Is IGN a credible source for reviews, still?

#1Pac12345Posted 10/18/2013 4:23:05 AM
Honest question here. Like, we're talking about the site who gave us this jewel:

http://m.ign.com/articles/2011/10/22/the-playstation-vita-is-set-to-succeed

The company who was suspected to accept bribes from publishers a few years ago, and the company who gave MW3 9 score.

Seriously, people? Heck, even Audrey Drake was known to be a Nintendo suck up and gave games insanely high scores.
#2squatch22Posted 10/18/2013 4:27:06 AM
Or any review site that gives Elder Scrolls: Glitchfest, high scores.
---
RIP Hiroshi Yamauchi. RIP Tom Clancy.
http://img.gamefaqs.net/screens/1/9/b/gfs_75574_2_16.jpg
#3Revival125Posted 10/18/2013 4:29:27 AM
Only when it gives a game you like a bad review m I rite???

When it gives the next Mario 9/10 suddenly this board will be proclaiming IGN amazing and..."damn that stupid gamespot giving it 7, look at the other cramp reviews they have".
---
Spread Your Wings And Fly Away With Me
#4demonlord6696Posted 10/18/2013 4:32:43 AM
Revival125 posted...
Only when it gives a game you like a bad review m I rite???

When it gives the next Mario 9/10 suddenly this board will be proclaiming IGN amazing and..."damn that stupid gamespot giving it 7, look at the other cramp reviews they have".
#5JackalPosted 10/18/2013 4:33:24 AM
Only when they are favorable for the games that one likes. Other than that, they are IGNorant according to people who do not agree with their scores.
---
PSN: Jackal-5, XBox: Jackal 55 (No, I don't have a 360)
EVE Online: Jonak, Ouya: Zeek_Bronz
#6Pac12345(Topic Creator)Posted 10/18/2013 4:33:46 AM
Revival125 posted...
Only when it gives a game you like a bad review m I rite???

When it gives the next Mario 9/10 suddenly this board will be proclaiming IGN amazing and..."damn that stupid gamespot giving it 7, look at the other cramp reviews they have".


No. If you pay attention to IGN's history, you will notice that regardless of company or brand, theu rate games bases on the reviewer's preferences. This means they do not produce objective objective content, but rather fanboy content. Whether it is Nintendo, Sony, or Microsoft.
#7Neo_HeartlessPosted 10/18/2013 4:40:39 AM
Reviews are and always will be opinion. Unless the game is technically broken that is.

As such they should always been seen as little more than a guideline to form your own opinion.

They also can never be proved to be impartial. There will always be an element of doubt and their own opinions might colour their reviews.
---
[Wubeth Intensifies]
#8RiaanYsterPosted 10/18/2013 4:54:37 AM
I don't think any gamer with more than 2 years experience playing takes review scores all that serious.

Everyone has at least one game they loved that scored junk.
#9Alnilam81Posted 10/18/2013 5:17:02 AM
Who cares, you going to throw accusations at all the other sites that have given it a bad review too. Personally I find the high score from Famitsu more suspicious than any of the others, but of course only the bad reviews are possibly fake/lies/bribed if it fits your agenda.
#10Pac12345(Topic Creator)Posted 10/18/2013 5:24:16 AM
Alnilam81 posted...
Who cares, you going to throw accusations at all the other sites that have given it a bad review too. Personally I find the high score from Famitsu more suspicious than any of the others, but of course only the bad reviews are possibly fake/lies/bribed if it fits your agenda.


No, I am not saying that. Did you even read what I posted? I am saying that IGN gives reviews, both good and bad, based on subjective parameters.

Why is this bad? Because they sell you (Consumer) on supposed "Professionalism". Seeing as how they have become so influential in consumer perception, this is somewhat troubling.

Again, look at the games they praise and bash. They do not produce objective content. Regardless of company. Read.