Is IGN Biased?

[GiantRaven]

They are completely and utterly biased. They gave Damnation (a crap game but at least it tried to be inventive) a 2.5. Then they gave Terminator Salvation a crap short game that tried nothing new over 5. An above average score. That was the last time I took IGN seriously.

Buuuuhhhhhhhhhhhhh?!

5/10 is not an above average score! It is a dead on absolute average score! This really pisses me off with reviews; they are never numbered in a way that makes sense. The majority of games that come out should be scoring around the 4/5/6 mark instead of 7/8/9. No type of media has that many products of that quality level.

 

[Tom Phoenix]

Personally I refuse to believe that a game should ever genuinely warrant a perfect score. Mostly because no game is inheritly perfect.

While I agree that it is impossible for any game to be perfect, that fact does raise an obvious question...what is the point of even having a "perfect" score, then? If there is no realistic chance for such a score to be given, then why even have it included in the scoring scale in the first place? I don't know about you, but I am a person who believes that if someone uses a scoring scale, that scale should be set up so that all scores have achievable, realistic requirements (no matter how high those requirements may be).

Simply put, if there is no such thing as a perfect game, then perhaps we shouldn't even have perfect scores to begin with.

 

[Chibz]

While I agree that it is impossible for any game to be perfect, that fact does raise an obvious question...what is the point of even having a "perfect" score, then? If there is no realistic chance for such a score to be given, then why even have it included in the scoring scale in the first place? I don't know about you, but I am a person who believes that if someone uses a scoring scale, that scale should be set up so that all scores have achievable, realistic requirements (no matter how high those requirements may be).

Simply put, if there is no such thing as a perfect game, then perhaps we shouldn't even have perfect scores to begin with.

Therein lies the problem. By having a highest-score possible it inheritly becomes the perfect score of the rating system. We should have a perfect score and a utterly imperfect score (In my score 0 and 100) mostly as an ideal. A score that would be fitting for the fictional, never to be made, perfectly good (or bad) game.

 

[IamSofaKingRaw]

yes. IGN is very biased. have you ever noticed how strongly backed by corporate advertisements they are? it should be obvious. :/

besides that, they said InFamous is better than prototype.

no. its not. both games should be judged independently of each other as each game has its own strengths and weaknesses. shows a PS3 bias right thar.

-_- umm because it is better. The only reason they were compared is because they came out around the same time and were both based on antiheros in ppen worlds.

 

[Toriver]

honestly i never liked IGN that much they do favor the 360 more than the ps3 but alot of companies do, but IGN makes it point blank that they like the 360 more out of frat boyism

This, and the fact that they wouldn't be caught dead saying anything nice about Nintendo, are the reasons why I stopped going to IGN. Also, I can kinda see how they would tend to favor the 360 when their editor-in-chief used to be their longtime 360 editor. Just sayin'.

I know they gave Bayonetta a higher score on the 360 despite them being 100% identical. Most all multiplatform games get higher scores on the 360 despite being the exact same.

If I remember right, they gave Kinectimals the same score as GT5 if that tells you anything.
Microsoft's money goes a long way.

Actually, if I remember right myself, pretty much every comparison between the 360 and PS3 Bayonetta commented on the visual and control issues with the PS3 version, giving the 360 the "edge" on that game, so to speak. I've also heard from friends who have played both versions and can back that up.

 

[moretimethansense]

yes. IGN is very biased. have you ever noticed how strongly backed by corporate advertisements they are? it should be obvious. :/

besides that, they said InFamous is better than prototype.

no. its not. both games should be judged independently of each other as each game has its own strengths and weaknesses. shows a PS3 bias right thar.

Or perhaps they thought it was the better game?
I know I did, don't get me wrong they are as biased as all hell but using that as an example simply shows your own bias.

 

[squid5580]

They are completely and utterly biased. They gave Damnation (a crap game but at least it tried to be inventive) a 2.5. Then they gave Terminator Salvation a crap short game that tried nothing new over 5. An above average score. That was the last time I took IGN seriously.

