Support NeoGAF

[NervousXtian]

Not only that, he played key development in the original Star Fox on SNES and other classics, working alongside Nintendo EAD Japan and Miyamoto and co personally.

The reviewer should have bowed down on his knees when Cuthbert called him out, instead he continues to be a douchebag by trying to get the last word and trying to be the "right one" on his blog.

The same "I'm awesome" arrogant behaviour is seen with Greg Miller too.
IGN lost it after 2002/2003.

Just because someone made some great games doesn't mean they can't be wrong. That's insane if you think so.

There's a huge list of talented people who are giant douchebags.


In the end, this is over a cutscene, a inconsequential, non-playable cutscene.

Let me sum this up:

Dude played game, didn't really like it = 6.5.

Dev mad, calls out reviewer on not playing all the "levels"

Dude retracts comment about ending, then posts blog explaining what happened.

Dev admits it wasn't a "level" it was a "cut-scene"

Gaf explodes with hyperbole and conclusions.


Did I get it right? Seriously, this isn't about anything but the 6.5. Anyone who thinks it's about something other than 6.5 is lying to themselves. Score of 8 or higher then this thread isn't made.

 

[tycoonheart]

It's not about the score. It's about the obvious lying, editing, and backtracking

I don't think he lied or backtracked. He definitely edited out a sentence from his review, he even admits to it. He has since put it back in the review.

 

[StuBurns]

So he did finish it on normal?

 

[bj00rn_]

Tried read up on what this controversy was all about, and it ended up being a storm in a teacup. Who gives a shit.

 

[Huff]

I don't think he lied or backtracked. He definitely edited out a sentence from his review, he even admits to it. He has since put it back in the review.

Then he's just incompetent enough to spread misinformation in a review. Enough for a dev to call him out on? That's almost worse than lying

 

[mugurumakensei]

Let me sum this up:

Dude played game, didn't really like it = 6.5.

Dev mad, calls out reviewer on not playing all the "levels"

Dude retracts comment about ending, then posts blog explaining what happened.

Dev admits it wasn't a "level" it was a "cut-scene"

Gaf explodes with hyperbole and conclusions.


Did I get it right? Seriously, this isn't about anything but the 6.5. Anyone who thinks it's about something other than 6.5 is lying to themselves. Score of 8 or higher then this thread isn't made.

your summary is flawed. The developer called out the reviewer on saying there was no reward at the end, and it just goes back to screen. That was false. The game has an ending cutscene that is only viewed on normal or harder. This reviewer then claimed seperately that game is really short on normal the second time (though this was never in the review but as a comment to someone else).

 

[tycoonheart]

Then he's just incompetent enough to spread misinformation in a review. Enough for a dev to call him out on? That's almost worse than lying

Lets be honest here. The developer is at fault for spreading misinformation too. He first tweeted about how the reviewer didn't even play the last stage that unlocks in normal mode. He later tweeted about how the reviewer complained about the game being short but failed to unlock this last stage. He then tweeted about how the only thing that unlocks is this cutscene. Unprofessional all around, if you ask me.

 

[Fixed1979]

Honestly, some of you guys. Guy made a mistake, have none of you ever made a mistake at a job?

I'm sure I fuck up every day but I'm quick to correct and don't try to hide it. My only problem with this is how he handled himself after being called out is something a child or a criminal would do (hide the evidence)...I don't think he's a criminal. Making a significant change to a "news article" after it has been released to the public without noting the changes is amateur hour. Doing this shows me that either IGN or the writter clearly don't give a fuck about it's readers or the whatever the subject of the review is.

 

[AcceptableGhost]

I still continue to wonder how people who play videogames for a living (to review) cannot even take the time to give an earnest try to play all the content in the game. The reviewer for this game I can only assume literally rushed through the game and said damned that was an easy review CHA-CHING. Which is kind of how I feel about a lot of reviews, it feels like they are aiming for the low hanging fruit in all aspects of the game-playing process.

 

[SpacePirate Ridley]

Well, Dylan is awesome, so im glad he discovered this cheat of a reviewer.

