When you work for a gaming outlet with a large audience, Activision can make your life very good. The publisher has made a habit out of offering posh "review events" for the press instead of simply sending out early code. When the reviews arrive, few discuss the free vacation they were given.

This is why we were so impressed to see a full description of the event held for Call of Duty: Black Ops reviewers in GamePro. The short story: Activision spent a lot of money to make sure reviewers were impressed before they even played the game.

"Two weeks before the game's launch, I was flown from San Francisco to LAX; from there, I was driven to Santa Monica airport where I was given a flight helmet customized with my gamertag," Tae Kim wrote about his experience reviewing the game. "I was then put into a helicopter and flown to Ojai, California, a small town about two hours north of Los Angeles. After landing in a field, I was driven to the Ojai Valley Inn and Spa, where I was given a posh suite to stay in for three days." The suite had a 360, a copy of the game, and a nice 3D television hooked up to a surround-sound system.

There was a separate area with 30 stations set up so reviewers could try the multiplayer portion of the game. "I was also given a Mad Catz Call of Duty Black Ops branded headset," Kim wrote. "At the end of the trip, I was allowed to keep the flight helmet and the Mad Catz headset. All travel and accommodations, including food, were covered by Activision."

Our point is not to call out GamePro, because it is one of the few outlets that described these conditions and disclosed the entire review process. That's classy, and frankly, it's something we need to see more of. Many other outlets didn't offer context for their early reviews, nor did they disclose freebies like the helicopter ride.

It's a hard choice for outlets

Activision doesn't send out early code for these games, and it only invites certain publications on junkets. The desire for Black Ops coverage is insane, so decent coverage gets good traffic. An early review is worth a ton of readers, which are of course valuable to the sites, and if they can't afford the trip, Activision is happy to pick up the tab for them. It's a tough choice: stick by your ethics policy, or accept a free vacation, some gifts, and boost your site's traffic.

And let's be very clear: these events are designed to wow and impress the reviewer. It's not a matter of fighting piracy, because the game had already been leaked. It's not a matter of just controlling the setting, because that can be done without putting a reviewer up in a country club for three nights. Publishers like Activision spend the money in order to squeeze out the best reviews possible, and to send an implicit message: take care of us, and we'll continue to take care of you.

What's worse for reviewers is that if they do decide to accept these trips for early coverage of the game—even if they're honest about their impressions—it looks bad. It's also harder to be objective. The fact that so few outlets talk about it is another problem; even if readers don't care about trips like this, it's clear they deserve to know under what conditions the reviews took place.

Do you wonder why no reviews have talked about the glitchy PC online play? Because online play was tested for a very short time, with consoles that were right next to each other. There was no opportunity for actual coverage of the product in a real-world setting, and certainly not on the PC.

It should be noted that some sites did try to mitigate the effects of the trip. I talked to Chris Grant, the Editor in Chief of Joystiq, and he explained that they did indeed go on the trip, although they declined the helicopter ride, handled their own transportation, and paid for their own, smaller room. "We follow the 'appearance of impropriety is as bad as impropriety itself' school of thought," Grant told Ars. "I trust my writers, but I would never expect readers to. We have to earn that trust with everything we write." He also expressed admiration for GamePro's full disclosure of the trip.

Don't expect change

Publishers will continue the junkets because they work. Reviewers will continue to go because they want the pageviews—or maybe they just like free vacations. Our best hope is for full disclosure. Let's just hope more sites follow GamePro's leadership in this area.