1up bought out by IGN

Retr0gamer

http://www.1up.com/news/1up-joins-forces-with-ign

Seems like a bad thing to me. I really like 1up especially their special features and podcasts. IGN really are a pathetic games site so I'm hoping they're poor journalism doesn't spill over. However 1up was on the decline with many of it's best writers let go or leaving for Gamepro (which is now a very good site). As long as there's little interference with the quality 1up writing and 1up gets more money out of this to support it it could be good.

Zero-Cool

Feel exact same. I don't have a clue how IGNnorant release the rediculous reviews they do and still get seen as one of the biggest gaming sites!

megaten

I don't really care to be honest. The only gaming site I really read is destructoid and that's only out of habit, the writers and staff i actually like are all long since gone save one or two.

johnny_ultimate

IGN - the worst thing to ever happen to games criticism. Metacritic comes close.

Don't really read 1up anymore anyway, but alas bought out by the worst of the many **** game sites.

J. Marston

What's the best site for game reviews then?
It seems IGN isn't liked too much.

Retr0gamer

It really depends on the reviewer and not the site for me.

megaten

I don't read reviews for games unless I'm interested in a particular persons opinion on it, and I'd rather listen to a podcast for that.

Zero-Cool

I always look for the Gametrailers game reviews. IGN have the worst reviews i've ever seen/heard.

Varik

Only listened to the podcasts but the same goes for IGN, never really go on to any site any more. I just get news from their feeds and already have opinions on what games i want so no need for reviews.

RAIN

Gametrailers get it on the money 90% of the time for me. I'm not all that bothered by IGN, they get a lot of slack, I think for the most part they come across as un-smug. It's not high art we're discussing, it's games I think I stopped reading 1up after David Elise left(many other good writers left before him).

I very much doubt much will change on the editorial side of 1up, IGN don't need another site filled with goofy editors, I'm sure they just wanted to have the best of both worlds. Now the do.

Retr0gamer

Not a fan of gametrailers and they're reviews are unsurprisingly really and only cover the big games. IGN used to be great but they are awful now and it's silly how they can get reviews utterly wrong. Destructoid have a really bad reviewer at the moment that reviewed Tactics Ogre and Ys 1 and 2 and they are two of the worst reviews I've ever read.

megaten

Retr0gamer wrote: »

Not a fan of gametrailers and they're reviews are unsurprisingly really and only cover the big games. IGN used to be great but they are awful now and it's silly how they can get reviews utterly wrong. Destructoid have a really bad reviewer at the moment that reviewed Tactics Ogre and Ys 1 and 2 and they are two of the worst reviews I've ever read.

Oh god I read those, Didn't mind the Ys review but the Tactics Ogre one was a bit dumb. It's fine if he didn't like the game but I think even people who hate it would think for a bit before calling it average. The thing i don't like about his review is that he gives a fairly balanced summery of what he liked and didn't like and then picks a random number from the lower half of the scale.

honru

I used to be a regular visitor to IGN in and around ten years ago but now the site just looks like one big advertisement.

Retr0gamer

megaten wrote: »

Oh god I read those, Didn't mind the Ys review but the Tactics Ogre one was a bit dumb. It's fine if he didn't like the game but I think even people who hate it would think for a bit before calling it average. The thing i don't like about his review is that he gives a fairly balanced summery of what he liked and didn't like and then picks a random number from the lower half of the scale.

He got both so wrong it's ridiculous. It's very obvious he isn't a fan of the genre so why the hell did he review them? I don't like sports games so I'd never review them. He ended up giving what is considered the finest tactical RPG ever 5/10 and 3/10 to one of the best old school RPGs and called its soundtrack crap, a soundtrack that is considered one of the best ever composed. The guy doesn't have a clue.

richymcdermott

I usually prefer independant reviewers from youtube.

johnny_ultimate

Prefer just getting some general feedback from around the 'net. Edge aren't always write, but their reviews often point you in the right direction. Same with Gamecentral - don't check them as much (used to religiously) but they're refreshingly honest. Other than that, feedback from other gamers is the best way IMO with a general critical opinion from trustworthy sources.

Alas, game critics are an overenthusiastic bunch for the most part. It's always a little distressing at how happy they are handing out perfect scores. As is always the way on metacritic - skip the top third and the bottom third and see how it levels out in the middle :pac:

IGN and Gamespot though - alas, you suspect their reviews aren't always independent.

phant0m

I don't know why people get so hung up on scores from review sites like IGN or whatever. Fair enough if the score isn't backed up by the text, but it's just one persons opinion at the end of the day.

Retr0gamer

The problem isn't that it's one persons opinion with IGN and Gamespot, it's that it's the opinion of the publishers advertising money not the person reviewing it. Then you get small budget games from small publsihers with no advertising budget getting unfairly dismissed.

Fnz

johnny_ultimate wrote: »

Alas, game critics are an overenthusiastic bunch for the most part. It's always a little distressing at how happy they are handing out perfect scores. As is always the way on metacritic - skip the top third and the bottom third and see how it levels out in the middle :pac:

Well, I can't read sarcasm, so... 10/10 does not mean a game is perfect. I don't think any reviewer would claim otherwise, because it would be ridiculous to do so.