 

[Omegasquash]

I'm sure I fuck up every day but I'm quick to correct and don't try to hide it. My only problem with this is how he handled himself after being called out is something a child or a criminal would do (hide the evidence)...I don't think he's a criminal. Making a significant change to a "news article" after it has been released to the public without noting the changes is amateur hour. Doing this shows me that either IGN or the writter clearly don't give a fuck about it's readers or the whatever the subject of the review is.

The appropriate thing to do in this case would have been to own up, replay the game, re-write the review and give a mea culpa. It would take work, yes. Lots of it. Quickly hiding something is childish, I agree.

 

[mbmonk]

Just because someone made some great games doesn't mean they can't be wrong. That's insane if you think so.

There's a huge list of talented people who are giant douchebags.


In the end, this is over a cutscene, a inconsequential, non-playable cutscene.

Let me sum this up:

Dude played game, didn't really like it = 6.5.

Dev mad, calls out reviewer on not playing all the "levels"

Dude retracts comment about ending, then posts blog explaining what happened.

Dev admits it wasn't a "level" it was a "cut-scene"

Gaf explodes with hyperbole and conclusions.


Did I get it right? Seriously, this isn't about anything but the 6.5. Anyone who thinks it's about something other than 6.5 is lying to themselves. Score of 8 or higher then this thread isn't made.

But aren't ending cut-scenes a common reward for beating a video game?

If the reviewer actually saw the end game cut-scene and thought is was inconsequential then why not make that the point of the critique for that part of the review? Something like "I thought the cut-scene wasn't particularly well done" or "The ending didn't really satisfy or add anything to the experience", etc.

Notice that wasn't his critique though. His critique was that there was no real reward for beating the game. But there is a commonly used reward, a end game cut-scene.. if you beat it on Normal mode.

EDIT: Exactly Levious. It's not about a cut-scene, it's about the review process that was used. Which is more important than any single score for a particular game.

 

[levious]

it's about an ending cutscene that the reviewer clearly didn't see, proving that he played through a short downloadable game on casual/easy. That's embarrassing. If we don't expect the reviewers to be competent and play and beat a game on the default settings, then just submit ESRB type footage to them and have them review that.

 

[AcceptableGhost]

Bbbut guys, its about the "experience"! Difficulty shouldn't matter, thats SO 80's right??? If you ever wanted an example of why genre fans should review games, here it is.

 

[Lord Error]

Actually, I think the ending cutscene only shows up if you beat the game on Hard.

The End Level, which is a long boss fight is something that you play after you finish the game on normal (or hard).

I think Dylan has at first thought that Daemon didn't see that last level, but it turned out he only didn't see the end cutscene for which you have to play on hard. That's what I got from all this anyway.

I honestly feel more bad that the guy didn't like the game much at all, than how he went about reviewing it, as I think it's one of the best shmups I played lately. I doubt playing it on normal or hard would have changed his mind at all. I knew I loved the game after the first minute or two of playing it :\

Bbbut guys, its about the "experience"! Difficulty shouldn't matter, thats SO 80's right??? If you ever wanted an example of why genre fans should review games, here it is.

You wouldn't want me reviewing an NFL game, I can tell you that much. It could be the best NFL game in the world, I would have no idea if it is, or how to review it properly.

 

[faridmon]

Its hard to trust a single review when people can't even unluck the important part of the games and review a gimped game. That is why I love Giantbomb. They actually specify furthure in thier Bombcast.

 

[HaRyu]

You wouldn't want me reviewing an NFL game, I can tell you that much. It could be the best NFL game in the world, I would have no idea if it is, or how to review it properly.

Now I have this idea in my head about starting a parody game site that purposely reviews games using reviewers who know absolutely jack-shit about the genre they're playing, yet act like they know what they're talking about.

"So in this latest installment of Madden, I found that it was odd that you couldn't play as Madden himself in the game. When they throw that football thing across the field is so realistic, the physics just blew me away. My big gripe is that it was difficult to pull off combos and finishing moves, although I love the dancing when they get to the end part of the playfield."

 

[Nemo]

dude should've been called out but this backlash is unjustified. Can't believe how folks continue to thrive on controversy, small as they be.

 

[tycoonheart]

Now I have this idea in my head about starting a parody game site that purposely reviews games using reviewers who know absolutely jack-shit about the genre they're playing, yet act like they know what they're talking about.

