Send News. Want a reply? Read this. More in the FAQ.   News Forum - All Forums - Mobile - PDA - RSS Headlines  RSS Headlines   Twitter  Twitter
Customize
User Settings
Styles:
LAN Parties
Upcoming one-time events:

Regularly scheduled events

Game Reviews

View
17 Replies. 1 pages. Viewing page 1.
< Newer [ 1 ] Older >

17. Re: Game Reviews Oct 28, 2011, 12:37 Alamar
 
Verno wrote on Oct 27, 2011, 11:45:
It's the journalism equivalent of your newspaper editing out mistakes in their online issue or failing to give correction notices. Granted I doubt most of us expect much from IGN but it's situations like this that help perpetuate the whole "lol gaming journalism" attitude.

Tonight at 11! We apologize for all the fear mongering we spout to keep consumers fat and happy...

-Alamar
 
Avatar 22996
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
16. Re: Game Reviews Oct 27, 2011, 18:59 Wowbagger_TIP
 
I don't see any other explanation for what happened except that the reviewer lied. The other explanations offered here so far just make no sense given what was written by the reviewer.  
Avatar 9540
 
"The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, but wiser people so full of doubts." -- Bertrand Russell (I think...)
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
15. Re: Game Reviews Oct 27, 2011, 17:34 Prez
 
Regardless of whether or not the developer was annoyed by the 6.5 score, the evidence is pretty damning that the reviewer was at least being dishonest, if not less than professionally thorough in his review. Trust is pretty important in media, even if it is only gaming media, so I'd say, yeah, this is a problem. I'm not sure too many gamers remain that trust IGN too far anyway, but it's the principle of the thing. Their score still factors into the metascore on metacritic.  
Avatar 17185
 
“The greatness of a nation and its moral progress can be judged by the way its animals are treated.”
- Mahatma Gandhi
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
14. Re: Game Reviews Oct 27, 2011, 16:58 briktal
 
Tumbler wrote on Oct 27, 2011, 13:20:
And I think reviewers should disclose what they play on for that reason. Or, more likely, reviewers should play on what they feel their audience will play on.

Not sure if it matters but the reviewer wrote a follow up to this:

Blog

To clarify, there are three stages in SideScroller. In both casual and normal mode, when you complete all three stages you unlock the "last stage." So I played through this last stage on both difficulties.

To me it just looks like the devs were furious about getting a 6.5 from IGN and decided to try and make the reviewer look stupid. In the end it makes me think this game is more complicated than it's worth. Stages don't unlock on easy mode? There is no ending unless you play it on normal? There is an ending? Bah.

This is not a good way to get people to buy your game and Pixeljunk ends up looking unprofessional.

Wonder what others gave this...checking metacritic...oh my. IGN is the only review. Moving on.


There are three basic explanations. One is what you said. A second is that the reviewer did only play it on casual but maybe replayed it on normal after this blew up. The other is similar to the first, but the dev is instead upset that the reviewer wasn't impressed by the "epic ending sequence."
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
13. Re: Game Reviews Oct 27, 2011, 13:20 Tumbler
 
And I think reviewers should disclose what they play on for that reason. Or, more likely, reviewers should play on what they feel their audience will play on.

Not sure if it matters but the reviewer wrote a follow up to this:

Blog

To clarify, there are three stages in SideScroller. In both casual and normal mode, when you complete all three stages you unlock the "last stage." So I played through this last stage on both difficulties.

To me it just looks like the devs were furious about getting a 6.5 from IGN and decided to try and make the reviewer look stupid. In the end it makes me think this game is more complicated than it's worth. Stages don't unlock on easy mode? There is no ending unless you play it on normal? There is an ending? Bah.

This is not a good way to get people to buy your game and Pixeljunk ends up looking unprofessional.

Wonder what others gave this...checking metacritic...oh my. IGN is the only review. Moving on.

 
99gamers.com-Game trading site, PC digital trading!
Kickstarter "Game Developer"!
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
12. Re: Game Reviews Oct 27, 2011, 11:45 Verno
 
briktal wrote on Oct 27, 2011, 11:23:
To really know how big a deal the playing on casual thing was, I'd need to see exactly what the ending thing is. I can't tell if it's a whole level or just a cutscene or what from the discussion. But it's hard to put all the blame for this on the reviewer when you have the developer on twitter saying "Your review is inaccurate, there is a better ending if you play on normal" then "Oh my god you removed the inaccurate part of the review that is so unprofessional."

