| Leadified said: At what point did he say that IGN SPECIFICALLY gave the game a 9 or a 10? He posted the score THEY gave out, that's hardly misrepresentation. Besides even if Joe did quote IGN directly on giving the game a 9/10 when in reality they gave the game a 8.9/10, that is a really tough call to say that you are misprepresenting them. What are you even talking about here?? For one thing his comments on twitter are completely irrelevent to what he says in his reviews. Second of all having an opinion about the REVIEW SCORES of others is misrepresentation? Okay whatever you say. Third of all, lump IGN with other sites, what? You mean as a major outlet site? Well they are. What are your "facts"? |
I mean, it's the most basic numbers and math. 9's and 10's means a 9-10 score. IGN did not give that. It's just that simple. Furthermore, since when do you have to specifically say that? Otherwise why show IGN and not one of the sites that actually gave the score you're crying about? Also, why am I even bothering when you say he could have actually quoted a score they didn't give and it's not misrepresenting their review? LOL.
And I am talking about the complaints he brought up in the review. He cried that reviewers weren't even mentioning these things. IGN did.
| Leadified said: "I am suprised major outlets are giving this game high scores, "believe the hype", 10/10, 9/10." At what point did Joe say, "IGN said in their review to believe the hype"? He didn't, he said major outlets are giving high scores, which is true and major outlets are saying to believe the hype which is also true. It doesn't matter if it came from a review or a preview.
The saddest part of all is when he's called out on it he can't form a big boy response and just defaults to name calling and pouting. "Big boy response"? Dan attacked him out of nowhere. |
Why does he need to flat out say it when he is implying it in his video review? Again, Joe is just banking on the belief that his target viewers won't know the difference. If ESPN ran some Outside the Lines report on MLB injuries and had Miguel Cabrera footage on a loop in the background, the natural reaction would be assuming Cabrera was injured. Otherwise, why show him? On the same token, if you're crying about what you perceive to be high scores and ridiculous tag lines outlets are giving in their reviews, why show a tag line from a preview that is over 6 months old? It's misleading, and taking their quote out of context. You can disagree all you want, you're allowed to be wrong. I have spent enough time talking about this guy :)