"So in this latest installment of Madden, I found that it was odd that you couldn't play as Madden himself in the game. When they throw that football thing across the field is so realistic, the physics just blew me away. My big gripe is that it was difficult to pull off combos and finishing moves, although I love the dancing when they get to the end part of the playfield."

The Onion of video gaming. I like it.

 

[InsaneLuchador]

Giant bomb quick look at about 10:57: "Lower the difficulty to casual you loser"
lol
http://www.giantbomb.com/videos/3/

 

[HiVision]

Yes, from his review I really got the impression he didn't see the end epic boss battle - the one that takes up an entire level and is more than 15 minutes long (considering his comments on the game taking minutes to complete), but perhaps he did? He obviously didn't see the ending cut scene though, which is the bit I was calling him out on (due to his comment that the game just puts you back to the title screen without a word when you complete it).

When I pointed that out he should have just said something like "you're right, I only completed the casual mode and that was enough for me, sorry but I just didn't enjoy the game". It would have been strange for a self-declared shmup fan to have written a review about a shmup based on the mode that is designed for people who haven't played a shmup before, but that is a fairly small anomaly in the grand scale of things.

Anyway, Trent Reznor tweeted that he loves the game in spite of destroying a controller over it - and well, that kind of rocks, so I'd like to forget about IGN now and stick with happy thoughts

 

[NervousXtian]

I still continue to wonder how people who play videogames for a living (to review) cannot even take the time to give an earnest try to play all the content in the game. The reviewer for this game I can only assume literally rushed through the game and said damned that was an easy review CHA-CHING. Which is kind of how I feel about a lot of reviews, it feels like they are aiming for the low hanging fruit in all aspects of the game-playing process.

Have it ever actually reviewed a game for a site before? It's not nearly as fun as it always sounds, there's pressure from editors, bosses, devs, and deadlines.

It can be a lot of fun, you're playing a game and get to review it, and you don't have to pay for the game! Which is great when you like or love the game, but when you don't really connect with it, for whatever reason, it's a chore. Just like anything, when it's not a hobby but a job it changes things.

I was terrible at it, and I did it for free, and going in I thought it was going to be such a cool gig. Then I ended up with crap like a Rocket Power game to review and Myst. I was able to actually review a couple of cool games, but I'm telling you powering through something like Rocket Power wasn't "fun" even though, it wasn't a terrible terrible game at the time, it was derivative of all the other 3D adventure/platformers of the time. Did I beat all the games I reviewed? I tried to, but yeah I'd skip a lot of things that someone who enjoyed the game might like.

But do I just review the game for fans of the genre, or just review it how I feel the game is and to a general audience? I prefer the last, you should explain the mechanics, but in the end if I wasn't feeling it, then it didn't score high.

The review read like a game the reviewer wasn't really feeling, not so much rushed, as just he wasn't all that interested in it. But shit, it's a downloadable game in a market with a bunch of downloadable games that are either niche, or just not really all that compelling. Some people will love it, a lot of others will have the reaction he did. Just because it's a PJ game doesn't make it golden.. hell a lot of people ripped Racers (which I actually liked, but didn't play a ton of), Eden while cool wears out it's welcome after a few hours, but is a cool experience. Monsters is a cute and fun TD. Shooter was average at best, IMHO. I see what they were going for, but I just wasn't feeling it. I like what PJ is trying to do, but sometimes concept trumps the overall product produced.

 

[Aizu_Itsuko]

In a situation like this the least thing you could do is deeply apologize and correct the mistake, instead of embarrasing yourself and the whole site.

But what do we know, most of us aren't professional gaming journalists...

 

[JWong]

Just because someone made some great games doesn't mean they can't be wrong. That's insane if you think so.

There's a huge list of talented people who are giant douchebags.


In the end, this is over a cutscene, a inconsequential, non-playable cutscene.

Let me sum this up:

Dude played game, didn't really like it = 6.5.

Dev mad, calls out reviewer on not playing all the "levels"

Dude retracts comment about ending, then posts blog explaining what happened.

Dev admits it wasn't a "level" it was a "cut-scene"

Gaf explodes with hyperbole and conclusions.


Did I get it right? Seriously, this isn't about anything but the 6.5. Anyone who thinks it's about something other than 6.5 is lying to themselves. Score of 8 or higher then this thread isn't made.

