Ign Review

[DWadeNShaq]

Re: Ign Review

I love how this guy is just trying to find the smallest things to call this game bad, but in the NBA Live review they were praising the dunk contest the whole time. I saw the Shaq clip where he said Shaq couldnt back down Andre Miller, but he obviously was backing him down and then the guy pulled a spin move. ONLY thing that I saw in the review that was horrible was when shaq was standing on the outside but once again he could have called an isolation play to have everyone move out and then try to blame it on the game. This guy is BS and a moron.

exactly,
u got that right

[DWadeNShaq]

Re: Ign Review

I love how this guy is just trying to find the smallest things to call this game bad, but in the NBA Live review they were praising the dunk contest the whole time. I saw the Shaq clip where he said Shaq couldnt back down Andre Miller, but he obviously was backing him down and then the guy pulled a spin move. ONLY thing that I saw in the review that was horrible was when shaq was standing on the outside but once again he could have called an isolation play to have everyone move out and then try to blame it on the game. This guy is BS and a moron.

exactly,
u got that right

[seanmac]

Re: Ign Review

If I ever read another Hilary post I'll will cut my own friggin throat. That chick cant review a sports game to save her life. Why would they let her review ESPN anyway. She should do DOA Beach Volleyball or some bull like that. I'll say this and I'm done, anytime you read a reveiw (I'm a editor) and someone writes five pages with nit picks, one of 2 things have occurred:

1. Editor doesn't have the applicable experience or knowledge about article and therefore blabs on about nothing (which Hilary does in the majority of her reviews)

2. Was handed an assignment (by default. Someone was sick, absent, etc)or chose to take an assignment to establish a name or gain recognition supplying gamers with the longest and some of the weirdest reviews I have read.

IGN definitely can hire better talent or keep Hil' in her comfort zone; Barbie Doll games and such.

Hilary is a man, you sexist twit.

[seanmac]

Re: Ign Review

If I ever read another Hilary post I'll will cut my own friggin throat. That chick cant review a sports game to save her life. Why would they let her review ESPN anyway. She should do DOA Beach Volleyball or some bull like that. I'll say this and I'm done, anytime you read a reveiw (I'm a editor) and someone writes five pages with nit picks, one of 2 things have occurred:

1. Editor doesn't have the applicable experience or knowledge about article and therefore blabs on about nothing (which Hilary does in the majority of her reviews)

2. Was handed an assignment (by default. Someone was sick, absent, etc)or chose to take an assignment to establish a name or gain recognition supplying gamers with the longest and some of the weirdest reviews I have read.

IGN definitely can hire better talent or keep Hil' in her comfort zone; Barbie Doll games and such.

Hilary is a man, you sexist twit.

[durvasa]

Re: Ign Review

The 2K5 reviewer clearly took a different approach than the Live reviewer, and I think that more of the blame needs to be put on the IGN editing staff. They should realize that people are going to compare these two game's reviews and it probably would have made more sense to have the same guy do both.

There are a few things people are saying in this thread that simply don't make sense, though.

In that funny Shaq clip, the CPU has to be controlling him. Otherwise, the video doesn't illustrate anything. His point was that the AI was messed up, so why would HE control Shaq to illustrate that?

A lot of people are complaining about the graphics rating being less than in past years, even though the graphics are obviously better. Come on, guys. Think. You don't rate graphics relative to game from past years. That's ridiculous. The standards for graphics (and gameplay as well, but to a lesser extent) are constantly increasing, and so the ratings should reflect that. If the game is merely as good as last year graphically and gameplay-wise, then the score SHOULD be lower.

Also, with all the complaints he had in his review, keep in mind that he still gave the game an 8.1 rating which is pretty good. The reviewer wanted to focus on the bad, because when you compare the game to the other ESPN titles the flaws really stick out.

[durvasa]

Re: Ign Review

The 2K5 reviewer clearly took a different approach than the Live reviewer, and I think that more of the blame needs to be put on the IGN editing staff. They should realize that people are going to compare these two game's reviews and it probably would have made more sense to have the same guy do both.

There are a few things people are saying in this thread that simply don't make sense, though.

In that funny Shaq clip, the CPU has to be controlling him. Otherwise, the video doesn't illustrate anything. His point was that the AI was messed up, so why would HE control Shaq to illustrate that?

A lot of people are complaining about the graphics rating being less than in past years, even though the graphics are obviously better. Come on, guys. Think. You don't rate graphics relative to game from past years. That's ridiculous. The standards for graphics (and gameplay as well, but to a lesser extent) are constantly increasing, and so the ratings should reflect that. If the game is merely as good as last year graphically and gameplay-wise, then the score SHOULD be lower.

Also, with all the complaints he had in his review, keep in mind that he still gave the game an 8.1 rating which is pretty good. The reviewer wanted to focus on the bad, because when you compare the game to the other ESPN titles the flaws really stick out.

[Yuckmouf7]

Re: Ign Review

Hilary is a man, you sexist twit.

That makes it worse. I was trying to give him/her the benefit of the doubt.

[Yuckmouf7]

Re: Ign Review

Hilary is a man, you sexist twit.

That makes it worse. I was trying to give him/her the benefit of the doubt.

[23]

Re: Ign Review

NBA 2K4 was not a good game, which is why I find it amusing that people are going nuts that the next year's version isn't getting a 9.5 or whatever it is that people want. It was a bad, bad game. I hope-and I'm sure everyone else hopes as well-that VC has created a substantially better product, but the odds are better that the game resembles 2K4 than that it does not, particularly considering the limited development cycle.

