ign.com has lost alot of credibility with gamers in regards to the review on MVP. half the bugs they'd mention haven't shown up and goes to show, they rushed their review just like game companies rush their product to get to the customers first...
-
I am glad I got the Buell- I love riding it, I love the oddball looks I get on the road- I love people asking "What IS that thing?" I love flying into a corner WAY too hot, scared spitless and sure I'll never hold it at this speed- and hearing the bike whisper "Sissy!"... -
Re: I.G.N-ORE THEIR REVIEW...
i couldn't agree more
-
Re: I.G.N-ORE THEIR REVIEW...
i couldn't agree more
Comment
-
Re: I.G.N-ORE THEIR REVIEW...
</font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />
ign.com has lost alot of credibility with gamers in regards to the review on MVP. half the bugs they'd mention haven't shown up and goes to show, they rushed their review just like game companies rush their product to get to the customers first...
<hr /></blockquote><font class="post">
You may be right- but has it occurred to anyone that the reviewer at IGN had probably been playing MVP for weeks and weeks and weeks before he wrote his review, not 2 days.
It would be interesting to have you write a review of MVP now and write a second one on April 14- I bet there will be some differences.
My point is that after 2 days one can gloss over or ignore any small little flaws MVP (or any other game) has. But as time passes those flaws can start to drive you nuts. I mean I have seen people complain about the CPU letting baserunners get by without a tag because of the animation and fielders diving in the wrong direction, so it does happen. Not often, but it happens.
Now imagine it happens and costs you a run or a game. Now imagine you are playing your 80th test game and it happens and cost you a run. And let's say it cost you a run a few games ago and it cost you a game back on game 59 and 47 and 39, etc.- you get the idea.
I think that what most people forget is that most good reviews are written from a longish perspective. All the WOW!!! factor is gone and you just have to look at what you like and don't like, what is done well and what is not.
So maybe a little more understanding is in order
Comment
-
Re: I.G.N-ORE THEIR REVIEW...
</font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />
ign.com has lost alot of credibility with gamers in regards to the review on MVP. half the bugs they'd mention haven't shown up and goes to show, they rushed their review just like game companies rush their product to get to the customers first...
<hr /></blockquote><font class="post">
You may be right- but has it occurred to anyone that the reviewer at IGN had probably been playing MVP for weeks and weeks and weeks before he wrote his review, not 2 days.
It would be interesting to have you write a review of MVP now and write a second one on April 14- I bet there will be some differences.
My point is that after 2 days one can gloss over or ignore any small little flaws MVP (or any other game) has. But as time passes those flaws can start to drive you nuts. I mean I have seen people complain about the CPU letting baserunners get by without a tag because of the animation and fielders diving in the wrong direction, so it does happen. Not often, but it happens.
Now imagine it happens and costs you a run or a game. Now imagine you are playing your 80th test game and it happens and cost you a run. And let's say it cost you a run a few games ago and it cost you a game back on game 59 and 47 and 39, etc.- you get the idea.
I think that what most people forget is that most good reviews are written from a longish perspective. All the WOW!!! factor is gone and you just have to look at what you like and don't like, what is done well and what is not.
So maybe a little more understanding is in order
Comment
-
Re: I.G.N-ORE THEIR REVIEW...
</font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />
</font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />
ign.com has lost alot of credibility with gamers in regards to the review on MVP. half the bugs they'd mention haven't shown up and goes to show, they rushed their review just like game companies rush their product to get to the customers first...
<hr /></blockquote><font class="post">
You may be right- but has it occurred to anyone that the reviewer at IGN had probably been playing MVP for weeks and weeks and weeks before he wrote his review, not 2 days.
It would be interesting to have you write a review of MVP now and write a second one on April 14- I bet there will be some differnces
<hr /></blockquote><font class="post">
If he had been playing the game for months he was doing it on a beta copy and he shouldn't have done a review off of it.Comment
-
Re: I.G.N-ORE THEIR REVIEW...
</font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />
</font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />
ign.com has lost alot of credibility with gamers in regards to the review on MVP. half the bugs they'd mention haven't shown up and goes to show, they rushed their review just like game companies rush their product to get to the customers first...
<hr /></blockquote><font class="post">
You may be right- but has it occurred to anyone that the reviewer at IGN had probably been playing MVP for weeks and weeks and weeks before he wrote his review, not 2 days.
It would be interesting to have you write a review of MVP now and write a second one on April 14- I bet there will be some differnces
<hr /></blockquote><font class="post">
If he had been playing the game for months he was doing it on a beta copy and he shouldn't have done a review off of it.Comment
-
Re: I.G.N-ORE THEIR REVIEW...
</font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />
</font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />
</font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />
ign.com has lost alot of credibility with gamers in regards to the review on MVP. half the bugs they'd mention haven't shown up and goes to show, they rushed their review just like game companies rush their product to get to the customers first...