Buuuuhhhhhhhhhhhhh?!

5/10 is not an above average score! It is a dead on absolute average score! This really pisses me off with reviews; they are never numbered in a way that makes sense. The majority of games that come out should be scoring around the 4/5/6 mark instead of 7/8/9. No type of media has that many products of that quality level.

Over 5 is an above average score. Reading comprehension is your friend

 

[Azaraxzealot]

yes. IGN is very biased. have you ever noticed how strongly backed by corporate advertisements they are? it should be obvious. :/

besides that, they said InFamous is better than prototype.

no. its not. both games should be judged independently of each other as each game has its own strengths and weaknesses. shows a PS3 bias right thar.

Or perhaps they thought it was the better game?
I know I did, don't get me wrong they are as biased as all hell but using that as an example simply shows your own bias.

did i say prototype was better? read my post before saying im biased.

besides that, the OP has the right idea when saying that that Mass Effect 2 review was biased. it's only a matter of time before xbox gets a GOTY edition with all the DLC included.

 

[moretimethansense]

yes. IGN is very biased. have you ever noticed how strongly backed by corporate advertisements they are? it should be obvious. :/

besides that, they said InFamous is better than prototype.

no. its not. both games should be judged independently of each other as each game has its own strengths and weaknesses. shows a PS3 bias right thar.

Or perhaps they thought it was the better game?
I know I did, don't get me wrong they are as biased as all hell but using that as an example simply shows your own bias.

did i say prototype was better? read my post before saying im biased.

besides that, the OP has the right idea when saying that that Mass Effect 2 review was biased. it's only a matter of time before xbox gets a GOTY edition with all the DLC included.

I never said you did, the bias you are displaying is a clear bias against IGN, you also claim a PS3 bias when many would claim they had an XBOX bias.

However I took issue with your reasoning, not your preferences.

You claim that prefering inFamous is a clear sign of bias, then say that both games are different and should be judged independantly and be found equal, so you are claiming that a game reviewer can't have a personal preference of one game over another?
On top of which you claim that your oppinion is right and any deviation from it is bias?
And that they preferred inFamous to Prototype somhow shows a preference of system?
What if they had prefered Prototype?
How exactly would that show bias?
Think long and hard before you awnser, Prototype is multiplatform so console bias doesn't come in to it and if you claim that it shows no bias you are clearly displaying an overt dislike of the PS3, inFamous or you are simply trying to make faults where none exsists.

 

[Hatchet90]

yes. IGN is very biased. have you ever noticed how strongly backed by corporate advertisements they are? it should be obvious. :/

besides that, they said InFamous is better than prototype.

no. its not. both games should be judged independently of each other as each game has its own strengths and weaknesses. shows a PS3 bias right thar.

Yeah.... but Prototype was also on the PS3.

 

[Azaraxzealot]

yes. IGN is very biased. have you ever noticed how strongly backed by corporate advertisements they are? it should be obvious. :/

besides that, they said InFamous is better than prototype.

no. its not. both games should be judged independently of each other as each game has its own strengths and weaknesses. shows a PS3 bias right thar.

Or perhaps they thought it was the better game?
I know I did, don't get me wrong they are as biased as all hell but using that as an example simply shows your own bias.

did i say prototype was better? read my post before saying im biased.

besides that, the OP has the right idea when saying that that Mass Effect 2 review was biased. it's only a matter of time before xbox gets a GOTY edition with all the DLC included.

I never said you did, the bias you are displaying is a clear bias against IGN, you also claim a PS3 bias when many would claim they had an XBOX bias.

However I took issue with your reasoning, not your preferences.