How about:

Dude knocks off a couple of points off because he said there's no ending.
Dev tells him that he's lying because there is one.
Dude gets owned.

 

[NervousXtian]

How about:

Dude knocks off a couple of points off because he said there's no ending.
Dev tells him that he's lying because there is one.
Dude gets owned.

You honestly think that the cut scene ending or playing on a different mode would have really changed the score? The review and his blog don't seem to point that direction.

 

[creid]

Yes, from his review I really got the impression he didn't see the end epic boss battle - the one that takes up an entire level and is more than 15 minutes long (considering his comments on the game taking minutes to complete), but perhaps he did? He obviously didn't see the ending cut scene though, which is the bit I was calling him out on (due to his comment that the game just puts you back to the title screen without a word when you complete it).

Is the "ending cut scene" different from the scene telling you that you unlocked hard, which he did mention?

Anyway, Trent Reznor tweeted that he loves the game in spite of destroying a controller over it - and well, that kind of rocks, so I'd like to forget about IGN now and stick with happy thoughts

Saw that earlier, congrats!

 

[Backfoggen]

www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=nA7GK-48sR8#t=59s

 

[Infernodash]

You honestly think that the cut scene ending or playing on a different mode would have really changed the score? The review and his blog don't seem to point that direction.

I've read enough to discern that he didn't give the game a fair shake. Because of that, his review is immediately deemed insincere. It's worth noting that his demeanor on twitter and his blog post isn't helping him either. He comes off extremely smug as if he can do no wrong.

 

[LQX]

The OP really should be updated in some manner to reflect some of the changes to the story rather than the pile on which is still going on. You have these huge screen shots then a single line link at bottom.

 

[Kazerei]

Here's a better summary.

Daemon's review:

Finish the last stage and defeat the final boss and what is your reward? A swift kick back to the title screen with no more than "congratulations."

Dylan's tweet

@DaemZero you didn't play it on normal (as is obvious from your review) - completing it on casual doesn't unlock the last epic stage

Daemon's tweet

@dylancuthbert Rest assured I definitely beat it on normal. Usually a big fan of your games, sorry this one didn't click for me.

Dylan's tweet

@DaemZero if you beat it on normal you would have seen the entire ending sequence

Daemon's review:

Finish the last stage and defeat the final boss and what is your reward? A swift kick back to the title screen with no more than "congratulations."

Dylan's tweet

woah @DaemZero that's really unprofessional..you removed the section from your review showing clearly you rushed through the game in casual

Daemon's blog:

In both casual and normal mode, when you complete all three stages you unlock the "last stage." So I played through this last stage on both difficulties.

Dylan's tweet

@JDFatalist the level unlocks, but it doesn't give you the big finale ending - in casual it does just plonk you back on the title screen

Dylan on NeoGAF

Dylan here - I'd like to point out I never complained about the score (that's all opinion-based anyway and you can't change that), and obviously when I called out the reviewer for only playing casual he quickly re-edited the bits of the article and that really showed a bit of guilt I think. (and made it look like I was complaining about nothing, which was pretty annoying)

When you clear the game on Normal you get the full epic ending - I called it a "stage" in my twittery haste early this morning, but the point I was making is that it was obvious the guy had only played the game in casual mode due to the complaint that the game just puts you back to the title screen.

To begin with, when you complete the game in Casual, it *does* just put you back to the title screen. When you complete it in Normal it gives you the full ending (with voice acting!)
On top of that, when you go back to the title screen it tells you that you have unlocked the new Hard mode (which also gives you a really cool visual unlock).

So I stand by my case, the guy definitely only played through casual which is a "hold your hand" mode, and if that's fine for a review then that's fine with me too, but I think he should specify that in the review so people can understand what they are reading.

We've had this kind of quick rushed review on every single one of our games, and it's always the first review to make the press - from there on the reviews are well-written and detailed. So yes, I am a bit hard on the gaming press and the quality of their editorial... we all need to be to be honest. There are actually good people out there really trying to do a good job in the gaming press with detailed articles and in-depth articles, and even some investigative stuff. This is the press we should encourage; not the rushed reviews to be first to get page views.

 

[PetriP-TNT]

You can't spell IGN without KOTAKU!

 

[gatti-man]

But aren't ending cut-scenes a common reward for beating a video game?

