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

Forums - Gaming Discussion - Your opinion on IGN and Gamespot?

outlawauron on 27 April 2008

IGN is good, but I think people are a little to harsh on gamespot.

I like IGN the most out of the two though.



"We'll toss the dice however they fall,
And snuggle the girls be they short or tall,
Then follow young Mat whenever he calls,
To dance with Jak o' the Shadows."

Check out MyAnimeList and my Game Collection. Owner of the 5 millionth post.

Around the Network
krik on 27 April 2008

I love IGN (have IGN's Hilary Goldstein though) and hate GameSpot.



PSN ID: krik

Optimistic predictions for 2008 (Feb 5 2008): Wii = 20M, PS3 = 14M, X360 = 9.5M

 

Aj_habfan on 27 April 2008

I like both. Gamespot has the best interface and some good news and such, although most of the people there are the worst of the worst fanboys. I've been going to Gamespot since 2004, I don't go to IGN regularly, I just read their reviews on games I am interested in.



FOOD on 28 April 2008

I like IGN better. Mostly because of a few of their editors. My favorite is Greg Miller. Most of his reviews are spot on with my opinions. So now I just trust his every word on games because we practically have the same taste. But for the most part, everyone has a different opinion, and no one should take a review as a mandate.



zeitgeistmovie.com

PS3 Trophies

Ratix240sx on 28 April 2008

Both are terrible. Ign hasn't been any good since they sold out all those years ago and gamespot has always been trash.



Around the Network
noname2200 on 28 April 2008
CAL4M1TY said:
I've never been a huge fan of Gamespot (I find their reviews to be intentionally harsh) but after that Kane and Lynch Fiasco, I've been put off by them forever.

As for IGN, I don't particularly mind that PS3 reviews get lower than 360's alot of time, because alot of what they say is quite warranted (framerate issues in multiplatform EA sport games). What I don't like is the copy and paste nature of their reviews, they credit two different authors for what is essentially the exact same review (with the exception of swapping console names and a random paragraph or two describing the difference between them).

I wouldn't say they were bias to the 360 though, or else they wouldn't have separate teams for each platform doing reviews (talking about exclusives here, not the copy and paste garbage for multiplatform games). I would hate for an internet where people changed their opinion to agree with the masses, If i wanted that I'd just stick to the real world. That's why I actually enjoy the PS3 versions usually (not always) getting a lower review score, so I can see how uneffected the reviewers are by the flame comments (Heck, even the dude that reviewed Lair told people to flame him for giving a low score!)

On IGN, Jeff Haynes, Matt and Bozon are probably the only article writers I consistently enjoy reading. You can tell they are fanboys, but at least they know it and make fun of themselves (and each other). The rest are pretty much the stereotypical nerdy gamer.

 Since this expresses my feelings on the matter completely and more concisely than I could, I'll just say "read above."