| DMeisterJ said: @ Onimusha12 There we go. Resort to name calling when your argument gets eradicated. Bravo! And I agreed with Rocketpig, because he didn't take cheap shots at the game unlike you. |
Oh Cheap Shots, here you go with your whining and persecution complex again. So by agreeing with Rocketpig because he doesn't take cheapshots you agree the game isn't that good so long as the person is polite about it? Also what I've said about the game so far you agree to be true too because it really wouldn't count as cheap shots if they weren't true. Hell if what I was saying about the game wasn't true, they wouldn't be called cheap shots, they'd be called lies. In the end, you admit I'm right, but that I'm just rude about it. Where are my manners. ;P
Oh and the name calling, right... Like your two reputations and frequent appearances in response to my posts doesn't say it for me already. :)
|
DMeisterJ said:
|
Oh, actually IGN gave it an 11/10. But then again I must thank you for making another point for me. How MGS4 has proven the reviewing system to be corrupt and broken. LAIR drew dubious suspision to the backroom politics of reviews, Halo 3 made us all wonder about the industry's integrity, Kane & Lynch showed us what happened to individual reviewers who speak out against a game their employer is heavily pushing, Assassin's Creed gave us a glimpse of developers strong arming reviewers and the repurcussions for not playing ball, now MGS4 has finally put any doubt to rest.
Face it, a game hyped as much as MGS4 was, a game as integral to the industry as MGS4 has been, forces the industry to give it exceptional treatment, as the lower profile Assassin's Creed has shown us, anyone not willing to play ball with a developer's flagship franchise risks being shunned by them costing them access to pre-launch access to games and exclusive insider information which would cost them the edge against their competitors. The major players of the industry could not afford to give this game anything less than a score deserving of the hype and the higher the score, the more favors and privelages that can be expected from Sony and Konami for future releases and titles. And how do you outdo your peers who have already given the game a perfect 10/10? Give it an 11/10. That 11/10 has no doubt given IGN a secure place in Sony/Konami's favor for future pre-launch exclusives and upcomming information on games.
The only reason LAIR was accosted by reviewers is because its flaws were fundamentally integral to the gameplay, graphics and enjoyment of the game (unignorable and unavoidable) and would have sullied the reputation of any reviewer who to try and pass it off as a AAA title, and even then, most reviewers still gave it high scores. Also as a new franchise the game wasn't as integral an avatar to the industry as MGS4 is thus reviewers could afford it more prejudice, incidentally this game could have also been the perfect oportunity for reviewers to display a sacrificial whipping boy to create the illusion they don't pander to all hyped games. It's all part of the industry's politics.
Thanks, but I think Zero Punctuation and Penny-Arcade make more convincing arguments than the Spike-TV placative industry.
