There were a lot of great games that came out in the last 12 months, but do we really think that there were 90 games that deserved to be called outstanding? The editors at IGN apparently think so, as they handed out about 90 scores of 9.0 or better in the last 12 months, not counting repeats on other systems or collector’s editions. Now, in case you were wondering, that means there were almost 2 games that came out every week in the last twelve months that the editors at IGN think are worthy of being called outstanding titles.
What a month!!!
By comparison, Gamespot appears to have given out about half of that number in the last 12 months, and GiantBomb, a site that is known for its creator’s infamous falling out with Gamespot over a poor review of Kane and Lynch, recorded about 20 ratings that would be equivalent to a 9 or higher on their 5 star scoring system.
To be perfectly fair, some of the disparity between IGN and Giantbomb can be accounted for by the fact that IGN seems to rate a significantly larger number of online and mobile titles, but even accounting for that fact, there is a rather large difference in the number of highly rated games coming out of IGN’s editorial offices. In fact, in a sample of 51 big name titles that all three sites reviewed, IGN had a whopping 43 scores above 9.0 while Gamespot and Giantbomb had 27 and 24 respectively.
Even IGN didn't give this game a 9
Now, I don’t necessarily have a problem with a site giving out a higher number of good scores than other gaming sites, but there are at least two things about IGN’s situation that are a little bothersome. The first thing is that making a 9.0 your standard score for an above average game creates the false impression that those games are even in the same ballpark as the truly outstanding titles, such as Red Dead Redemption, Fallout 3, and Batman: Arkham Asylum. Do we really think that these games, which received 9.7, 9.6, and 9.3 from IGN, are only .3-.7 points better than games like Snoopy: Flying Ace or Dragon Lair for the iPhone? I’m guessing not.
Out my fucking way Batman.
The more insidious problem, however, is that it isn’t entirely obvious that some of these games are not getting higher scores as a result of some sort compensation, monetary or otherwise. Is it a coincidence that the IGN background recently sported a rather large ad for Sin and Punishment: Star Successor, which received a 9.0 from Daemon Hatfield? (Correction: Sin and Punishment actually received pretty high scores from the rest of the media, so it is probably unfair to pick on Mr. Hatfield here.) Or that the new Transformers game, which as I recall shared a rather large booth with IGN at E3 this year, also received a 9.o? (If anybody has a pic of that booth, I’d like to get one for confirmation.) Frankly, it is hard to tell, but when the overall press rating for Transformers is a 7.9, I don’t find IGN’s enthusiasm particularly convincing.
Oh, Dragon's Lair, you're so sexy on the iPhone. I'm leaving John Marsten for good this time. I swear!!!
For a Defcon: Awesome update on the IGN ratings issue, which includes a discussion of the some your criticisms, check here
Matty
22 Comments
Just about any game that has ANY amount of hype behind it gets an auto 9.0+ from ign.
Or! IGN doesn’t review hype but rather games, unlike most sites.
can someone tell me why you go on ign, its terrible!
IGN has certainly bowed to peer pressure for about the last 2-3 years and just gives all the big titles, ESPECIALLY PS3 exclusives, high scores.
Resistance 2 got 95/100 from IGN. 95/100! that game is utter rubbish, and certainly worse than even the first resistance – which wasnt a great game – which IGN also gave 91/100. they are ridiculous scores for average games.
the big doozy though, was MGS4. giving a game that is as polarising as MGS4 a 10…….utter rubbish. sure, to SOME people its a 10, but to others its a 4, and the review needs to be impartial and get that point across. it didnt, all it did was say how its the greatest thing since sliced bread.
its just something ive now come to expect from IGN unfortunately, which is why i take their scores with a grain of salt.
if you guys ever post on the ign boards watch out for these idiots
1.robsull14
2.crushermania1592
3.owned.
4.icee-freeze
5.salvador238 he’s a snitch who will tell on you if you type the smallest infraction
6.smart one. the thinks he’s smart when he dont know jack-s***
7.mrrobp needs a shrink
8. phenix1979 if you piss this guy off he will stalk you and he will even take your pic and post it on gay porn sites just to get revenge.
if you ever post on IGN watch out for these buttholes. that’s why i got banned! because of these assholes.
sorry i mean those assholes.
If a game is good its good, period.
and Gamespot is an utter sh*thole, for Christ’s sake they have fat forumites as editors.
You realize they give they gave Gears 2 the same score as UC2? Having played both I find Gears 2 a fun but overly rehashed version of Gears 1. That’s my opinion but you don’t see me screaming that IGN must include my personal opinion on the matter in their review. Oh please, the argument that to some people a game is worthless applies to every game and to suggest they should have done it because you’re apparently butthurt over MGS4 is plain stupid.
You’re saying IGN’s journalism lacks integrity. I actually agree with most of IGN’s opinions. Part of the problem could be a generational one where older people see more evolution in games and ups the review score based on that. A younger person who hasn’t seen how far video games have come isn’t as impressed because they don’t know how revolutionary something really is.
