Is Tomb Raider: Underworld as good as some sources claim? According to blog site Twitter, one of its reviewers was asked to postpone a review if the game was expected to score less than 8 out of 10. While the PR firm accused, Barrington Harvey, has firmly denied any tampering, it raises the obvious question; who can you trust?
 
It's certainly a fine line. I was once asked hypothetically in an interview what I would do if a games company told me I couldn't review a game unless I gave it a high score. I said that as a staff writer, or someone even further down the pecking order, I'd have to run such a decision past the editor. But it appears lack of a game to review would be the least of my worries. My interviewer told me that sometimes such "requests" could be backed up by suggestions that certain advertising would be removed and that future releases would be more difficult to come by.
 
It's certainly true that exclusive reviews are often handed to magazines based on the amount of coverage they are given, even if that means trying to fill nine pages of one official magazine with just four or five fairly boring screenshots (you know who you are!). And in the cut-throat world of games magazines, getting your hands on a game first may put you in the sort of mood to add an extra mark or two to a game's score.
 
While it would seem to be a bit daft for a company to make a request like the alleged TR:U one, magazine and website editors always have to consider future relations with games publishers and PR companies. I would argue that unless an official magazine or a popular website gives a hugely-anticipated title, such as, for example, Grand Theft Auto IV, 1 out of 10, many PR firms are happy just to see their game get coverage. Circulation can be key in this equation, with lifestyle magazines often able to get their hands on titles ahead of the specialist press by virtue of the fact that they shift more copies. But if a generous 8 here and there allows you to keep in with the powers-that-be and secure review copies of a massive title in the future, then it may be worth selling a little piece of your soul.
 
Certainly with the explosion of the internet, there are less places for truly shocking games to hide. And also, with some of the bigger websites, companies know they cannot realistically withhold a review for any meaningful length of time. Even if an advance copy was not forthcoming, a review can be online within a day or two of a title hitting the shelves.
 
So the key, as always, is never to believe one source, however much you respect their reviewers or the cache attached to the publication. After all, a review is one person's opinion of a particular game in a particular genre on a particular day. The irony of the alleged Lara incident appears to be that her latest outing has been fairly well received. And no doubt, like Ms Croft, the figures will remain fairly impressive too.