<hr /></blockquote><font class="post">
99% of every print review I have ever done was done from a beta. And I would bet that the same holds true for most of the larger internet site reviews.
You may be right- but has it occurred to anyone that the reviewer at IGN had probably been playing MVP for weeks and weeks and weeks before he wrote his review, not 2 days.
It would be interesting to have you write a review of MVP now and write a second one on April 14- I bet there will be some differnces
<hr /></blockquote><font class="post">
If he had been playing the game for months he was doing it on a beta copy and he shouldn't have done a review off of it.
<hr /></blockquote><font class="post">Comment
-
Re: I.G.N-ORE THEIR REVIEW...
</font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />
</font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />
</font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />
ign.com has lost alot of credibility with gamers in regards to the review on MVP. half the bugs they'd mention haven't shown up and goes to show, they rushed their review just like game companies rush their product to get to the customers first...
<hr /></blockquote><font class="post">
99% of every print review I have ever done was done from a beta. And I would bet that the same holds true for most of the larger internet site reviews.
You may be right- but has it occurred to anyone that the reviewer at IGN had probably been playing MVP for weeks and weeks and weeks before he wrote his review, not 2 days.
It would be interesting to have you write a review of MVP now and write a second one on April 14- I bet there will be some differnces
<hr /></blockquote><font class="post">
If he had been playing the game for months he was doing it on a beta copy and he shouldn't have done a review off of it.
<hr /></blockquote><font class="post">Comment
-
Re: I.G.N-ORE THEIR REVIEW...
I don't know about you all, but I read reviews to get an 'idea' about a game, not a purchasing decision. People join IGN so they can get a decent review right as the game hits the shelvs.
I see no problem with the review, it's a person's opinion.. nothing more nothing less.
If they can reveal any show stopping bugs, it just saved you $50.
ToddComment
-
Re: I.G.N-ORE THEIR REVIEW...
I don't know about you all, but I read reviews to get an 'idea' about a game, not a purchasing decision. People join IGN so they can get a decent review right as the game hits the shelvs.
I see no problem with the review, it's a person's opinion.. nothing more nothing less.
If they can reveal any show stopping bugs, it just saved you $50.
ToddComment
-
Re: I.G.N-ORE THEIR REVIEW...
I disagree,
While the review was a fair interpretation of the game they also made it sound like the problems they were seeing were gamekillers.
Well they are in the business of timely reviews. They can't afford to be late or they will lose insider business. What they should have done is have the gold copy and just see if they see problem with that. Playing the beta is fine but they need th efinal version to see if it occurs there. But that's too much more for them.
Comment
-
Re: I.G.N-ORE THEIR REVIEW...
I disagree,
While the review was a fair interpretation of the game they also made it sound like the problems they were seeing were gamekillers.
Well they are in the business of timely reviews. They can't afford to be late or they will lose insider business. What they should have done is have the gold copy and just see if they see problem with that. Playing the beta is fine but they need th efinal version to see if it occurs there. But that's too much more for them.
Comment
-
Re: I.G.N-ORE THEIR REVIEW...
</font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />
I disagree,
While the review was a fair interpretation of the game they also made it sound like the problems they were seeing were gamekillers.
Well they are in the business of timely reviews. They can't afford to be late or they will lose insider business. What they should have done is have the gold copy and just see if they see problem with that. Playing the beta is fine but they need th efinal version to see if it occurs there. But that's too much more for them.
<hr /></blockquote><font class="post">
Ultimately I agree with you JRod- it would be better if reviews are done form the released game- but sadly that often is not possible. Like you said- for those large sites being "on time" is job one. It is also sad to realize that IGN is not in business to give accurate, great reviews. They are in business to sell ad space and make a profit. Time is money after all. . .
But I think my original point - that the longer most people play a game, the less they like it- still remains true and colors many a review.
Comment
-
Re: I.G.N-ORE THEIR REVIEW...
</font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />
I disagree,
While the review was a fair interpretation of the game they also made it sound like the problems they were seeing were gamekillers.
Well they are in the business of timely reviews. They can't afford to be late or they will lose insider business. What they should have done is have the gold copy and just see if they see problem with that. Playing the beta is fine but they need th efinal version to see if it occurs there. But that's too much more for them.
<hr /></blockquote><font class="post">
Ultimately I agree with you JRod- it would be better if reviews are done form the released game- but sadly that often is not possible. Like you said- for those large sites being "on time" is job one. It is also sad to realize that IGN is not in business to give accurate, great reviews. They are in business to sell ad space and make a profit. Time is money after all. . .
But I think my original point - that the longer most people play a game, the less they like it- still remains true and colors many a review.
Comment
Comment