This is hilarious, but they must be doing something right. They get shit loads of views on their review vids and have plenty of subs and followers all over social media.
>”I don’t like the game so IGN scoring it higher than I would means they are ignorant paid shills”.
Same person, unironically:
>”I loved the game and IGN didn’t give it a perfect 10 so they are idiotic paid shills.”
Reality: games that are realistically a 4-6 in quality don’t make covers, and games that are 1-3 don’t get any mention at all. That’s why it seems like the scoring system favors higher numbers. It’s basically survivorship bias.
This is why a lot of sites stopped giving numeric scores. They wouldn’t need to apply a 1 or 2 point bump to any AC or CoD games if the journos weren’t threatened by a horde of neck beards (look what happened after they gave Cyberpunk a mediocre score)
Dude I swear, every review from them if it isnt them giving some average ass game a 9 or 10 is always a 7.8.
You know J2 Global the parent company of IGN is partly owned by Sony?
This is hilarious, but they must be doing something right. They get shit loads of views on their review vids and have plenty of subs and followers all over social media.
Wait. Do people actually use their reviews?
+goes to IGN+
+clicks on “Reviews”+
+selects “Games”+
+two of the first ten reviews are rated either 4 or 5+
+next ten, one is a 4+
+next ten, one is a 2 and one is a 4+
+Average score of 30 most recent reviews is 7.03+
No wander they suck so bad, what a shit criteria to judge anything on.
Does it have water? Yes= -4
There was a point in the early 2000’s when anything that wasn’t CoD on an Xbox was automatically given a shit score and a tonne of criticism
Nothing but shills
At least they gave the shitty gta trilogy a 5
Really the rating system is 6-10 and they’ll give you a 5 if you’re actually shit
>”I don’t like the game so IGN scoring it higher than I would means they are ignorant paid shills”.
Same person, unironically:
>”I loved the game and IGN didn’t give it a perfect 10 so they are idiotic paid shills.”
Reality: games that are realistically a 4-6 in quality don’t make covers, and games that are 1-3 don’t get any mention at all. That’s why it seems like the scoring system favors higher numbers. It’s basically survivorship bias.
Some of you put too much focus on the number instead of the actual words said in the review.
A number hasn’t mattered to me for years.
It really makes you ^feel like you’re in a shitty IGN review.
Ever since “7.8: Too much water”, I have thoroughly ignored their reviews
What now, they didn’t give your favorite game a 9?
That is at least in part down to people seeing 6 as already being complete trash which means the scale needs to be adjusted.
Nice
cant beat a puzzle for 9 year olds? -4 points
I think your missing the has US politics +1 point
Extra credit if it features a minority.
This is why a lot of sites stopped giving numeric scores. They wouldn’t need to apply a 1 or 2 point bump to any AC or CoD games if the journos weren’t threatened by a horde of neck beards (look what happened after they gave Cyberpunk a mediocre score)
On another note, their guides are horrible (at least on mobile). They have little to no actual useful information
sonic pocket adventure
Checks out