Poll: IGN is dead to me
- Thread starter agentmaine
- Start date
Recommended Videos
I don't care about what IGN does - I don't give a fuck about game reviews in general.
Getting angry at journalism based around fictional time wasters is in itself a new low.
If i need a review i consult friends or just read some forum posts.
Sites like IGN is therefore completely blocked from existence in my life.
No need wasting precious brain cells on it
Getting angry at journalism based around fictional time wasters is in itself a new low.
If i need a review i consult friends or just read some forum posts.
Sites like IGN is therefore completely blocked from existence in my life.
No need wasting precious brain cells on it
cant spell ignorance without IGN.
but seriously, theyre horrible at reviewing games.
for example, they gave CoD: WaW a 9.2 but gave Black Ops an 8.5 even though it is VASTLY superior to WaW. they mentioned Modern Warfare 2 throughout the review of BF: Bad Company 2 and the reviewer made every positive thing sound negative so he could give it a bullcrap score. they gave Hydro Thunder Hurricane the second lowest score out of all reviewers on metacritic or gamerankings simply because the reviewer didnt know how to play it and thought it felt TOO classic
they suck
but seriously, theyre horrible at reviewing games.
for example, they gave CoD: WaW a 9.2 but gave Black Ops an 8.5 even though it is VASTLY superior to WaW. they mentioned Modern Warfare 2 throughout the review of BF: Bad Company 2 and the reviewer made every positive thing sound negative so he could give it a bullcrap score. they gave Hydro Thunder Hurricane the second lowest score out of all reviewers on metacritic or gamerankings simply because the reviewer didnt know how to play it and thought it felt TOO classic
they suck
When I had a lot of cash flowing in, I would try to buy three random games a month. Unfortunately, I've been broke for quite sometime now and rely on reviews or word of mouth. I miss the days of unprovoked purchases because there are so many hidden gems I would have never given a chance.Generic Gamer said:
yes, ign has been known to have some very very crappy reviews.
they give bad reviews to good games, and good reviews to bad games. and sometimes, they give good reviews to games just because they believe the hype.
they give bad reviews to good games, and good reviews to bad games. and sometimes, they give good reviews to games just because they believe the hype.
The gave Mass Effect 2 a lower score than what it deserves. ((joke, it has a good score.))
The gave Battlefield: Bad Company 2 a lower score than what it deserves.
They gave Modern Warfare 2 a higher score than what it deserves.
They have done similar things to many other games. You can tell when they're biased to a game when the mark the game down a point for something stupid. They're not too reliable; I'd suggest no longer visiting them.
The gave Battlefield: Bad Company 2 a lower score than what it deserves.
They gave Modern Warfare 2 a higher score than what it deserves.
They have done similar things to many other games. You can tell when they're biased to a game when the mark the game down a point for something stupid. They're not too reliable; I'd suggest no longer visiting them.
Damnit, I was going to say that XDPielikey said:
I haven't played the game, so I can't say what I think it deserves, but you got to take into account it's cost and maybe the amount of content it has. It could have 40 game modes, multiplayer, leader boards, who knows. Maybe other sites didn't appreciate that but maybe IGN saw that it has the best value. DLC games are all about value, IMO.
That being said, IGN does make a lot of stupid scores. Some people may agree with them. If you don't, then don't read their reviews. I usually don't, so I just refer to other reviewers.
So much win... Made me lol.Pielikey said:
Ign is so sad now. I really don't want to find the article again, but they did a preview on Dragon age 2 and they spent the entire article talking about nothing.
Their reviews are generally poorly done, and they all around just annoy me.
The only reason I put "indifferent" in the poll option is because there's nothing to forgive IGN about. The person who reviewed the game apparently really liked the game, and scored it as such. Also, have you played it?
Also, have you bought the game? Or played it at all? It might be the greatest thing since games were invented for all any of us know.agentmaine said:
It's Pac-Man! One of the greatest, most enduring games of all time. It's still good! And, since I can see no way in which it can be improved, worthy of a 10.
9.9 if you're one of those people who refuses to give a 10 on general principle
9.9 if you're one of those people who refuses to give a 10 on general principle
I agree with their 10. There really is nothing wrong with the game. Infinite replayability, innovative ideas, fun gameplay, perfect controls. Before you judge a game, at least try it out first. Unless they are like GT and say nothing but bad things about a game *cough*Medal of Honor*cough* and then give them an 8 which says "This game is good. It has some problems and you won't be mad if you miss it, but you should at least rent it and try it out for yourself." What you should be asking, "Is GT dead to you?"
This is the escapist though, having an opinion against everyone else means you ARE a troll. You're not allowed to have an opinion on those shitty games.Aura Guardian said:
Well a lot of these gaming sites are sponsored by publishing companies, so scores are ALWAYS biased. Thats why I use the Escapist most. I doubt Yahtzee has ever given something a good review because he was paid to, same with Moviebob.
For other news, I use teeny indie sites made by gamers like http://rebelgaming.team-talk.net/forum.htm and others. (shameless self promotion there, but it is true that I use little sites more) They're unbiased because they don't get paid to say things, they just say things.
For other news, I use teeny indie sites made by gamers like http://rebelgaming.team-talk.net/forum.htm and others. (shameless self promotion there, but it is true that I use little sites more) They're unbiased because they don't get paid to say things, they just say things.
