Tr4newreck

@d-man: till you get out of moms basement and pay your own rent/bills/clothing/food we can talk, till then stfu d-bag

your ignorant of the value of money and your well on your way to growing up to be a chump who can be sold "organic tomato's" in your local grocery store for 20/lb

Upvote • 
Avatar image for d-man
D-Man

409

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 5

@tr4newreck: So that's why you're so stingy. You have a shitty job. You can barely make ends meet and crawl into your gamer-hole when life gets too scary. When that fails, you post shitty criticism on gaming websites... then accuse others of being the real losers. It all makes sense now.

I don't need to buy organic "tomato's" (are those like tomatoes?) because I grow my own in my organic garden, along with squash, cucumbers, lettuce, strawberries, zucchini, green beans, dill, peppers (which I didn't get very many of, hoping to do better this year) chamomile, scallions, blueberries, raspberries, and snow peas. That said I could probably SELL to an organic market at a profit, but I have class and don't worship the almighty dollar like another putz I could name.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for kozzy1234
kozzy1234

35966

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 86

User Lists: 0

@tr4newreck: 10-12 hour campaign, nothing wrong with that for a RTS, especailly when it has fantastic writing. A game like starcraft 2 might have much more multiplayer options, but this game has MUCH better writing, story, atmosphere and campaign. Also love the slower pace of it compared to many other rts games. To each ther eown but the campaign alone is worth the price. The multiplayer is just added goodness. If they can fix the AI and add more maps (which they said are coming free a few days ago) , this could go from a very good to a great game imo.

5 • 
Avatar image for tr4newreck
Tr4newreck

674

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

Edited By Tr4newreck

@kozzy1234: for a 10hr campaign non mp focused game i expect 30-40 price...

i am a fan, i own all homeworld games, and the remaster and even got kharak on 10% discount for it...

i criticize the game like any reasonable person who loves a franchise, i want it to be better, or get better... i wont give it a pass, because...'its homeworld and i love it..."

as a consumer who values his money, and is older and more conscious of his cash i cannot justify the price of this game for the amount of work that has gone into it, just being very honest as to why i think, what i think of this game...

randy pitchfords touch is all over this, but thats just my jaded opinion..

4 • 
Avatar image for JIMDOG4442002
JIMDOG4442002

731

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 6

User Lists: 0

Edited By JIMDOG4442002

@tr4newreck: I agree, it seems like a big lackluster to me do to stuff you was able to do in the other Homeworld games. I still cant get over the fact that you cant dock any of your vehicles like in the original games. I guess that's small stuff to most people, but the fact that it's eating me up that I cant extra protect my scavengers by keeping them out of the line of fire.

4 • 
Avatar image for samsmithnz
samsmithnz

32

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Does it have scaling difficulty like Homeworld? That is what killed Homeworld 1 + 2 for me. It didn't matter how well I did, the next level gave me something to match the resources I had. It didn't make me feel like there was incentive to do well...

2 • 
Avatar image for T-ESI
T-ESI

89

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 6

User Lists: 0

@samsmithnz: Thats very weird. I played both of those games and I encountered no scaling whatsoever. Each campaign mission was always the same regardless of your force strength. If you brought enough from the last and used them wisely then you were fine. If not, you were SOL and had to load from a previous.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for samsmithnz
samsmithnz

32

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@T-ESI: Check out this thread for some examples: https://www.reddit.com/r/homeworld/comments/2xl8y5/can_anyone_explain_how_the_difficulty_scaling/

Upvote • 
Avatar image for ShimmeringSword
ShimmeringSword

107

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@samsmithnz: It's not scaled, but if you're doing badly there's an option for a "standard army". Most missions involve you fighting waves 1/4 to 2/3 the size if your force, over and over. You just have to preserve your units and it's easy.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for tr4newreck
Tr4newreck

674

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

Edited By Tr4newreck

@samsmithnz: campaign is full of scripted encounters(giving the illusion of intelligence)... mp is full of the most retarded AI you have ever met...its like the game was developed without any AI programmers....

Upvote • 
Avatar image for kozzy1234
kozzy1234

35966

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 86

User Lists: 0

Edited By kozzy1234

Game is a blast, only issues is the ai needs some work and there could be more multiplayer maps.

The story is great (in a RTS!), gameplay is fun, it looks gorgeous, the audio is amazing and most importantly it has the atmosphere and feel of Homeworld.

2 • 
Avatar image for Gelugon_baat
Gelugon_baat

24247

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 656

User Lists: 4

Edited By Gelugon_baat

This is more like Carrier Command than Homeworld. :\

A lot of the reviews right now are pointing to its story-telling and the strategic scenarios which its story creates. I would have been more interested in a purchase if its supposedly epic story is more than just around 10 hours.

US$49.99 is a lot to ask for what this game offers.

Also, I don't like that GameSpot's reviewing policies don't consider value anymore; I think that this started with Calvert, and followed through by vanOrd and Brown.

5 • 
Avatar image for c0mmanderKeen
c0mmanderKeen

124

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

@Gelugon_baat: So have you played it yet?

Upvote • 
Avatar image for JIMDOG4442002
JIMDOG4442002

731

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 6

User Lists: 0

@Gelugon_baat: New reviewers?

Upvote • 
Avatar image for Gelugon_baat
Gelugon_baat

24247

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 656

User Lists: 4

Edited By Gelugon_baat

@JIMDOG4442002: If you are suggesting that they are "new" because they are young, then I would tell you that they are not. Some of the freelancers are older than you think, and most of them are already well over 30 years old.