You claim that prefering inFamous is a clear sign of bias, then say that both games are different and should be judged independantly and be found equal, so you are claiming that a game reviewer can't have a personal preference of one game over another?
On top of which you claim that your oppinion is right and any deviation from it is bias?
And that they preferred inFamous to Prototype somhow shows a preference of system?
What if they had prefered Prototype?
How exactly would that show bias?
Think long and hard before you awnser, Prototype is multiplatform so console bias doesn't come in to it and if you claim that it shows no bias you are clearly displaying an overt dislike of the PS3, inFamous or you are simply trying to make faults where none exsists.

i already have thought a lot about this. it should not be mentioned in any review whatsoever when one game is "better" than another unless there is blatant "ripping off" going on.

they even made a video comparing the two. and i say PS3 bias because its a console exclusive. and then in the Mass Effect for PS3 review they also blatantly went "this is better". personally, i saw no differences in the graphics (just one looked darker than the other. does better graphics = darker?) and it includes all the DLC? so? what if they had come out at the same time? then there WOULD be no DLC to compare them to.

games that SEEM similar should not be compared to each other. thats like calling every Hack-N-Slasher a "God of War" rip off or every open-world game a "GTA rip-off".

the fact that InFamous is a console exclusive to the PS3 doesn't instantly make it a better game

 

[Azaraxzealot]

yes. IGN is very biased. have you ever noticed how strongly backed by corporate advertisements they are? it should be obvious. :/

besides that, they said InFamous is better than prototype.

no. its not. both games should be judged independently of each other as each game has its own strengths and weaknesses. shows a PS3 bias right thar.

Yeah.... but Prototype was also on the PS3.

i know this, but because InFamous was exclusive to the PS3 they gave it a better review. in fact, most of the PS3's major exclusives get better reviews on that site. and multi-platform games also get better reviews on the PS3 on that site.

 

[moretimethansense]

yes. IGN is very biased. have you ever noticed how strongly backed by corporate advertisements they are? it should be obvious. :/

besides that, they said InFamous is better than prototype.

no. its not. both games should be judged independently of each other as each game has its own strengths and weaknesses. shows a PS3 bias right thar.

Or perhaps they thought it was the better game?
I know I did, don't get me wrong they are as biased as all hell but using that as an example simply shows your own bias.

did i say prototype was better? read my post before saying im biased.

besides that, the OP has the right idea when saying that that Mass Effect 2 review was biased. it's only a matter of time before xbox gets a GOTY edition with all the DLC included.

I never said you did, the bias you are displaying is a clear bias against IGN, you also claim a PS3 bias when many would claim they had an XBOX bias.

However I took issue with your reasoning, not your preferences.

You claim that prefering inFamous is a clear sign of bias, then say that both games are different and should be judged independantly and be found equal, so you are claiming that a game reviewer can't have a personal preference of one game over another?
On top of which you claim that your oppinion is right and any deviation from it is bias?
And that they preferred inFamous to Prototype somhow shows a preference of system?
What if they had prefered Prototype?
How exactly would that show bias?
Think long and hard before you awnser, Prototype is multiplatform so console bias doesn't come in to it and if you claim that it shows no bias you are clearly displaying an overt dislike of the PS3, inFamous or you are simply trying to make faults where none exsists.

i already have thought a lot about this. it should not be mentioned in any review whatsoever when one game is "better" than another unless there is blatant "ripping off" going on.

they even made a video comparing the two. and i say PS3 bias because its a console exclusive. and then in the Mass Effect for PS3 review they also blatantly went "this is better". personally, i saw no differences in the graphics (just one looked darker than the other. does better graphics = darker?) and it includes all the DLC? so? what if they had come out at the same time? then there WOULD be no DLC to compare them to.

games that SEEM similar should not be compared to each other. thats like calling every Hack-N-Slasher a "God of War" rip off or every open-world game a "GTA rip-off".

the fact that InFamous is a console exclusive to the PS3 doesn't instantly make it a better game

Okay, where to start?

They were being compared because they were two similar games released at roughly the same time with roughly the same premise, these are competing games, of course they should be compared.

ME2 come to the PS3 with all the DLC, that's reason enough to prefer it to the 360 version, there's simply more game for your money.

Again, they have the same layout, same premise, same method of trave and they were released at the same time.

