My reviews are biased (and so are yours)

“Don’t believe a word he says. He’s biased. He’s a shill.”

Some people get mightily cheesed off at games reviewers. They have critics they’d trust with their credit card, others they see as unscrupulous grifters who’d sell their own mother for a copy of Great Western Trail, and a whole bunch dotted along the scale somewhere between the two extremes.

If you write, film, or otherwise communicate your views on games, before long you’ll come up against someone whose fur you stroke the wrong way, and that’s when you’ll start hearing the dreaded word – bias. I’m not just talking about the people who read or watch your reviews, either. I’m including publishers and other reviewers in that mix.

People get labelled as biased. Even the holier-than-holy types. And you know what? The people who say that, even the loudmouths shouting it from atop their virtual soapboxes, are right. These people are biased.

Guess what. So am I.

So what is bias?

The Cambridge dictionary defines bias as:

the action of supporting or opposing a particular person or thing in an unfair way, because of allowing personal opinions to influence your judgment

https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/bias

It mostly manifests in the tabletop space as someone disagreeing with a positive opinion about a game. Especially when the person making the review gets the game for free.

Reviews are by their very nature subjective. They’re an attempt by one person to communicate their subjective feelings about a thing to other people. In this post I’m not going to talk about the whole concept of a ‘paid review’. I’ve written about it before, and so have my peers. Oliver over at Tabletop Games Blog and Iain at The Giant Brain share the same opinion as me – there is no such thing as a paid review.

I’ve seen my contemporaries in media groups (I won’t go as far as calling them friends) swear blind that they can be paid to make a review and keep it free of bias. This is, of course, utter bollocks.

So what about when no money changes hands? How does bias come into play in other situations? I’m glad you asked, dear reader. Let me lead you by the hand through the garden of hypothetical scenarios, where we can stop along the way and sniff the blooms of the bias plants. Hopefully, we’ll see some that you might not have considered before.

Examples of bias

Below are some scenarios that can lead to someone creating a review. Let’s take a look at where the bias comes from in each, and what you can do about it, if anything.

Scenario 1: Reviewer is given the game to review for free

This is the big, easy one to look at. I get sent quite a few games to write reviews for, and the majority of times I get them for free. When you’re starting out doing any form of games critique, this feels like making it. Someone values your opinion so much that they want to know what you think of their game.

Of course, this is nonsense. First and foremost, publishers want their game to be seen. That’s why you get their game. Don’t kid yourself it’s for any other reason.

As a reviewer, it’s very easy to feel a level of pressure to say something nice about the game you’ve been given. Usually, it’s because you want them to send you more games in the future. ‘“If I write or say something negative, they won’t like me, and I won’t get any more free games.“

Even those of us who don’t mind pointing out the negatives in a game are guilty of a level of bias here. Even if it’s just a teeny, tiny bit. You form relationships with people. They become your friends. That’s not ideal for any level of ‘professional’ critique, but it’s the reality of the situation.

What can you do about it?

Accept that there’s likely to be some level of bias inherent in what you’re reading. It’s up to you to gauge how much. Watch or read the critic’s other reviews. Do they never say anything negative? There’s a red flag for starters.

The other piece of advice I can give you is to see how long the person has been reviewing for. Anyone who has done this for any length of time will tell you the same thing – the sparkle of free games loses its shine when they’re hidden in the shade of the review backlog.

Scenario 2: Reviewer is given a game, but they have to forward it on

This happens quite a lot, especially for crowdfunding campaigns. A few preview copies are out in the wild. One finds its way to your doorstep, so you play it, make your (p)review, then send it off to the next person on the list.

There’s no place for bias here, right? They don’t even get to keep the game afterwards. Wrong. It’s very common for a publisher to promise a free copy of the game once it gets printed, so while there’s no instant reward, there’s one somewhere down the track.

The other thing to be aware of is exposure. Previews for Kickstarter and Gamefound campaigns can get a huge number of views, and the publishers and designers often feature pullquotes from the people saying nice things about their games, and provide links out to the previews. It’s a great way to get eyes on your work, so maybe there’s a temptation to say nice things to get the spotlight on you?

What can you do about it?

Very little. It falls into the same category of the free game review I mentioned above, but this time with the added bonus of more exposure for someone’s brand.

The big thing to look out for is the lack of opinion. Many publishers pay for crowdfunding campaign previews. When they do this, there are regulations around what you can or cannot say in a piece about the game. Paid previews should never contain opinions, because a paid preview is an advertisement. Watch or read the preview again. Did they tell you the game was good? Or did they tell you how cool some things look?

Scenario 3: Reviewer buys the game with their own money

This category covers the vast majority of reviews you’ll ever read somewhere like BGG. The person telling you about the game spent their own money on the game.

Initially, it might sound like a ridiculous claim to say there’s any level of bias in this type of review, but it’s there alright, even if it’s hiding in the cracks.

Let’s say you’re reading a review for some massive, table-swamping, super-pimped edition of the latest crowdfunding darling. People can spend stupid money on these games, and people like to think they’re capable of making sound decisions, which is where we can run into a sunk-cost fallacy. If you’ve spent north of $200 on a game and waited for three years for it, a part of you is desperate for it to be good, so you tell yourself it’s great. You overlook blemishes and faults that you’d otherwise point out, because you don’t want to feel stupid.

