IGN Review - 9.0

[Dakia]

Ign gave skyrim a 9 as well I believe? and we all know how buggy/broken that was

A lot of reviewers, including PC Gamer, have Skyrim as their GOTY. That was just about the buggiest thing I have ever seen released. I love it, but it was buggy as all get out.

[ElAmigo]

http://pc.ign.com/articles/115/1152717p1.html

They gave rift an 8.5, nothing to see here.

edit: I guess I mean, their rating system is more about hype and advertising than actual gameplay.

I mean if you say so, but Skyrim got a 9.5 while both Skyward Sword and Uncharted 3 got 10's.....now you be the judge. Which was hyped more??

[Low Hanging Fruit]

SWTOR money buys you more then a 9.0 guys. Stop living in the Blizzard reality that billion dollar companies can't afford 10.0 from an internet website. If you look beyond bugs that are recognized and being actively investigated and worked on then you would see a pretty solid platform for an MMO worthy of a 8.5-9.0 level of grade. Sure they only have a month or two to work out several of the big ones before things start to sour (for anyone with patience and understanding) but that has yet to be seen, as you say, it has only been a short amount of time so we cannot judge how good the game is just as we cannot judge how bad or cringe over some of the bugs quite yet either? Just be sure the door swings both ways. If it is too soon to say how good something is then be careful to jump on the bandwagon of how bad it is in the mean time. Seems kind of.. idk.. contradictory if you do?

[Zhyler]

I kind of love IGN, they give good games a good reputation, and sometimes even lesser games good reputation But they rarely give any game an extremely low "grade". They acts like the nice teacher, wich on the flaming internet is probably a good thing.

Now for that akward part when i remind people that they need to read the whole review and not focus on the grade hehe

[Deleted]

To be fair, the rating system that is usually used is completely botched. A 7 means that the game is "ok", an 8 that it is "good", 9 for "very good" and a 10 for "great". Some 11s have been given out despite the scales only reaching 10, which is for "perfect". What about everything below 7? Usually that means the game sucks, but if you have such a scale why even have those there to begin with?

I personally prefer a simple 0 to 5 scale (which makes more sense) where 0 is "unplayable", 1 is "bad", 2 is "average", 3 is "good", 4 is "very good" and 5 is "must buy". Now 5/5 doesn't mean perfect, there are no perfect games, just that it is heavily recommended. Like Ocarina of Time or Smash Brothers Melee, or Warcraft 3.

Having more numbers on the scale just causes inflation in the end, which we see with every review, nobody gets anything below a 6 and if you get something close to a 6 that means the game is for all intents and purposes "bad".

[Mr Gnomage]

To be fair, the rating system that is usually used is completely botched. A 7 means that the game is "ok", an 8 that it is "good", 9 for "very good" and a 10 for "great". Some 11s have been given out despite the scales only reaching 10, which is for "perfect". What about everything below 7? Usually that means the game sucks, but if you have such a scale why even have those there to begin with?

I personally prefer a simple 0 to 5 scale (which makes more sense) where 0 is "unplayable", 1 is "bad", 2 is "average", 3 is "good", 4 is "very good" and 5 is "must buy". Now 5/5 doesn't mean perfect, there are no perfect games, just that it is heavily recommended. Like Ocarina of Time or Smash Brothers Melee, or Warcraft 3.

Having more numbers on the scale just causes inflation in the end, which we see with every review, nobody gets anything below a 6 and if you get something close to a 6 that means the game is for all intents and purposes "bad".

Pretty much agree with this, although I wouldn't say that having more numbers on the scale is "bad" but that abusing the numbers is bad. I always enjoyed x-play back in the day (Adam Sessler is my hero...), because they would give alot of games 3 stars, and that meant they were good, 4 meant amazing, and 5 meant GODLY good. It wasn't ridiculous, where every game that was remotely fun was OMGWTFBBQPERFECT10BATMAN, cause that's ridiculous.

I see too many video game review sites giving out 8/10+ and anything below that means "You don't want to play this game, ever." Shouldn't 5-6 be average? If 10 is the absolute best game out there for that genre, and 1 is the absolute worst, it seems like middle should be average. You also have to keep in mind that the average is changing. Good graphics, sound, and gameplay is pretty standard. Games need more than those things to stand out these days. The storyline has to be utterly amazing, the character interaction needs to be better and deeper. Games are evolving, but reviews aren't. We're seeing games with beautiful graphics and sound, and then freaking out about it, when in reality that's just the evolution of things.

Not saying I don't love Star Wars, and definitely not saying it shouldn't be a 9/10 in the MMORPG genre, just that reviews from big names are pretty stupid these days.

[Mosc]

What does Google have to do with reviewing anything? Nothing. So, thanks for that.

Ah, so you didn't bother to read up on it. That's cool. My point was IGN probably has no control over the ads that are shown. They can probably control the content (games, movies, porn, etc.) but they use a service like Google provides to focus ads shown on their site and cater to what their viewers may enjoy.

So the fact that SWTOR ads may be shown on the review web page is not IGN's doing. Dismissing a review because of it shows a lack of understanding.

On topic: From my experience, I actually thought this review was just about spot-on, including the score. A 9.0 to me says it's an excellent game but not perfect. It's worth your time to play, which is true.

[videotape]

their rating system is more about hype and advertising than actual gameplay.

Yeah, I'm surprised this is still a big secret to so many people here. Game mags have always been this way. Since the beginning of time.

They are marketing rags. Nothing more, nothing less.