If you want to talk about a bad review, go look at 1Ups NBA Live review. Fluff, fluff, score. Whether or not you like what Hilary is saying, he is at the very least spending most of his time addressing gameplay issues, things that people in here would actually care about. And it's point blank ludicrous to go bashing the review of someone who has played a game that you haven't.

Some of you just dont get it, and we're actually laughing at him for the most part because his little movies and screenshots are inconsistent with what he says. Not only that, his reviewer history is horrid, and the bias is and other things like naming things like isobroken is kinda kiddy like to be honest with you.

Give a nice fair review, and noone will be upset, we want to know if VC improved the game or put out more trash, but when you do things like what
he did here, it's absolutely unbelievable that he actually put this out and felt nothing about it.

[23]

Re: Ign Review

NBA 2K4 was not a good game, which is why I find it amusing that people are going nuts that the next year's version isn't getting a 9.5 or whatever it is that people want. It was a bad, bad game. I hope-and I'm sure everyone else hopes as well-that VC has created a substantially better product, but the odds are better that the game resembles 2K4 than that it does not, particularly considering the limited development cycle.

If you want to talk about a bad review, go look at 1Ups NBA Live review. Fluff, fluff, score. Whether or not you like what Hilary is saying, he is at the very least spending most of his time addressing gameplay issues, things that people in here would actually care about. And it's point blank ludicrous to go bashing the review of someone who has played a game that you haven't.

Some of you just dont get it, and we're actually laughing at him for the most part because his little movies and screenshots are inconsistent with what he says. Not only that, his reviewer history is horrid, and the bias is and other things like naming things like isobroken is kinda kiddy like to be honest with you.

Give a nice fair review, and noone will be upset, we want to know if VC improved the game or put out more trash, but when you do things like what
he did here, it's absolutely unbelievable that he actually put this out and felt nothing about it.

[RubenDouglas]

Re: Ign Review

The 2K5 reviewer clearly took a different approach than the Live reviewer, and I think that more of the blame needs to be put on the IGN editing staff. They should realize that people are going to compare these two game's reviews and it probably would have made more sense to have the same guy do both.

There are a few things people are saying in this thread that simply don't make sense, though.

In that funny Shaq clip, the CPU has to be controlling him. Otherwise, the video doesn't illustrate anything. His point was that the AI was messed up, so why would HE control Shaq to illustrate that?

A lot of people are complaining about the graphics rating being less than in past years, even though the graphics are obviously better. Come on, guys. Think. You don't rate graphics relative to game from past years. That's ridiculous. The standards for graphics (and gameplay as well, but to a lesser extent) are constantly increasing, and so the ratings should reflect that. If the game is merely as good as last year graphically and gameplay-wise, then the score SHOULD be lower.

Also, with all the complaints he had in his review, keep in mind that he still gave the game an 8.1 rating which is pretty good. The reviewer wanted to focus on the bad, because when you compare the game to the other ESPN titles the flaws really stick out.

druvasa.. the same guy(Hil) reviewed both games.. same guy.. thats why theres 100+ posts in this thread.. because its ODD

[RubenDouglas]

Re: Ign Review

The 2K5 reviewer clearly took a different approach than the Live reviewer, and I think that more of the blame needs to be put on the IGN editing staff. They should realize that people are going to compare these two game's reviews and it probably would have made more sense to have the same guy do both.

There are a few things people are saying in this thread that simply don't make sense, though.

In that funny Shaq clip, the CPU has to be controlling him. Otherwise, the video doesn't illustrate anything. His point was that the AI was messed up, so why would HE control Shaq to illustrate that?

A lot of people are complaining about the graphics rating being less than in past years, even though the graphics are obviously better. Come on, guys. Think. You don't rate graphics relative to game from past years. That's ridiculous. The standards for graphics (and gameplay as well, but to a lesser extent) are constantly increasing, and so the ratings should reflect that. If the game is merely as good as last year graphically and gameplay-wise, then the score SHOULD be lower.

Also, with all the complaints he had in his review, keep in mind that he still gave the game an 8.1 rating which is pretty good. The reviewer wanted to focus on the bad, because when you compare the game to the other ESPN titles the flaws really stick out.

druvasa.. the same guy(Hil) reviewed both games.. same guy.. thats why theres 100+ posts in this thread.. because its ODD

[Krayzie12]

Re: Ign Review

NBA Live 2005 was reviewed by Jon Robinson, his name is under the closing comments.. Hilary just has the "Another Take" paragraph of the review at the very end.

[Krayzie12]

Re: Ign Review

NBA Live 2005 was reviewed by Jon Robinson, his name is under the closing comments.. Hilary just has the "Another Take" paragraph of the review at the very end.

[Yuckmouf7]

Re: Ign Review

The Shaq clip was so ******** because anyone who knows basketball, knows that the play that caused the whole floor to spread out is called an isolation play. It is used when def. is man to man and/or ballhandler feels he has advantage over defender.

The other video shows how noobish his controls are, that he couldnt hold down the trigger and turbo long enough to back Miller down and instead let go to early and then took a fade away with 10 seconds left on the clock. Why didnt he just kick it out and then call a Low Post play for Shaq? Because he is an ignorant underpaid/overpaid editor thats why!