Right you haven't seen it for yourself but you get context from both sides. The developer says the reviewer only played on the lowest difficulty and thus didn't see all of the content the game has to offer. The reviewer says this isn't correct and that he did play on Normal. The developer points out the impossibility of that scenario given that the reviewer criticizes the lack of a final stage, something he would have seen in the Normal version. Reviewer says nothing but edits his review to remove that criticism.

It's not a one sided interaction and the big deal isn't about the difficulty itself, it's that the game reviewer lied and tried to play revisionist history. If he had just admitted his mistake and taken responsibility for it then it would have been slightly embarrassing but people would have moved on after the 3 hour news cycle on reddit or whatever.

It's the journalism equivalent of your newspaper editing out mistakes in their online issue or failing to give correction notices. Granted I doubt most of us expect much from IGN but it's situations like this that help perpetuate the whole "lol gaming journalism" attitude.

This comment was edited on Oct 27, 2011, 12:19.
 
Avatar 51617
 
Playing: Alien Isolation, 7 Days to Die, Dragon Age Origins
Watching: The Canal, Brazil, The Town That Dreaded Sundown
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
11. Re: Game Reviews Oct 27, 2011, 11:42 Beamer
 
Tumbler wrote on Oct 27, 2011, 11:33:
Actually, playing on casual is a big deal for some games.

Not a fan of this kind of thing. If the buyer is expected to pay full price then don't restrict content. Last stage, hard mode, etc. The ign guy posted a response to this as well. Pixeljunk looks kind of shady in all this.

Lots of companies won't unlock certain things, such as a harder difficulty level, unless you play on one. But they're open about this.

What bothers me more in the context of reviews is that some games just suck on casual but are fun on harder levels.

And I think reviewers should disclose what they play on for that reason. Or, more likely, reviewers should play on what they feel their audience will play on.
 
-------------
Music for the discerning:
http://www.deathwishinc.com
http://www.hydrahead.com
http://www.painkillerrecords.com
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
10. Re: Game Reviews Oct 27, 2011, 11:33 Tumbler
 
Actually, playing on casual is a big deal for some games.

Not a fan of this kind of thing. If the buyer is expected to pay full price then don't restrict content. Last stage, hard mode, etc. The ign guy posted a response to this as well. Pixeljunk looks kind of shady in all this.
 
99gamers.com-Game trading site, PC digital trading!
Kickstarter "Game Developer"!
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
9. Re: Game Reviews Oct 27, 2011, 11:23 briktal
 
Beamer wrote on Oct 27, 2011, 11:11:
Verno wrote on Oct 27, 2011, 11:09:
briktal wrote on Oct 27, 2011, 11:03:
The IGN thing sounds like a minor issue with one point in a review was twisted into pretty standard small-guy sympathy marketing. Who is supposed to be the bad guy in this?

Uhhhh IGN? Did you read the quoted text? If he had criticized them for not making a better Casual difficulty playthrough then that would be one thing but he said they omitted having a final stage, the developer corrected him and he lied about it saying he did complete it on Normal. After all that he edited his review to remove the text where he made the assertion. So yeah while I'm not going to go run out and buy their game or host a pity party it seems pretty clear cut IGN fucked up here.

Yeah. Playing the game on casual? Not too big of a deal. Having to amend the review because you played it on casual? Not too big of a deal, especially if the game withholds content from casual players without letting them know.

Lying about playing on casual? Big deal.
Amending a review without a "correction" statement explaining why it was amended, particularly if fessing up to a mistake? Big deal.

The reviewer made two huge mistakes that turn nothing into something.

