LOL
this is why IGN sucks ass
lawl what a shitty game...also Matt Crapholemassima should be fired.
Last edited by Joust Williams; 23 Jun 2009 at 01:55 AM.
Farts Farts Farts
LOL
ABOUT ME.
"Underground music should have its back turned, it needs to be gone, untrackable, unreadable"
The worst part about it is the game looks like shit. I just watched the video review. This is the worst example of 'lowered expectations' I have ever seen in my entire life, no exaggeration. He keeps talking about the tech as if it's a Killzone 2 killer but it looks like Half-Life 1 would if it had bad art. The framerate doesn't even look that good. The multiplayer has long legs supposedly, but half of the time he had a mediocre experience. The AI looked terrible in every shot. The maps looked simple and boring as hell. I heard some variant of "Wii owners finally have a good shooter" about five times. This looks like an amateur total conversion (with busted AI trees) from about 1999.
The guy should be fired. But I guess he brings the hits. He does a disservice to the growth of the industry because of his Wii game persecution complex. If I was a consumer and didn't know what to buy, he could dupe me into buying this junk.
Wow, you don't like a Wii game. Color me surprised.
YOU watch the review ;p
Why, the game doesn't interest me, and I don't even have a Wii...
... unlike SOME PEOPLE...
Well I'll admit, I am a sucker for that kind of stuff. But this is one of the worst examples of PR reviewing ever. This douchenozzle has been pimping this game for well over a year. And now that it's here, I see an effort that..well. Come on. Maybe I'm way off base here, but I think it's a microcosm for the state of journalistic integrity in the industry. There is none.
Anyway, I derailed this thread enough ;p Even though it goes hand in hand with IGN being cockmonglers.
You're way off base here.Originally Posted by Joust Williams
I'll break down how advertising and journalism are balanced on IGN. In my experience, it seems that IGN will sell placement and quantity of coverage to an extent (as seems to be the case here), but it has no bearing on the scores or the content of what's said. Case in point, when Terminator Salvation came out, they plastered ads all over the site, had 5 articles on the front page (including one they had me do, presumably because of the deal), and their reviews still said the movie and the game were both shit.
This is how it's always been. Magazines would cut deals to get cover stories, and companies would entice publications to cover their games, but at the end of the day, the review is still the word. It'd be nice if advertising never had to get involved at all, but there's no business model otherwise.
Also, the controls in the Conduit are fucking amazing. It's nothing revolutionary outside of that, but then neither is Halo if you ask me. Yes, ultimately, it is great "for the Wii," and they are grading on a curve to some extent, but it's a good game. It is. And I rarely agree with Cassamassina on much when it comes to reviews.
Braaaaaaainssssss
No. You stop throwing posta, bitch!
That may be true for Terminator: Salvation but I still find GTA4 getting a 10's in every category by three different regional IGN reviewers suspicious (the only exception was the 9.5 for graphics in one of them).
Posting Permissions
Bookmarks