makingmusic476 said: The shotgun in question:

Oh ... my... god.... is it okay that i get a stiffy outta ex-ite-ment from that gif....

Well thats IGN's biased showing yet again.

IGN has shown no bias against Guerrilla.

Well true, infact so far they've been overlly kind its creepy....

But they do nit-pick at it.

Ah, how quickly IGN turns from the most respected site on the internet to the most despised.

It's ironic how much these posts would have differed had that review been about Gears of War 2. Were this game not exclusive, most of you would write it off because of this preview. Let me repost a little something I wrote recently, and this thread proves I was totally on point:

http://www.vgchartz.com/forum/thread.php?id=51046&page=1

The thing is, most of these sites have some huge mistake they've made that has made the PS3 fanbase totally distrust and hate them.

Once you lose the PS3 fanbase, you lose generalized opinion. You lose positive stories on N4G, and gain negative ones. The PS3 fanbase is definitely the most influential on the internet, that's one thing about those guys.

Gametrailers has the game compraison controversy.

Gamespot has the Gerstman firing and the Rachet/Princess scores.

Xplay has the Core Crisis review.

IGN has been very careful not to rock the boat with the Sony fans. That, at least, has been a smart move from a PR standpoint. Screw Sony fans over once, and you're done. I've actually seen sigs of Sony fan avatars pissing on Eurogamer and Edge magazine, lol.

If you're on top, you've got to appease certain audiences. You can't even have the appearance of improperiety. You can't afford to underscore games when you're an early reviewer. In the gaming media, standards are a bad thing. The more you shill, the more popular you are.

I was so epically right about every word of that, that I seriously should have some groupies, just based off the excellence of that post. It was so....inciteful.

Were this preview positive(I haven't read it), it would be being touted to the heavens as confirmation of a AAA game. Since it isn't(confirmation), IGN simply must be wrong, and stupid to boot?

I think IGN's comments are valuable, but I think posting it as a story is kinda wrong. This late in the dev cycle, not much is going to change in a big game like KZ2 -- there won't be new AI types, new weapons, sweeping story changes, etc. That stuff all needs to get thoroughly tested and the game needs to be out the door a good month (or more like 6 weeks) before it hits the shelves, for printing and shipping.

I hope IGN shared these tidbits with Guerilla long before they shared them with the public, if they actually expect any results.  At the same time, they've gone and given themselves a foundation from which to criticize KZ2 with this article.  Again, it would be lame of them to have not shared this feedback earlier -- I doubt Guerilla asked for this feedback recently, actually.

Many of the comments on the article are inflammatory, from other people who appear to have played the single player campaign beta somewhat.  I would wager that Guerilla did indeed address some of the issues that IGN mentioned, although not necessarily all of them, or in the way IGN, or other responders to Guerilla's survey, "asked" for.

It kinda sounds like KZ2 is destined to get a "10" in the graphics dept, from IGN and everywhere else.  I hope the rest of the game scores as well.

God forbid a review site being critical of some design elements.

But this situation shows IGN doing some rather tone- or situation-deaf nitpicking, which they'd avoid like the plague if your little conspiracy/influence hypothesis were correct.

Did gametrailers or anyone else mislabel, or at the time appear to mislabel, 360 games in a way that seemed detrimental, and then unilaterally ban a bunch of people from their message boards for discussing it?  If so, you all would be perfectly entitled to discuss and decry it.

The only thing you're correctly putting your finger on is that Playstation has a large fanbase net-wide: larger proportionally than the posters here represent.  As for the PS3 conspiracy, and the IGN posting which is inconsistent with your conspiracy: no.

Not only that, but 360 peeps around here have already bashed IGN when 'bad' news came out only to reverse themselves later (starcraft et al), so any criticism here ISN'T a Playstation-fan-only issue.  It's fanboyism to suggest otherwise.

The things that IGN thinks should be improved indicates that this game is already very solid and with a couple of adjustments should be AAA worthy.
Not bad at all. Hopefully Sony will do a huge marketing campaign for this game.

My hyphothisis was absolutely correct, but I don't want to get into that, it'd just be a text crit, and it's missing the point. Suffice it to say that IGN is simply an idea, not a person, and individuals write their articles, not some great collective consciousness.

The point is, how quickly the loving PS3 fanbase turned rabid on IGN when they put up a small article criticizing a couple of aspects of the next Sony golden calf. Such a magnificant example of my Sony fanbase theory, and how review sources must now appease that market, or be destined and doomed to lack of credibility in the minds of the average internet gamer. I bet 10 to 1 that this story is on, or will be on N4G(with heavy damage control, and 2 negative 360 articles to counteract it), and spun negatively towards IGN by every commentor and probably the articles poster.

If someone only read N4G, they would think that Sony was easily winning this console war.