The fact that inFamous is PS3 exclusiver is TOTALLY FUCKING IRRELEVENT!
As I asked you, what if they had prefered Prototype?
Wopuld you be raising the stink you are now?
And as I said perhaps they merely thought it the better game, I did, are you going to claim I have a PS3 bias now?

You are basicly making up reasons to hate IGN, when there are so many legitimate reasons why bother?

To (mis)quote Kain "Hate them, but do it honestly".

 

[Azaraxzealot]

yes. IGN is very biased. have you ever noticed how strongly backed by corporate advertisements they are? it should be obvious. :/

besides that, they said InFamous is better than prototype.

no. its not. both games should be judged independently of each other as each game has its own strengths and weaknesses. shows a PS3 bias right thar.

Or perhaps they thought it was the better game?
I know I did, don't get me wrong they are as biased as all hell but using that as an example simply shows your own bias.

did i say prototype was better? read my post before saying im biased.

besides that, the OP has the right idea when saying that that Mass Effect 2 review was biased. it's only a matter of time before xbox gets a GOTY edition with all the DLC included.

I never said you did, the bias you are displaying is a clear bias against IGN, you also claim a PS3 bias when many would claim they had an XBOX bias.

However I took issue with your reasoning, not your preferences.

You claim that prefering inFamous is a clear sign of bias, then say that both games are different and should be judged independantly and be found equal, so you are claiming that a game reviewer can't have a personal preference of one game over another?
On top of which you claim that your oppinion is right and any deviation from it is bias?
And that they preferred inFamous to Prototype somhow shows a preference of system?
What if they had prefered Prototype?
How exactly would that show bias?
Think long and hard before you awnser, Prototype is multiplatform so console bias doesn't come in to it and if you claim that it shows no bias you are clearly displaying an overt dislike of the PS3, inFamous or you are simply trying to make faults where none exsists.

i already have thought a lot about this. it should not be mentioned in any review whatsoever when one game is "better" than another unless there is blatant "ripping off" going on.

they even made a video comparing the two. and i say PS3 bias because its a console exclusive. and then in the Mass Effect for PS3 review they also blatantly went "this is better". personally, i saw no differences in the graphics (just one looked darker than the other. does better graphics = darker?) and it includes all the DLC? so? what if they had come out at the same time? then there WOULD be no DLC to compare them to.

games that SEEM similar should not be compared to each other. thats like calling every Hack-N-Slasher a "God of War" rip off or every open-world game a "GTA rip-off".

the fact that InFamous is a console exclusive to the PS3 doesn't instantly make it a better game

Okay, where to start?

They were being compared because they were two similar games released at roughly the same time with roughly the same premise, these are competing games, of course they should be compared.

ME2 come to the PS3 with all the DLC, that's reason enough to prefer it to the 360 version, there's simply more game for your money.

Again, they have the same layout, same premise, same method of trave and they were released at the same time.

The fact that inFamous is PS3 exclusiver is TOTALLY FUCKING IRRELEVENT!
As I asked you, what if they had prefered Prototype?
Wopuld you be raising the stink you are now?
And as I said perhaps they merely thought it the better game, I did, are you going to claim I have a PS3 bias now?

You are basicly making up reasons to hate IGN, when there are so many legitimate reasons why bother?

To (mis)quote Kain "Hate them, but do it honestly".

well even if there is not a PS3 bias (which i still think there is) i think we can both agree that IGN has a bias against independent or original game ideas (by hardly showcasing them at all and giving them bad reviews)

 

[moretimethansense]

well even if there is not a PS3 bias (which i still think there is) i think we can both agree that IGN has a bias against independent or original game ideas (by hardly showcasing them at all and giving them bad reviews)

Oh I wasn't saying they didn't necesserily have one, just that the thing between inFamous and Prototype wasn't a good example.

And I'm al too aware of their apparent hatred of smaller Devs, give Way of the Samurai 3 a 6/10 will you?
Them fuckers is gonna pay!

Honestly though, often their complaints are ridiculess or even innacurate, if you read the WotS3 review and have played the game you might get what I'm talking about.