@Joe ya, there’s no middle ground really, just look at the GTAIV review. It’s filled with every type of hyperbole imaginable, they said it had an “Oscar-worthy script” which is pretty laughable in itself, but I was extremely disappointed with GTAIV because it never delivered on the promise that came with San Andreas. And IGN, and almost every other site following suit basically said it was the best game ever made. There hasn’t been a single game this generation that has deserved a 10
Well we’ve all got the internetz so it only takes a couple of clicks to get a second opinion, and I think most gamers that might read a review on IGN are savvy enough to read around and make thier own minds up.
I’ll say one thing for IGN though – their reviews are at least thorough and usually a decent read, even if you don’t regard the final score.
It’s almost a given these days that the bigger the site, the more skewed the ratings are gonna be.
My advice is to read the editorial, get a feel for what they’re saying about the gameplay. Then read another site’s review. Then another, and another, and if you like what they are all saying you can make your purchasing descision from there. Only an asshole would buy a game based on the final score of one website.
@ joe.
I can understand that MGS4 is not to everyone’s taste but I don’t think there’s a man alive that would give it a 4/10. Even if you absolutely hate shooty stealth games and cutscenes the character design alone would earn it a 6. There’s a lot of love in that game, it’s blatantly obvious.
Me? I’d give it an 11/10 in a heartbeat. Pure quality.
“impartial”?
Stupid. A review is supposed to be one mans opinion.
“the big doozy though, was MGS4. giving a game that is as polarising as MGS4 a 10…….utter rubbish. sure, to SOME people its a 10, but to others its a 4, ”
Joe are you a complete moron or something?
You said it yourself to some people its a 10, so you ever thing the reviewer was one of the people who thought it was a 10 which is why it received one?
A review is nothing but that one person’s opinion regardless if its on a big name website or what, its that single person’s opinion. If you ever read or listened to IGN podcast you would know even the different reviewers on the site don’t always agree with each other’s scores. Most think Ryan over rated Bayanetta, others think Hilary overrated GTA4.
But they understand its that person’s opinion.
Maybe you should learn that
I personally feel that picking out IGN’s review scores is really unjustified. They review way more titles compared to the other sites, which isn’t surprising as they review DLC & Virtual Console titles in addition to iPhone apps.
Now, looking at the comment from Joe, I feel you are being really hard on IGN’s review process. A review reflects a reviewer’s opinion on a title, and I feel that both Resistance 2 & Metal Gear Solid 4 are considered to be excellent titles to many, and it so happens that the reviewer (Jeff Haynes in both instances) liked them.
What a silly article. By your logic, if a kids flick gets 5/5, it’s on-par with an Oscar winning title that also gets 5/5. Of course games like Snoopy aren’t as good as Fallout, but Fallout 3 also has a lot more to compare and critique, and there, the standards are higher. 10/10 for an XBLA game is great, but 10/10 for a 30+ hour game with an amazing overall presentation is stupendous. I really hate people who make the comparison the way you have in this article. Why would IGN give Snoopy a high score for marketing sakes? Who cares about Snoopy? And why would IGN feel so inclined to please a small publisher, when it’s the small publisher almost always wanting to please the big publication? People just can’t except that there are a lot of good games out there, and they want low scores because low scores dictate discussion and debate, whereas higher scores are just boring. You’re a bunch of winging morons. How about you all play the games IGN gave “Outstanding” to, and accept they’re all GOOD GAMES!
@Joe
Just PS3 exclusives my ass, its across the whole lot. At one point IGN were serious M$ fanboys. Halo 3 95, yeah right. Gears 2 95, I was the biggest fan of Gears 1 and let me tell you Gears to should have gotten a 60 at best, it was pathetic.
I personally dont believe any game deserves a 10. They also gave GTAIV a 10! I prefer to check metacritics averages now when I buy a game. Too much of the internet press is bias. Averages will do.
I am still super confused about that company calendar…there is a super man 64 ds that I was totally unaware of. Also it is outstanding! Well different people have different opinions and IGN’s word isn’t law so who cares if they “like” something you don’t.
The calendar is a joke.
Now we are talking politics here. If anyone thinks IGN doesn’t slide the ratings scale on some titles they’re morons. Some developers/publishers grant early access to demos, previews, interviews, and reviews. With this comes some political capital. You scratch by back and I’ll scratch yours; but if you bite the hand that feeds you, there will no longer be access to anything early. Like I said, it’s just business, so if you want a real idea of a game, get 10 scores and average them, but come off of the “quit picking on IGN” attitude and come join us in the real palm greasing world.
romansboy u dumbass, y would they care about getting a game earlier, its to the developers benifit to give it out before the release date so they can get the review out early. ign isnt made of 5 year old boys, they can wait for a game. idiot
IGN > you
I really shouldn’t waste my time even responding to you fasdj but you are such an imbecile I feel I need to educate you. The reason ANYONE wants exclusive access is profit dollars. If you have a story first the traffic comes to your site, the advertisers pay big money to put their ads on sites with traffic!! Without profit, companys shut down!! Do you understand this or do I need to write it in crayon while you drink your kool-ade?
3 Trackbacks
[...] IGN’s Ratings Are Out of Control [...]
[...] DEFCON : AWESOME » IGN’s Ratings Are Out of Control [...]
[...] DEFCON : AWESOME » IGN's Ratings Are Out of Control [...]