Why is IGN attacking this game after giving it 9/10?

[Geek Ultra]

it is confusing

[tmaddox]

Originally posted by Settings:

Originally posted by Geek Ultra:

oh ok. they should update the 9/10 they initially released, i guess

IGN is famously paid for their reviews by publishing companies. So unless EA's cheque bounces, nah.

You realize that is not allowed by the FTC right? Both sides could face major fines and penalties if they were caught.

I am not saying that it never happens but I doubt it is as common as some people think.

As for IGN.... In the end they just want clicks. It probably does not matter to them if different writers agree. The person who reviewed the came is the reviewer on record. The other writer wrote a commentary piece that does not change the review at all.

[Boh]

the 9/10 pre release was to maintain access to pre release copys, it's why you shouldn't trust review sites 'early' reviews.

I'd guess the new 'attacking' is then seeing the way the wind is blowing and basically saying 'hello fellow gamers'

[Kan3da.]

Originally posted by Tommy Wiseau:

Game reviews are jokes to begin with they give 99.9% of games 9/10 or 8/10

Think you mean review RATINGS are jokes to begin with?

Its certainly not 99.9% 9s and 8s though, thats silly and obviously not even a semblance of reality.

Your saying 1 in 1000 game reviews is below 80% or 8?

XD

[Grogan]

When I read reviews, I read some good and some bad. Somewhere in the middle is what matters to me. Consider positive points, negative points and the bias they were borne of.

P.S. I don't have this game yet, I'm in the "considering it" phase.

[Ayaka]

Originally posted by Geek Ultra:

Originally posted by EH!:

Different writers? It would be bad if they had more than one writer talking about the same games and they always agreed.

but why would the company allow 2 writers to release two conflicting reviews? shouldn't they stand as one?

It's almost as if people have different opinions or something.

[Sgt. Flaw]

Originally posted by Ayaka:

Originally posted by Geek Ultra:

but why would the company allow 2 writers to release two conflicting reviews? shouldn't they stand as one?

It's almost as if people have different opinions or something.

Yup, ones trans the others not...

We've been over this

[MeltingPotOfFriendship]

Originally posted by Settings:

What's confusing? IGN is and always has been a joke of a company and should be ignore for every game whether their opinion validates your own or not.

They once complained that a Pokemon game set on a small archipelago had too much water.

You can's spell ignorant without IGN.

[Ruffio]

If you going to be serious about review a game, you should stick to be as objective as possible. If you going to go balls to the wall subjective and let your emotions run wild you won't really do a good job, just preaching to your own backup choir. Hard to believe there was no more suitable DA/RPG fan at IGN who would done a better take at it.

[AcidFood]

cause they got no Tegridy

[tmaddox]

Originally posted by Geek Ultra:

Originally posted by EH!:

Different writers? It would be bad if they had more than one writer talking about the same games and they always agreed.

but why would the company allow 2 writers to release two conflicting reviews? shouldn't they stand as one?

Because in the end, IGN wants clicks and if they can get them from those that enjoy the game and those that don't like the game they make more money.

Personally I give them credit for covering both sides.

[MeltingPotOfFriendship]

Originally posted by tmaddox:

Originally posted by Geek Ultra:

but why would the company allow 2 writers to release two conflicting reviews? shouldn't they stand as one?

Because in the end, IGN wants clicks and if they can get them from those that enjoy the game and those that don't like the game they make more money.

Personally I give them credit for covering both sides.

IGN has been long since pozzed. So I'm not at all shocked that they are just going wherever the wind blows.