To really know how big a deal the playing on casual thing was, I'd need to see exactly what the ending thing is. I can't tell if it's a whole level or just a cutscene or what from the discussion. But it's hard to put all the blame for this on the reviewer when you have the developer on twitter saying "Your review is inaccurate, there is a better ending if you play on normal" then "Oh my god you removed the inaccurate part of the review that is so unprofessional."
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
8. Re: Game Reviews Oct 27, 2011, 11:13 Beamer
 
Actually, playing on casual is a big deal for some games.
Some games really withold fun on casual. You get fewer enemies who are much dumber and often stand there. It's worth knocking a game down a few points for having a pathetic casual mode, but if the reviewer doesn't play it on harder difficulties he'll miss the nuances of a game.

I've certainly gone back to a few games and played through a second time on an easier difficulty because I'm just there to find things I missed and lost interest within minutes because the challenge is so far back and all thrill is gone.
 
-------------
Music for the discerning:
http://www.deathwishinc.com
http://www.hydrahead.com
http://www.painkillerrecords.com
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
7. Re: Game Reviews Oct 27, 2011, 11:12 wrlwnd
 
briktal wrote on Oct 27, 2011, 11:03:
The IGN thing sounds like a minor issue with one point in a review was twisted into pretty standard small-guy sympathy marketing. Who is supposed to be the bad guy in this?

Yeah, take the IGN side on this.

No wonder they get away with crap like this when people are so clueless and forgiving.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
6. Re: Game Reviews Oct 27, 2011, 11:11 wrlwnd
 
edited to add quote below  
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
5. Re: Game Reviews Oct 27, 2011, 11:11 Beamer
 
Verno wrote on Oct 27, 2011, 11:09:
briktal wrote on Oct 27, 2011, 11:03:
The IGN thing sounds like a minor issue with one point in a review was twisted into pretty standard small-guy sympathy marketing. Who is supposed to be the bad guy in this?

Uhhhh IGN? Did you read the quoted text? If he had criticized them for not making a better Casual difficulty playthrough then that would be one thing but he said they omitted having a final stage, the developer corrected him and he lied about it saying he did complete it on Normal. After all that he edited his review to remove the text where he made the assertion. So yeah while I'm not going to go run out and buy their game or host a pity party it seems pretty clear cut IGN fucked up here.

Yeah. Playing the game on casual? Not too big of a deal. Having to amend the review because you played it on casual? Not too big of a deal, especially if the game withholds content from casual players without letting them know.

Lying about playing on casual? Big deal.
Amending a review without a "correction" statement explaining why it was amended, particularly if fessing up to a mistake? Big deal.

The reviewer made two huge mistakes that turn nothing into something.
 
-------------
Music for the discerning:
http://www.deathwishinc.com
http://www.hydrahead.com
http://www.painkillerrecords.com
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
4. Re: Game Reviews Oct 27, 2011, 11:09 Verno
 
briktal wrote on Oct 27, 2011, 11:03:
The IGN thing sounds like a minor issue with one point in a review was twisted into pretty standard small-guy sympathy marketing. Who is supposed to be the bad guy in this?

Uhhhh IGN? Did you read the review text comparison? If he had criticized them for not making a better Casual difficulty playthrough then that would be one thing but he said they omitted having a final stage, the developer corrected him and he lied about it saying he did complete it on Normal. After all that he edited his review to remove the text where he made the assertion. So yeah while I'm not going to go run out and buy their game or host a pity party it seems pretty clear cut IGN fucked up here.
 
Avatar 51617
 
Playing: Alien Isolation, 7 Days to Die, Dragon Age Origins
Watching: The Canal, Brazil, The Town That Dreaded Sundown
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
3. Re: Game Reviews Oct 27, 2011, 11:03 briktal
 
The IGN thing sounds like a minor issue with one point in a review was twisted into pretty standard small-guy sympathy marketing. Who is supposed to be the bad guy in this?  
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
2. Re: Game Reviews Oct 27, 2011, 10:45 Creston
 
Don't pay IGN money for a positive review? Then they just make shit up!

IGN: EA's number one cheerleader since 2001.

Creston
 
Avatar 15604
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
1. Re: Game Reviews Oct 27, 2011, 09:56 nin
 
Ohhhhh, IGN. You dumbasses...I love it when you get caught with your hand in the cookie jar.

 
http://store.nin.com/index.php?cPath=10
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
17 Replies. 1 pages. Viewing page 1.
< Newer [ 1 ] Older >


footer

Blue's News logo