By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Gaming Discussion - Issues with IGN's MM3D Score

 

Is IGN full of idiots?

Yes 228 67.66%
 
No 109 32.34%
 
Total:337
veritaz on 15 February 2015
SlimShadyDroid said:
*Channels inner IGN reviewer*
I give this thread a 7.8/10. It has too much water.
I also give the human responsible for this thread a 7.8/10, as the human body has too much water.

No, but seriously.

I miss Audrey. I used to love her Nintendo reviews because, well, she's a Nintendo fan like myself. When she said a game was good, I knew I'd like it, if she said it was bad, I knew I wouldn't. They really haven't gotten back to that yet since she left, and it's pretty much gone down hill. Now, I just watch the video review to see a quick snippet of what the game looks like, and go to Destructoid for reviews. They're not always great, but they usually get it right, and the comments section is usually great.


Audrey was actually the worst reviewer at ign to me. She scored Nintendo games higher than the average all the time and underscored any other game not made by Nintendo. This is all because she took being a Nintendo fan over actually doing her job and that's why she works at Nintendo now and left ign.



Around the Network
OnlyForDisplay on 15 February 2015

I wouldn't consider IGN "Idiots" per say, but biased is in discussion for me. Lowering a game score based on a mechanic or level that was perfectly acceptable in its original form seems to me more like cherry picking than editorial critique. Even more so of what makes me disgusted regarding IGN's review system is to refuse clear issues that impede a games enjoyment but continue to discuss the positives of said game ( i.e. Any Call of Duty after Modern Warfare and before Advanced Warfare, Evolve, etc.). A game should be critiqued should it impede enjoyment, fail to innovate, or simply not work; not complain about a section or something miniscule in comparison due to the fact that the reviewer did not like it.

Gaming journalism has to be unbiased but retain proper editorial etiquette for readers to obtain better understanding of why said game was critiqued in the manner that was. I know this colloquium is older than me, but when I read some of IGN's reviews, Swole" is often the first adjective that comes to mind; especially if the reviewer critiques something that is irrelavent towards the enjoyment or innovation that the game being reviewed offers.



" It has never been about acknowledgement when you achieve something. When you are acknowledged, then and only then can you achieve something. Always have your friends first to achieve your goals later." - OnlyForDisplay

Lollipopanon on 15 February 2015

Well you have a number of problems with your argument.  Not that I entirely disagree with you about them being idiots.  Look, the game could have absolutely no "cons" listed and get an 8.7 out of 10.  There are plenty of games I have that I don't have any major gripes about and would not give a perfect score.  In fact, I would hardly give any game at all a perfect score, that's not how it works.  So no, the 1.3 points off is not because of that one "con" that they list.  Also, you have to realize that there is no logical way to compare two different reviewers opinions(yes, reviews are subjective and therefore opinion) of the same game.  So stating that a review from over 10 years ago gave the original a 9.9 doesn't really hold any weight.   I love the game, but I would say that an 8.7 is certainly a fair score anyhow.  By no means is that a bad score.  It is actually listed as "great" if I remember correctly. 

 

Reviews are just subjective anyhow, so try not to get too caught up in the number score.  More important is the actual meat of the review.



dukerx2 on 16 February 2015

No, Its their opinion. Same with why the original score is different than the new one, two different peoples opinions. And yes their pro/con normally doesn't make sense when compared to the review score, but I find they leave smaller pro/con off it. IGN is for the most part good with reviews, especially compared to some sites. But it all comes down to each persons individual opinion. If you don't like it start your review site and share your opinion.



Game_God on 16 February 2015
icykai said:
Well they gave TLoU a 10 so i guess i can agree with you OP :D.


They gave Evolve a 9 for god sake!!! Going by that metric, Zelda: MM should have scored 19/10 or something...



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n29CicBxZuw

01001011 01101001 01110011 01110011 00100000 01101101 01111001 00100000 01110011 01101000 01101001 01101110 01111001 00100000 01101101 01100101 01110100 01100001 01101100 00100000 01100001 01110011 01110011 00100001

Around the Network
Game_God on 16 February 2015
Lafiel said:
a game without flaws is not a "perfect game" it's a polished game

and a game that's essentially 15 years old will have aspects that just don't "wow" people anymore


With that line of thinking, all past games should have their scores slashed if only for the graphics, you know that criteria that makes or break a game by today "gamerz" "standarts"!



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n29CicBxZuw

01001011 01101001 01110011 01110011 00100000 01101101 01111001 00100000 01110011 01101000 01101001 01101110 01111001 00100000 01101101 01100101 01110100 01100001 01101100 00100000 01100001 01110011 01110011 00100001

Game_God on 16 February 2015
veritaz said:
SlimShadyDroid said:
*Channels inner IGN reviewer*
I give this thread a 7.8/10. It has too much water.
I also give the human responsible for this thread a 7.8/10, as the human body has too much water.

No, but seriously.

I miss Audrey. I used to love her Nintendo reviews because, well, she's a Nintendo fan like myself. When she said a game was good, I knew I'd like it, if she said it was bad, I knew I wouldn't. They really haven't gotten back to that yet since she left, and it's pretty much gone down hill. Now, I just watch the video review to see a quick snippet of what the game looks like, and go to Destructoid for reviews. They're not always great, but they usually get it right, and the comments section is usually great.


Audrey was actually the worst reviewer at ign to me. She scored Nintendo games higher than the average all the time and underscored any other game not made by Nintendo. This is all because she took being a Nintendo fan over actually doing her job and that's why she works at Nintendo now and left ign.

That is what is commonly known as "knowing your stuff" & "having good taste"!



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n29CicBxZuw

01001011 01101001 01110011 01110011 00100000 01101101 01111001 00100000 01110011 01101000 01101001 01101110 01111001 00100000 01101101 01100101 01110100 01100001 01101100 00100000 01100001 01110011 01110011 00100001

Zekkyou on 16 February 2015
ExplodingBlock said:
veritaz said:
Games don't start off at a 10 point rating, you know that right? A review doesn't start off at 10 and take points off.


Well they give the original Majora's Mask a 9.9, so they took off 1.2 points for the exact same temple

They gave MM that score 15 years ago :p



binary solo on 16 February 2015

OMG a Zelda game only gets an 8.7 from one reviewer the world has officially ended and gone to hell.



“The fundamental cause of the trouble is that in the modern world the stupid are cocksure while the intelligent are full of doubt.” - Bertrand Russell

"When the power of love overcomes the love of power, the world will know peace."

Jimi Hendrix

 

Nate4Drake on 16 February 2015

IGN is one of the few reviewers I still read. I don't agree with the OP.



”Every great dream begins with a dreamer. Always remember, you have within you the strength, the patience, and the passion to reach for the stars to change the world.”

Harriet Tubman.