 

[Azaraxzealot]

well even if there is not a PS3 bias (which i still think there is) i think we can both agree that IGN has a bias against independent or original game ideas (by hardly showcasing them at all and giving them bad reviews)

Oh I wasn't saying they didn't necesserily have one, just that the thing between inFamous and Prototype wasn't a good example.

And I'm al too aware of their apparent hatred of smaller Devs, give Way of the Samurai 3 a 6/10 will you?
Them fuckers is gonna pay!

Honestly though, often their complaints are ridiculess or even innacurate, if you read the WotS3 review and have played the game you might get what I'm talking about.

yeah i was looking into that game, is it really like a samurai sandbox game? because ive been looking for one of those

 

[Hatchet90]

yes. IGN is very biased. have you ever noticed how strongly backed by corporate advertisements they are? it should be obvious. :/

besides that, they said InFamous is better than prototype.

no. its not. both games should be judged independently of each other as each game has its own strengths and weaknesses. shows a PS3 bias right thar.

Yeah.... but Prototype was also on the PS3.

i know this, but because InFamous was exclusive to the PS3 they gave it a better review. in fact, most of the PS3's major exclusives get better reviews on that site. and multi-platform games also get better reviews on the PS3 on that site.

Yes, but the fact of the matter is that PS3 is superior.

 

[aPod]

honestly i never liked IGN that much they do favor the 360 more than the ps3 but alot of companies do, but IGN makes it point blank that they like the 360 more out of frat boyism

This, and the fact that they wouldn't be caught dead saying anything nice about Nintendo, are the reasons why I stopped going to IGN. Also, I can kinda see how they would tend to favor the 360 when their editor-in-chief used to be their longtime 360 editor. Just sayin'.

I know they gave Bayonetta a higher score on the 360 despite them being 100% identical. Most all multiplatform games get higher scores on the 360 despite being the exact same.

If I remember right, they gave Kinectimals the same score as GT5 if that tells you anything.
Microsoft's money goes a long way.

Actually, if I remember right myself, pretty much every comparison between the 360 and PS3 Bayonetta commented on the visual and control issues with the PS3 version, giving the 360 the "edge" on that game, so to speak. I've also heard from friends who have played both versions and can back that up.

Haha, PS3 bias, Xbox Bias, people are so amusing.

It's like arguing about Fox News being biased towards Repubs and MSNBC being biased towards Dem's but we prefer to get our news from whatever organization shares a similar bias towards us. I just found that a little amusing.

And correct me if I am wrong but don't they have separate channels for the platforms. I really don't think the PS3 editors have some scheme to undermine the system they are working for.

Anyways, i remember the first time i went to IGN, i wasn't looking for games but boobs. Wasn't till years later i went their again for gaming news. And now i come here.

 

[moretimethansense]

well even if there is not a PS3 bias (which i still think there is) i think we can both agree that IGN has a bias against independent or original game ideas (by hardly showcasing them at all and giving them bad reviews)

Oh I wasn't saying they didn't necesserily have one, just that the thing between inFamous and Prototype wasn't a good example.

And I'm al too aware of their apparent hatred of smaller Devs, give Way of the Samurai 3 a 6/10 will you?
Them fuckers is gonna pay!

Honestly though, often their complaints are ridiculess or even innacurate, if you read the WotS3 review and have played the game you might get what I'm talking about.

yeah i was looking into that game, is it really like a samurai sandbox game? because ive been looking for one of those

Eh, pretty much don't get me wrong it's not to everyones taste and there are some legitimate complaints about it but it is a decent game, I'd say give it a try it's probebly not that expensive now, though my favorite is the second one.

 

[warm slurm]

I know they gave Bayonetta a higher score on the 360 despite them being 100% identical. Most all multiplatform games get higher scores on the 360 despite being the exact same.

Obviously you haven't played the 360 version of Bayonetta, which is pretty much superior because of frame rate issues and such on the PS3. It isn't superior by a large margin, but it is the better version.

And a lot of developers find the 360 easier to develop for, so sometimes (ala The Orange Box) multiplatform games are better on the 360.