xg4bx Posted October 11, 2012 Share Posted October 11, 2012 Due to Public Relations and $$$ http://www.zeldainformer.com/news/comments/former-ign-employee-admits-review-scores-are-skewed-due-to-public-relations This is one of those things that we always knew but it's kind of depressing to have suspicions confirmed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pixelboy Posted October 11, 2012 Share Posted October 11, 2012 And the worst part: I'm not the least bit surprised. And then they expect us to believe that the Oscar judges are totally honest and unbiased. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GKC Posted October 11, 2012 Share Posted October 11, 2012 (edited) Not really surprised. What's concerning to me is that I generally (on a small sample size) agree with IGN on their reviews whether it's games, movies or television shows. I guess that means I'm biase?... Again not terribly surprised. With that being said though I put more stock into what people say here (and other forums) as well as YouTube than I do IGN. Edited October 11, 2012 by GKC Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+Gemintronic Posted October 11, 2012 Share Posted October 11, 2012 As a kid I always assumed every game was great. As a teen I noticed sub-par games getting above average scores. As an adult I saw reviewers fired for honest opinions. Kane & Lynch anyone? No wonder the gaming mag industry went to spit. We all grew up and got tired of the duplicity. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reaperman Posted October 11, 2012 Share Posted October 11, 2012 (edited) well duh. If I'm a publisher, would I rather send my game to honest reviewers and take my chances, or would I rather pack a bunch of nice trinkets in the box and send it early to the people who always give me good reviews that I can print on the box when it's time to ship? And if I'm a review site, do I want to have the latest reviews, or do I want to review last week's games once everybody has seen my competitor's reviews? It gets even worse for print mags. If they don't have some kind of in, they're a month or more behind. Edited October 11, 2012 by Reaperman Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rex Dart Posted October 11, 2012 Share Posted October 11, 2012 ...sub-par games getting above average scores. Shaquille "4.5 out of 5" O'neal is furious at your accusation! 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HammR25 Posted October 11, 2012 Share Posted October 11, 2012 Next we'll find out there's payola for radio air play. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VW Posted October 11, 2012 Share Posted October 11, 2012 IGN scores have always seemed inflated to me, I stopped reading it years ago. Even after Gerstmann gate at gamespot, their scores seem more reliable but are still higher than I would give. What really annoys me is that no review ever mentions things like DRM. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nukeshed Posted October 11, 2012 Share Posted October 11, 2012 Next we'll find out there's payola for radio air play. That could never happen, more than once, or constantly after the multiple trials! Music is the golden example, incorrigible, and never in err! 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
8th lutz Posted October 12, 2012 Share Posted October 12, 2012 I am not shocked over this. This stuff has been happening for years. I remembered Videogame critic mentioning years ago that a certain company wasn't pleased with the score he gave to a game and refused to change his score. Professional review game sites or magazines had been corrupt for years. The other problem is Game magazines are capable of giving out reviews not what they actually think the grade a game deserves. Many Years ago Gameinformer admitted that to their message board that they rated Paper Mario: The thousand-year Door a 6.75 based on what they think the gamers wanted for a score for the game. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xg4bx Posted October 12, 2012 Author Share Posted October 12, 2012 (edited) I am not shocked over this. This stuff has been happening for years. I remembered Videogame critic mentioning years ago that a certain company wasn't pleased with the score he gave to a game and refused to change his score. Professional review game sites or magazines had been corrupt for years. The other problem is Game magazines are capable of giving out reviews not what they actually think the grade a game deserves. Many Years ago Gameinformer admitted that to their message board that they rated Paper Mario: The thousand-year Door a 6.75 based on what they think the gamers wanted for a score for the game. The hypocrisy of reviews sticks in my craw as well. They will savage a sequel for being too similar to its predecessor yet stand ready to slap a 9+ on Call of Duty every year. Unfortunately no unbiased Consumer Reports exists for gamers. The closest to unbiased/non-bought off is guys like Mark from Classic Game Room on Youtube. Personally I know I made the right decision years ago when I stopped listening to "pro" review sites. It always struck me as a bit odd how the big name sites would often have near identical scores for the big games and hopefully this article will cut down on some of the "yea right" when people suggest that reviews are paid for. Edited October 12, 2012 by xg4bx Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+CyranoJ Posted October 14, 2012 Share Posted October 14, 2012 If only all IGN reviews were like this. