15 replies to this topic

[BrosBeforeGardenTools]

I have listened to IGN's reviews in the past despite the criticisms because their reviews are long and seem overall legit compared to some others. However the Wii U game reviews make me scratch my head. Batman and Mass Effect 3 get 9.5s despite being claimed as bad ports, and the robust Tekken Tag Tournament 2 gets a 7.5 - you guys should read that last one and tell me whether it's legit or not, because I can't tell.

[Fig]

They mostly copy and paste the reviews, then add a wii u difference section at the end. The scores have mostly mirrored the previous reviews, with a few exceptions.

[Stormage09]

yeah i dont understand that high scores from a "bad ports" maybe they arent that bad after all

[Goose]

Assassin's Creed 3 had a 2 minute intro that stated the new features, and that it ran exactly like the other versions so the review was the same. The rest of the review was just the old review.

[BlueBlur]

You cant spell ignorant without IGN ;P

[Falconberg]

I usually like ign, but I have a feeling I will not agree with their review of zombiu. It seems like that game is fairly divisive in terms of critics opinions.
Gamespot always infuriates me as they always have guys who hate Nintendo review games they tried to rush through so they could get back to COD our Skyrim.
Giant Bomb is pretty good, but you'll never agree with all of them and sometimes you'll agree with none.of them.

[SoldMyWiiUAndLeftTheForums]

I give up with IGN, they are as much use as a Chocolate Kettle.

[Tricky Sonic]

It's IGN man - if you read a bunch of their pro's and con's its a bunch of bullcrap...they will say how good the game it ..give it like 4 pro's then for the 2 con's it will be all points you can't use to say a game is bad.

Example - the new Adventure Time game got a 8.5 - the only 2 cons...."Fandom required and it would of been nice to have voice acting" Really IGN? why the Wii do you think they made the game? oh yeah because there are tons of Adventure Time fans...and not having voice acting isn't something to judge a game on. I hate their reviews - if everyone reviewed things like IGN - then no one would buy things - it would be like "Edmunds Review of the 2013 Nissan Ultima - Pro's - Great Steering , Spacey Interior, Great Torque - Con's - I wish the model came in Neon Pink - the tires could be a little bit more ridgy - there for...8.0!

I usually count on Nintendo Life for my game reviews on Nintendo consoles - as Nintendo Fans like myself - I usually see pretty eye to eye with them

Edited by TrickySx4, 22 November 2012 - 01:43 PM.

[Soul]

Well, IGN assigns different people to do reviews and when it comes to Nintendo they assign the stupid ones 70% of the time.

[slammers]

The reason Arkham City and ME3 got good scores is because they are great games. I agree they could have been marked down to maybe 9.0 for being bad ports. But they are still great games (well maybe not so much ME3).
Tekken got 7.5 on PS3, I don't see why the exact same game should get a higher score just because it's a robust port.

It seems fair enough to copy and paste the majority of the review if the game is exactly the same.

edit: thought i'd add, I don't ever bother with IGN's reviews. Eurogamer.net 's are usually my pick. Nintendolife's are the worst IMO - blatent fanboyism

Edited by slammers, 22 November 2012 - 03:03 PM.

[JaylisJayP]

ZombiU alone is reason to not listen to these sites. At least IGN wasn't as bad as Gamespot.

[SNES]

IGN has gone downhill. It's not a good news site - most other sites break news faster and more often. It's not a good article site - generally full of misinformation or "I got paid to do this by the advertiser" type of junk. It's not a good review site - many of the reviews lack objectivity....some have outright bias. It was great before Matt left, a real feel of energy from the IGN team....now it's pretty much Greg and Sony/MS love.

[Old Leaf]

IGN should never be taken seriously. Ever. At least not when it has to do with Nintendo.

[MMG]

I honestly don't care about ratings anymore. If the game has online mode and the back of the game seems cool, I get it lol.

Another way to decide on a game is to watch videos of people playing the game on Xbox or PS3 because they get games early sometimes.

[Alianjaro]

You cant spell ignorant without IGN ;P

Ouch BURN IGN. Damn you owned em...
I like how IGN seems to give good reviews and still give a bad mark. Ninja Gaiden 3 Razor's Edge was "Definitely the best version of the game, had really good customization, was overall way harder than the previous version". 7.5. WUT?

Ninja Gaiden 3 got a 4.5 (talking about the original version) because reviewers felt like the game was nothing more than a movie. You only had to hold down a button to slice everybody. It was really sad, they said, because the franchise has always been known for its extreme difficulty. "The most important point of the franchise is how hard it is. We didn't feel anything hard in this game, that's why it's disapointing."

The Wii U version comes out, and what's the main problem? "The game is frustratingly hard."

Proof that they don't know what they're talking about.

Is it me or IGN and Gamespot are really biased and just bash on every japanese product?

[illogicology]

Batman and Mass Effect reviews seem pretty fair. They're great games and while the ports aren't the best, they differences really don't seem to be much bigger than you'd see between some Xbox 360 and PS3 games. A lot has been made of the PS3's poor ports from 360 games, but multiplatforms have been closer than ever before in this generation. That the Wii U titles are getting the same kind of parity as the PS3 is pretty good and PS3 ports usually get the same score too.