Previews of major games frequently come from events where the publisher paid for the writer's flight, hotel and meals. American outlets handle this with disclosure rather than refusal, and the reasoning is practical.
The alternative is not attending
Hands-on access is often available only at a controlled event, sometimes overseas, and covering it independently costs more than most American outlets can absorb per story.
Larger publications with travel budgets decline the funding as policy. Smaller ones face a choice between accepting it and having nothing to publish.
That asymmetry means paid travel effectively selects which outlets can cover a major game before release, which is itself an editorial effect.
Disclosure is the standard remedy
The usual American practice is a note stating who paid for travel and accommodation, placed with the article rather than buried in a policy page.
Disclosure does not remove influence. It transfers the judgment to the reader, who can weigh the arrangement against what the piece actually says.
Advertising rules in the United States require disclosure of material connections in endorsements, and outlets generally apply the same principle to editorial travel by convention.
The influence is social rather than transactional
Nobody instructs a writer what to conclude. The pressure comes from spending days as a guest of people who are enthusiastic about their own work.
Preview events are also structured to show a game at its best, on tuned hardware, in a chosen section, with developers nearby to explain intent.
A writer can account for all of that and still leave with a warmer impression than the finished game would produce at home.
Previews and reviews are held to different standards
Most American outlets treat a preview as an account of an arranged demonstration and reserve verdicts for review code played independently.
Readers do not always distinguish the two, particularly when both appear with similar headlines and imagery on the same site.
Outlets that label the distinction clearly are managing that confusion, since the difference in evidential value between the two formats is substantial.
Streamer and creator arrangements differ
Independent creators invited to the same events are often working under promotional agreements rather than editorial ones, sometimes with content requirements attached.
Those arrangements fall under advertising disclosure expectations, which is why sponsored labels appear on coverage that resembles editorial commentary.
For an American audience the useful habit is to check who paid and what they required, because those two facts explain most of what a piece can and cannot tell you.