Metacritic, rather than ignoring the extremes, I use to get a flavour from the establishments I trust and as a jumping off point to articles. That is, if I need more info than I get from podcasts.

I do have sympathy for game reviewers; they have to put up with their audience. It must be hell.

johnny_ultimate

Fnz wrote: »

Well, I can't read sarcasm, so... 10/10 does not mean a game is perfect. I don't think any reviewer would claim otherwise, because it would be ridiculous to do so.

Metacritic, rather than ignoring the extremes, I use to get a flavour from the establishments I trust and as a jumping off point to articles. That is, if I need more info than I get from podcasts.

I do have sympathy for game reviewers; they have to put up with their audience. It must be hell.

I've always hated the concept of grades for games, but it's here to stay. It's more so that the same doesn't seem to be the case for other mediums - it's rare to see films or music get the universal praise a new game does. I'm half joking, but alas metecritic is filled with ignorable reviews from the likes of genericgameblog.nl and IMO IGN. I agree it's worth filtering out the reputable sources too.

But I totally agree on the audience thing, and perhaps the thing that's holding game criticism back in the mainstream. Idiots leap down reviewers throats for having the balls to express an opinion. That's shameful, and given gamers are prone to act of illogic - OMG Portal 2 is short, let's give it 0! - it isn't surprising that many play safe.

megaten

Retr0gamer wrote: »

The problem isn't that it's one persons opinion with IGN and Gamespot, it's that it's the opinion of the publishers advertising money not the person reviewing it. Then you get small budget games from small publsihers with no advertising budget getting unfairly dismissed.

Oh for gods sake I hope that's sarcasm. Are you honestly going to throw the moneyhat argument out there? A company as big as IGN will have completely separate marketing and editorial teams. You get budget and niche games dismissed because they plain old just don't have any interest in them or assume there crap. It's got nothing to do with anyone being in a publishers pocket.

Retr0gamer

Trust me it happens more than you think.

Retr0gamer

johnny_ultimate wrote: »

I've always hated the concept of grades for games, but it's here to stay. It's more so that the same doesn't seem to be the case for other mediums - it's rare to see films or music get the universal praise a new game does. I'm half joking, but alas metecritic is filled with ignorable reviews from the likes of genericgameblog.nl and IMO IGN. I agree it's worth filtering out the reputable sources too.

But I totally agree on the audience thing, and perhaps the thing that's holding game criticism back in the mainstream. Idiots leap down reviewers throats for having the balls to express an opinion. That's shameful, and given gamers are prone to act of illogic - OMG Portal 2 is short, let's give it 0! - it isn't surprising that many play safe.

It seems film studios just accept bad reviews really, game publishers go bananas if you give a big game a bad review. Also lately I've been playing a lot of games that didn't score that well but have interesting ideas and having great fun with them. I think the score system is here to stay though unfortunately.

megaten

Retr0gamer wrote: »

Trust me it happens more than you think.

I'm not saying it doesn't ever happen I just think it has far more to do with current general opinions and attitudes in the gaming press than any sort publisher pressure ever will.

Retr0gamer

Activision pulling advertising money can change a lot of things.

johnny_ultimate

I think the whole Kane & Lynch scandal shows that some sites are very open to advertising influence, and it can take precedence over critical honesty. The fact that they fired a reviewer for complaining that they tampered with his review goes to show that these situations exist.

When I read Gamestop and IGN (I always consider the two to have a similar editorial style) I genuinely find it tricky to tell how honest the reviewer is being, often speaking in broad terms rather than actually criticising the game in depth. It's like Empire with film - increasingly, it's impossible to tell how editorially independent they are. There's just the feeling they are pandering to someone.

There are a load of good reviewers out there, but alas the reality is the opinions you read aren't always 100% honest.

Fnz

Retr0gamer wrote: »

It seems film studios just accept bad reviews really, game publishers go bananas if you give a big game a bad review.

Ubisoft is another with a reputation for hissy fits over reviews. Iirc they stopped sending review code to EGM after what they considered an unjust article.

Movie industry is probably more convinced by the notion that a low Metacritc average does not equate to low sales - I hear people went to see Transformers 2. Whereas PR bonuses based on Metacritic averages are not unheard of in the games industry.

sarumite

I liked 1up's Active Time Babble podcast, though once that stopped I kinda lost interest in 1up tbh. Though I did think 1up was better than IGN so not sure if this will be a good move.

Retr0gamer

sarumite wrote: »

I liked 1up's Active Time Babble podcast, though once that stopped I kinda lost interest in 1up tbh. Though I did think 1up was better than IGN so not sure if this will be a good move.

Well I just discovered that Kat Bailey has a new podcast on gamepro yesterday called roleplayers' realm. Ray Barnhalt is a regular guest as well so should be very similar.

sarumite

Retr0gamer wrote: »

Well I just discovered that Kat Bailey has a new podcast on gamepro yesterday called roleplayers' realm. Ray Barnhalt is a regular guest as well so should be very similar.

Cheers for that....I just subscribed, hopefully it will be similar to ATB.

Varik

Rather it was Joystick, hate Chris Grant.