| pezus said: No, I created it with the intention to ask people what they thought abouthis and you and others wanted me to tell you my opinion. I added nothing subjective to the OP. Again, this is nothing but a baseless accusation. |
Considering your activity these past days, it is pretty hard to believe that. 
daredevil.shark said:
|
AngryJoe leans towards Xbox, he doesn't even have a PS3. Also I think he also made a huge fuss about Bayonetta 2 being Wii U exclusive, where one of his points was, that he simply didn't want to buy one so it's not completely accurate to say that he doesn't prefer one over the other. But yeah his reviews generally are more "honest" about flaws, since that is part of his persona
you can read the news from gaming websites, but never believe in their reviews!
pezus said:
Yes, but then it's not a better question but an equally good one. My opinion is that IGN reviews can not be trusted while this banner exists. There's one thing to have ads, but this to me is a whole 'nother thing. It's not an ad, it's sponsorship. Would you trust Rooney to give his honest opinion of the British insurance company Aon?
Exactly |
Exactly, I wouldn't know. I don't even know who Rooney his.
I do know that IGN is one of the biggest gaming sites. I don't think that the ad has anything to do with their reviews.
"I've Underestimated the Horse Power from Mario Kart 8, I'll Never Doubt the WiiU's Engine Again"
This is the same as any videogame that makes big ads there before release.
I actually think this is the less of two evils, because they actually say who's paying them and aren't hiding it in any way.
Any site that takes advertising from videogame companies, inherently has a conflict of interest, this included. And that's pretty much any site on the net with every big videogame which imo causes inflated scores. Besides little Niche websites like "Tom Chick's" Quarter to three which this wesbite also criticize.
It makes me feel all tingly inside
To me that means that someties video game enthusiasts get a little too emotionally attached to products or companies in the video game business and lets their emotion cloud their judgment and clear thinking.
Unfortunate results of this range from petty bickering, endless attempts to prove that their product of choice is superior to someone elses product of choice, and worst of all, starting a thread on the merit that a company that is about to release a new video game console has decided to advertise this fact.
morenoingrato said:
We all know the purposes of this thread. Stop acting as if you were clueless. This is also for you, Somini. |
What is the purpose of your comment then i wonder?
Explains why the Super Mario 3D World review was pulled from youtube. IGN was supposed to give that 9.6 score to Ryse but messed up and gave it to Mario.
Pretty sure this has happened before... like... a lot.
Something like this is about the least pervasive form of influence a company can exert on gaming journalists as far as i can tell.
Things like exclusive first peaks for "friendly" journalists. Review Embargos for bad reviews, the leaking of secrets that come with implied NDAs to puff up certain journalists chests and make them self important and vaguely hinting at things....
that's the shit that effects shit.
Not some banner accepted by the ad department that half the staff probably doesn't even know is there.
About Us |
Terms of Use |
Privacy Policy |
Advertise |
Staff |
Contact
Display As Desktop
Display As Mobile
© 2006-2026 VGChartz Ltd. All rights reserved.