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cimerians Posted October 14, 2012 Share Posted October 14, 2012 I check Destructoid. Mainly Jim and a few other guys on there that do them, then I head over to Metacritic and eyeball whats going with the flame wars, I then read up on some fanboy reviews on Amazon. I then make up my own mind. (I'll post here and ask people too or email my friend if he has the game). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xenomorpher Posted October 15, 2012 Share Posted October 15, 2012 I generally watch reviews at Gametrailers and Gamespot. Gamespot tends to be more harsh while Gametrailers is a little more fair. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gabriel Posted October 15, 2012 Share Posted October 15, 2012 I generally only read fan reviews to make a judgement on a game, but even then I mostly ignore them in favor of watching gameplay videos. A gameplay video with no commentary is almost always better and more informative than most reviews. As for professional reviews, I only read them for entertainment purposes. I've noticed that IGN reviewers in particular will blatantly lie regarding what is and isn't part of a game. I suspect that quite a few are written solely based off screenshots of the game and the publisher's promotional text. The pattern for game review sites is that the interns write reviews for the no to low advertising publishers. They crank out some non-committal reviews and at least one of what I call "Bash Reviews." The Bash Review seems to be a promotional stepping stone from what I've seen. Because after the intern writes it they seem to start getting to do higher profile reviews where they can start assigning scores of 8 and higher. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+wood_jl Posted October 16, 2012 Share Posted October 16, 2012 In other news, "Motor Trend Car of the Year" (any every other damn competing award by other magazines/etc) is a bunch of hogwash-for-sale, too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
godslabrat Posted October 17, 2012 Share Posted October 17, 2012 In other news, "Motor Trend Car of the Year" (any every other damn competing award by other magazines/etc) is a bunch of hogwash-for-sale, too. Including, I want to add, the holier-than-thou Consumer Reports. If Kate Winslet wanted to make love by the fire, I wouldn't use that magazine for the kindling. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hydro Thunder Posted October 17, 2012 Share Posted October 17, 2012 The best encapsulation of this thread, and the Gerstmann incident. Source: http://penny-arcade....omic/2007/11/30 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
moycon Posted October 17, 2012 Share Posted October 17, 2012 Including, I want to add, the holier-than-thou Consumer Reports. If Kate Winslet wanted to make love by the fire, I wouldn't use that magazine for the kindling. I was under the impression CR doesn't accept any free products from producers, nor do they have any advertising. Has that changed? What would the incentive be for giving a product a great review if that is the case? Are you stating they do receive $$ for good reviews, and if so, where are you getting your information? No amount of searching I've done turns up anything. Curious to see what information you have. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
godslabrat Posted October 17, 2012 Share Posted October 17, 2012 I was under the impression CR doesn't accept any free products from producers, nor do they have any advertising. Has that changed? What would the incentive be for giving a product a great review if that is the case? Are you stating they do receive $$ for good reviews, and if so, where are you getting your information? No amount of searching I've done turns up anything. Curious to see what information you have. I don't get free products or take advertising money from Nintendo or Apple... I'm still biased as hell toward their products. Bias is a part of our thought process, and to say that you're immune to it just because no money changes hands is arrogant. My information on CR comes from years of working retail and selling the products they recommend. A lot of their advice is just plain terrible. Often the products they'd push people to buy would have very high return/repair rates, or be outperformed by competing products which cost only a little more. In consumer electronics especially, they did a terrible job preparing readers for changes in models and technology, and had the audacity to try and tell retailers what we "should" be charging. A large percentage of the customers who came in and told me CR was the bulk of their research ended up making a very poor buying decision. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