[Deadanon]

After watching the video review .. I realised that it was a fanboy glorifying the game without actually talking about any of the flaws that have been mentioned in other reviews. Thats just bad and makes the entire reivew totally worthless.

I also would like to mention that SWTOR is forcing ppl to both pay orginal money and a sub for playing a single player story. And still a gamesite that should be looking at things from a gamer perspective (including value) gives it 9.5 in Lasting Appeal. Thats pretty much says it all.

[Deleted]

After watching the video review .. I realised that it was a fanboy glorifying the game without actually talking about any of the flaws that have been mentioned in other reviews. Thats just bad and makes the entire reivew totally worthless.

I also would like to mention that SWTOR is forcing ppl to both pay orginal money and a sub for playing a single player story. And still a gamesite that should be looking at things from a gamer perspective (including value) gives it 9.5 in Lasting Appeal. Thats pretty much says it all.

To you. Opinion =! fact, learn that.

The reviewer loves the game, what are you going to do about it? I suggest you ignore him and form your own opinion if it is such a problem for you. There might be other reviewers out there that believe the game is worth a lower score, if so stick that review to your heart as your bible if you want to.

[Deleted]

This is really funny: http://www.metacritic.com/game/pc/st...e-old-republic

Hilarious how the people whose opinions should matter more: the players, rate it much lower than the "professionals".

Seems swtor is like one of those weird foreign movies: wins prizes at Cannes but doesn't sell one cinema ticket, and makes you wonder for what purpose did the film crew make the movie if they never intended to make any money from it.

You really,really should take metacritic with a pinch of salt and actually READ the 1 or 2 Point User-reviews. Most of them are "omg can't log in/hate this game/think that [random feature] is crap because [insert random problem] so this game is totally shit" or something like that. And some of them are just people who want to ... well, hate the game.

An example?

Singleplayer game with multiplayer thrown on so they can charge $15 a month. Virtually no endgame. If you enjoy starwars, might want to check it out for 1-50, but after that drop it instantly.

On Dec. 20th ... must have been be a very well informed person. Btw. the same person gave Dragon Age 0 points.

oh, my new favourite:

Biggest wasted opportunity in years. Who ever was responsible for making this game a WoW clone should be shot and the developers should hang their heads in shame to have created such a blatantly uninspired rip off of a tired and outdated formula. It could of been so different, don't waste your money on this one it deserves to go down and the biggest flop in gaming history.

[Glorious Leader]

My personal favorite of the user reviews is:

The final nail in the Bioware coffin, after the massive let down that was Dragon Age 2 I thought Bioware would get their act together and regain some dignity to their name. Sadly, it seems that SWTOR is not the game to do this, furthermore, I'm afraid this game will actually make Bioware disband as a developing studio. The game is a WOW clone, with even worse visuals, cut and paste classes, the most boring grindfest gameplay you will ever experience. If you want an MMO with substance hold onto your wizard hats fro guild wars 2. Hopefully the writers and developers at Bioware will be banished to a galaxy far, far away......

His perceived grievance against the company for some fucking reason or another completely over shadows anything he may have to say about SWTOR. It's a joke. Most of those reviews follow the same mold.

[Herecius]

I don't know why reviews come out for MMOs so soon after their release date, seriously.

They gave Rift an 8.5 right after it released, and we can all see how that went. What would they say if they reviewed it now?

I'm treating SWTOR like every other MMO - give it 2 months at least to 'cook in the oven' and then see how it's doing.

[Deleted]

IGN is the foxnews of video games. I think that was more his point.

Kinda what I was thinking ^^

[Herecius]

My personal favorite of the user reviews is:



His perceived grievance against the company for some fucking reason or another completely over shadows anything he may have to say about SWTOR. It's a joke. Most of those reviews follow the same mold.

That person wasn't the only one that thought Dragon Age 2 was a pile of crap. I don't know if I'd give it a 0, but it certainly left an ugly taste in my mouth. I regretted actually playing it. It really hurt my perception of Bioware, and since I'm no special snowflake, I'm sure there are others who also thought less of them after it.

[Caiada]

And this is why numbered reviews for video games need to be abolished. "Oh this person doesn't agree with me! They must be baised/paid/etc.!"

[Loaf Lord]

That person wasn't the only one that thought Dragon Age 2 was a pile of crap. I don't know if I'd give it a 0, but it certainly left an ugly taste in my mouth. I regretted actually playing it. It really hurt my perception of Bioware, and since I'm no special snowflake, I'm sure there are others who also thought less of them after it.

And yet people seem to think that if a company produces one game that wasn't up to par with their usual standards that suddenly the company is done for, it really is hilarious and sad at the same time.

[Glorious Leader]

They gave Rift an 8.5 right after it released, and we can all see how that went. What would they say if they reviewed it now?

Pray tell how did Rift go? As far as I'm aware its thriving still.

[Farora]

Major gaming websites are controlled by advertizers. So I wouldn't trust their reviews.

[Glorious Leader]

That person wasn't the only one that thought Dragon Age 2 was a pile of crap. I don't know if I'd give it a 0, but it certainly left an ugly taste in my mouth. I regretted actually playing it. It really hurt my perception of Bioware, and since I'm no special snowflake, I'm sure there are others who also thought less of them after it.

What that has to do with SWTOR or his "review" of SWTOR I'm not sure. He has a hardon for the developer based mostly on some grievance he has from a previous game. His "review" is virtually worthless, it tells us next to nothing about the game and spends more time bashing the developer and a previous title they released. For the record I enjoyed DA2. It sold well, and alot of my friends enjoyed playing it as well.