By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
-CraZed- on 17 April 2014
Edit Thread
The Fury said:
JakDaSnack said:
Dan is "more" in the right than joe is based off the twitter conversation you posted. Joe shouldn't have misquoted ign, since he clearly didn't read the review but only looked at the score, and then misquoted that. 8.9 is a big difference from 9. If they wanted it to be rounded up then they would have given it a 9. Dan may have overreacted a bit, but so did Joe. That's my opinion anyways.

Even Joe said he wasn't specifically saying 'IGN' or Dan when he mentioned '9/10' (He also mentioned 10/10, didn't he?) he just happened to show the IGN score at the time. This isn't misquoting IGN because you can't misquote something when it is a print screen. 

I find this quite odd as I would have expected most people to side with Joe, not because of the review but because of Dan's attitude. I don't even watch Joe but this Dan guy (I've never heard of until now) comes off as a right numpty. He went off on one about the different between 8.9 and 9, which to most gamers is pretty much a 9. If IGN want to do 'point' scores then they should do them out of 100. And Dan stepped randomly having a go as well not even about Titanfall.

Huh? You can misquote inmany number of ways. He took a screen shot from an IGN video review and used a quote from the review together and was clearly referencing IGN's coverage of the game in his criticism. He may not have outright misquoted them in this instance but he did twist the IGN reviewer's words and used them out of context. And while 0.1 might not mean much to him it does to the IGN reviewers as it places a game into a totally different level of quality.

Also, even though I most likely would agree with AJ's review score over IGn's after having played the beta and being underwhelmed and therefore skipped buying it, I find it silly that if the game is overall fun and with the main focus being on the multiplayer how the campaign should drag the score down in any significant way.

Had they just left out any campaign mode would that have raised the score for AJ? I watched his review and all the way until he started talking about the campaign he was hyping up the game to the rafters. So had Respawn left out the campaign would he have scored it a 8 or a 9? Or is it required to have a campaign mode to score over a 7?

I think both he and Dan look silly in this matter but I think AJ started it with his disingenuous reporting on how other review sites were "hyping" it up. Seriously, was he just trying to be the anti-IGN when he reviewed it?