moycon Posted October 17, 2012 Share Posted October 17, 2012 I don't get free products or take advertising money from Nintendo or Apple... I'm still biased as hell toward their products. Bias is a part of our thought process, and to say that you're immune to it just because no money changes hands is arrogant. My information on CR comes from years of working retail and selling the products they recommend. A lot of their advice is just plain terrible. Often the products they'd push people to buy would have very high return/repair rates, or be outperformed by competing products which cost only a little more. In consumer electronics especially, they did a terrible job preparing readers for changes in models and technology, and had the audacity to try and tell retailers what we "should" be charging. A large percentage of the customers who came in and told me CR was the bulk of their research ended up making a very poor buying decision. Ah I think I understand now. In your opinion their work sucks, and you think their good reviews are attempts to plug products they enjoy themselves, not because the reviewers are getting compensated like the IGN employee stated, but because CR staff members are biased towards the products they review. Interesting opinion. Still, Consumers Reports is celebrating their 75 year this year. They must be doing something right! And yeah, no, me personally if I review a product (like my reviews on Amazon or IMDB) I give my honest opinion regardless who manufactured the product. Don't associate your biased tendencies with the rest of the world, because not everyone is you or thinks like you. To suggest you speak for others,now that IS arrogance. I never really put too much stock in IGN because I think we all knew the reviews there were skewed, not because they were biased towards one game producer over another, but because they were getting paid to do it. If they were just biased, I might still think their reviews/opinions had some worth, as it stands sounds like their opinions aren't even their opinions. What's the point. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xg4bx Posted October 18, 2012 Author Share Posted October 18, 2012 The best encapsulation of this thread, and the Gerstmann incident. Source: http://penny-arcade....omic/2007/11/30 The way I understand it was that he openly bitched and moaned about having to play K&L because he wanted to play Assassins Creed instead. Timers on the offices 360 were checked and it was found he put an hour into K&L before writing his review and did indeed play AC for the entire weekend. In other words, he was fired for a poor review of a game he barely played. Supposedly he was on thin ice with Gamespot anyway and this was the straw that broke the camel's back. Of course it sounds sexier to say he was fired for simply giving a game a bad score. It's odd how this was the first and last case of being fired over a poor score I've ever heard of, I see poor reviews all the time and nobody has ever gotten fired over them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reaperman Posted October 18, 2012 Share Posted October 18, 2012 GTA IV 10/10 score Damn game never stopped being annoying--except when it crashed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoulBlazer Posted October 18, 2012 Share Posted October 18, 2012 I've never liked IGN. Gamespot, on the other hand, I used to use all the time. Not only did I agree with their reviews most of the time, but for most of the games I felt they rated it TOO harshly. I'd often bump up a game's score by .5 point or something. Nowdays, I use Amazon, GameFAQ (the good ones), this site, and YouTube to check out games and get reviews. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hydro Thunder Posted October 18, 2012 Share Posted October 18, 2012 The way I understand it was that he openly bitched and moaned about having to play K&L because he wanted to play Assassins Creed instead. Timers on the offices 360 were checked and it was found he put an hour into K&L before writing his review and did indeed play AC for the entire weekend. In other words, he was fired for a poor review of a game he barely played. Supposedly he was on thin ice with Gamespot anyway and this was the straw that broke the camel's back. Of course it sounds sexier to say he was fired for simply giving a game a bad score. It's odd how this was the first and last case of being fired over a poor score I've ever heard of, I see poor reviews all the time and nobody has ever gotten fired over them. Well perfectly honestly I think Gerstmann is a lazy and awful reviewer, I just thought the Penny Arcade take was funny. And if it went down as you say, I will simply say they had the backlash (whatever of it there was) coming for their poor timing and how badly the situation looks when as noted, your site is all about K & L and you're clearly getting $ from the company, and then you fire a guy who writes a negative review of it. You've got to know that's going to look bad, and Germann's been a terrible reviewer his whole career. Should've fired him before that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Like us on Facebook
Follow us on Twitter
AtariAge on Instagram
Watch us on YouTube
Chat on Discord
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.