Then there’s the other side of this coin, too. You might be mad as hell that this game cost you more than $200 and took three years to arrive. You can’t see the good in it because the red mist is clouding your vision. You give a negative review to a game which is actually pretty great, just because you’re salty and grumpy about the conditions surrounding it.

What can you do about it?

Just be aware of this kind of bias. Especially when it comes to expensive games. You can get a feel for tone. Read or watch the person’s other reviews, if they have any. Are they a cheerleader? Are they a Negative Nelly? Are they that person that gets off on saying everything is awful all of the time?

This goes for ‘professional’ critics as well as for folk just typing a few paragraphs on the BGG forums.

Scenario 4: Reviewer borrows a game and then returns it

This one is particularly pertinent for me, since I recently decided to work with a local games cafe. I thought it was a great compromise. I borrow games from their library, play them, review them, then hand them back. I don’t get anything in particular from it, so there’s no danger of any bias creeping in.

While I still think this is the best happy medium I can come up with as someone who has a review site and wants to tell the world about the games he’s playing, it still has potential problems. There’s still the issue of looking to gain exposure. If the place you’re borrowing from is boosting your reviews and sending traffic your way, that’s great, but did it influence what you wrote?

Were you kinder to the game than you should have been because you know that people who’d potentially borrow the game and spend time and money at the cafe now won’t? Okay, that’s a bit of a stretch, but it’s still there. There’s also the issue of value. You paid nothing for this game, and even if you didn’t get to keep it, you have no real concept of the value for money in the game, because you didn’t buy it. It almost adds a layer of disposability to a game, which in turn can lead to a sense of ‘I don’t really care about this game, so why invest my time and energy in it?’ A kind of negative bias.

What can you do about it?

Honestly, not much. Nor is this a scenario you typically have to worry about. It’s far from the norm when it comes to reviewing board and card games. I just wanted to highlight the sort of places where some level of bias can hide, even when you instinctively think there’s none to be found.

Scenario 5: Reviewer covers a type of game they like (or dislike)

This is an important one, and one which you might already be instinctively accommodating. In fact, this bias might be the one that you actively look for in a review.

Think about a game you love. Now think about a game you hate. Now, picture a new game arriving on your table. It’s set up and ready to go, but – oh no! The art is all by the same person who did the art in that game you hate. And it has a rondel, and you can’t abide rondels. Oh no, blind bidding and hidden roles too?? Begone, devil’s spawn!

Your opinion of this game is skewed before you even begin. Instead of being excited to play it, you’re approaching it with trepidation. It’s because you’re biased towards the sorts of games you enjoy, and against the ones you don’t enjoy. And that’s okay. It’s better than okay, it’s the way it should be. It’s what helps to drive this industry. Repeat customers buying the kinds of games they like the most.

Anyone reviewing games who’s worth your time will openly acknowledge this. It’s pretty disingenuous to pretend that you can just rise above your lizard brain instincts and go into a review with a pristine mental canvas.

What can you do about it?

Nothing, and nor should you. It’s not something you need to fix. Instead, lean into it.

Take the time to read and watch reviews from different people. Not just the top 10 on YouTube. Not just the same ones that everyone knows. Try something different. When you find someone whose style you like and who matches with you when it comes to opinions on certain games, remember them. Subscribe to them. Bookmark them.

Biases are fine when they match your own in this situation, because if the critic’s tastes match your own, then after bearing everything else in mind, you have a good idea that their opinion might accurately reflect your own, helping you decide which games to buy and which to avoid.

---

Enjoying this article? Consider supporting me.

---

In summary

Admittedly, a lot of what I’ve written here might come across as a bit of a stretch. It might make you raise an eyebrow and think “Really…?” But everything I’ve written here is true. How strongly each of those different biases might manifest can vary from person to person, but they’re all relevant. A lot of people don’t even realise they hold them, but they do. We all do.

These are only a few of the more obvious ones, too. The more you sit and think about it, the more ways you’ll understand how someone’s opinion can be swayed in one direction or another.

Handling bias is a lot like handling stress or anxiety for me. Instead of fighting it, trying to deny it space or squeeze it out of existence, the best thing to do is often to accept it, allow it to happen, and acknowledge it. Then move on from there.

An example

Big Jimmy of Big Jim’s Jumbo Board Game Jamboree loves deck-builders. He was given this new deck-builder by a publisher he’s worked with a hundred times before. That’s okay. You know there’s a good chance it’s going to get a favourable review. You know that he’s a cheerleader type of critic, and that he will probably gloss over a few foibles, like those two deck colours that are obviously too similar.

You know where his biases lie, and on which side of the scale. You can’t do anything about it, and besides, you love Big Jimmy. You accept it, take him on his word, and go into the review forewarned.

---

I’m biased. You’re biased. We’re all biased. Accept it and understand it, because you cannot change it.

Over to you

How do you feel about bias in board game reviews? Do you feel strongly about content creators’ biases? Have you found critics whose biases match your own? Tell me about it. Drop me a comment here or come find me over on Bluesky.