It's just that some of them are not as jaded as the others.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for JIMDOG4442002
JIMDOG4442002

731

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 6

User Lists: 0

@Gelugon_baat: No I was asking, but ok lol.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for timepasser
Timepasser

81

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@Gelugon_baat: Dont be a consumer act like a share holder, "obey"

Upvote • 
Avatar image for Gelugon_baat
Gelugon_baat

24247

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 656

User Lists: 4

@timepasser: A share holder doesn't give two shits about products but only wants returns instead.

The term that you should have used is "addict" instead of "share holder".

Upvote • 
Avatar image for timepasser
Timepasser

81

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@Gelugon_baat: no

Upvote • 
Avatar image for Gamer_4_Fun
Gamer_4_Fun

3862

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 139

User Lists: 0

Oh man, I am calling it now...The Year of the Strategy Games.

4 • 
Avatar image for Alurit
Alurit

1002

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@Gamer_4_Fun: we've been hearing that it's the returning year of RTS's for 5 years now. I still don't see it happening

Upvote • 
Avatar image for Renoo27
Renoo27

569

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 15

User Lists: 0

@Alurit: Well it may not be over the course of a year, but with Grey Goo and Act of Aggression coming out last year, and Kharak, XCOM 2 and Ashes of the Singularity coming out this year, I think it's safe to say strategy games are making something of a comeback. There's a lot for strategy gamers to be happy about, at least.

3 • 
Avatar image for simonbowden
simonbowden

100

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

Edited By simonbowden

@Renoo27: Company of Heroes 2.

2 • 
Avatar image for esqueejy
esqueejy

4987

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

@Gamer_4_Fun: I hear ya...but I don't think so...not with what else is coming out this year.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for M4yka
M4yka

78

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 0

Edited By M4yka

@Gamer_4_Fun: amen

Upvote • 
Avatar image for kingcrimson24
kingcrimson24

824

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 16

User Lists: 1

this seems like the Sci fi strategy game I need

2 • 
Avatar image for Mastermatta
Mastermatta

382

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

This is a basicly a full price game. It pisses me off that they think of this as some low budget game that doesn't even deserve a video review. As a gaming website gamespot, how about you help make an effort to revive the rts genre instead of barely giving this game any attention. Its not even like you thought poorly of it.

Also, come on the freaking suicide squad trailer analysis was a headline and this was not? This makes me question this site's journalistic integrity.

3 • 
Avatar image for ggregd
ggregd

850

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 4

User Lists: 0

Edited By ggregd

@Mastermatta: So journalistic integrity means they pay attention to what you want to see and place things at the same level of importance as you? Congratulations for effectively removing all meaning from the term.

4 • 
Avatar image for Mastermatta
Mastermatta

382

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

Edited By Mastermatta

@ggregd: I guess i have to explain it to the toddler. There is a lack of journalistic integrity because they are highlighting a movie trailer (which has nothing to do with games) cause it will get more hits and generate more ad revenue. There is a lack of integrity because they are more interested in making money than talking about gaming news/reviews.

Its like having the main article in a cooking magazine be about Donald Trump cause he supposedly likes filet mignon, while an interview with a famous chef might just be a side note. Yeah the magazine can do what it wants, i dont reject capitalism, but its still fing stupid. Just like they can write about what they want i can call them out on what i want.

8 • 
Avatar image for rsmith124
rsmith124

58

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 4

User Lists: 0

@Mastermatta: im kinda in agreement... movie trailer vs this game...hmmm its gamespot.. not moviespot

4 • 
Avatar image for loafofgame
loafofgame

1742

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@Mastermatta: I think you're exaggerating and also pointing at the wrong things to support your claims about integrity. Do keep in mind that all this content is coming to you free of charge. They have to strike that balance between being enthusiast press and focusing on what generates traffic. Because traffic is the only thing that generates any money. Branching out to subjects other than games is necessary to keep this site afloat.

Also, journalistic integrity is not necessarily lost when a website also focuses on traffic (or if a website contains sponsored content, etc.). They can still publish good, detailed and interesting content. As long as the distinctions between the different kinds of coverage on this website are clear, there's no harm done.

The fact they don't give this game a video review has got nothing to do with them thinking it unworthy or low budget. It's simple resource management. This website really isn't swimming in money. RTS isn't the biggest genre and it never will be. Spending resources on a video review nobody's going to watch is a waste and doesn't make any sense.

3 • 
Avatar image for mogan
mogan

19984

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 6

User Lists: 0

Edited By mogan  Moderator

@Mastermatta: If the Suicide Squad trailer will bring in more traffic than a piece on Homeworld, then the right thing to do is give the readers what they want and lead with Suicide Squad.

Also, Gamespot is posting about more than just games now; has been for over a year. It's why they added the Entertainment button up there with Reviews, News, Videos, and Forums. So posting movie trailer breakdowns isn't outside their purview, it's right in their wheelhouse.

2 • 
Avatar image for Renunciation
Renunciation

1216

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 12

User Lists: 0

@Mogan: No, no. There is a serious problem with journalistic integrity when a news source based on a specific thing starts talking about other specific things in an attempt to increase readership and revenue.

If you want REAL integrity, make sure that the video gaming news websites you visit don't actually pay any of their contributors for their reviews and/or articles. Make sure they don't pay any editors, website hosts, or administrators. Make sure the owners of the website don't have a physical address, as various utility bills must be paid as well as associated building maintenance costs. Please also ensure that the reviewers purchase the games they review with funds from a second career, like running a lemonade stand.

Any of these things would indicate that the gaming website has generated money through ads and links, which ruins journalistic integrity the same way that peeing in someone's cereal ruins their breakfast.

2 •