If the reviewer actually saw the end game cut-scene and thought is was inconsequential then why not make that the point of the critique for that part of the review? Something like "I thought the cut-scene wasn't particularly well done" or "The ending didn't really satisfy or add anything to the experience", etc.

Notice that wasn't his critique though. His critique was that there was no real reward for beating the game. But there is a commonly used reward, a end game cut-scene.. if you beat it on Normal mode.

EDIT: Exactly Levious. It's not about a cut-scene, it's about the review process that was used. Which is more important than any single score for a particular game.

+1 When I read his apology it came off as and BS track covering. Just because he said he played it on normal and that his final sentence was an oversight doesnt mean he actually did. It all smells like lies to me. If it really was an oversight why did he have the guilty knee jerk reaction of editing. He just would have come back with an answer that he felt the ending was lacking to the point of not mentioning it.

The whole thing is pretty obvious reading between the lines. Sure the dev was less than honest too but his bending the truth showed the true colors of the reviewer imo.

 

[rpmurphy]

Leaving the ending aside, he complains about the length (in non-specific terms) and replayability of the game when he completely fails to mention there are higher difficulty modes, two of which are unlockable, which you would think would be important to point out for a game of this genre, no? He wrote that the game has nothing more to offer than basically a single play of the game when he had only played on the sub-normal difficulty before putting up the review. This from a supposed shmup fan? It has to be either laziness or dishonesty. For the cynical me, it makes me think that he didn't mention them simply because he didn't play the normal or higher difficulty modes and tried to hide it. But sure, he rushed it likely, but that's no excuse to misrepresent the game like that.

 

[Kazerei]

Leaving the ending aside, he complains about the length (in non-specific terms) and replayability of the game when he completely fails to mention there are higher difficulty modes, two of which are unlockable, which you would think would be important to point out for a game of this genre, no? He wrote that the game has nothing more to offer than basically a single play of the game when he had only played on the sub-normal difficulty before putting up the review. This from a supposed shmup fan? It has to be either laziness or dishonesty. For the cynical me, it makes me think that he didn't mention them simply because he didn't play the normal or higher difficulty modes and tried to hide it. But sure, he rushed it likely, but that's no excuse to misrepresent the game like that.

I agree. And as kassatsu mentioned, there are new gameplay elements in the hard and brutal difficulty levels. The IGN review was clearly rushed and uninformative.

 

[AcceptableGhost]

I agree. And as kassatsu mentioned, there are new gameplay elements in the hard and brutal difficulty levels. The IGN review was clearly rushed and uninformative.

This isn't new. I wonder how many reviews actually mention that Ninja Gaiden Black / Bayonetta / Vanquish have remixed harder difficulties. This is the reason why so many games don't actually change up the harder difficulty (beyond tweaking some damage numbers), is because a lot of people don't play them (or are even aware of them) for both reviewers or players.

 

[Infernodash]

This isn't new. I wonder how many reviews actually mention that Ninja Gaiden Black / Bayonetta / Vanquish have remixed harder difficulties.

I guess beating a game on its easiest difficulty and then writing a review saying the game is short and easy is common practice too?

 

[Gravijah]

This isn't new. I wonder how many reviews actually mention that Ninja Gaiden Black / Bayonetta / Vanquish have remixed harder difficulties. This is the reason why so many games don't actually change up the harder difficulty (beyond tweaking some damage numbers), is because a lot of people don't play them (or are even aware of them) for both reviewers or players.

i know i don't bother with most higher difficulties because it's just "NOW ENEMIES TAKE 5 TIMES LONGER TO KILL!"

 

[AcceptableGhost]

I guess beating a game on its easiest difficulty and then writing a review saying the game is short and easy is common practice too?

Game reviews barely ever even talk about difficulty anymore, so probably?

i know i don't bother with most higher difficulties because it's just "NOW ENEMIES TAKE 5 TIMES LONGER TO KILL!"

This is true for most games, but people who did not even try Ninja Gaiden Black on Hard after beating it are missing out tremendously. Although that may be unfair given that NGB probably has more work put into the extra difficulties than any game I know.

 

[Nealand Liquor]

Oh come on.

I have was a member of the IGN boards since 2001 officially (unofficially since 2000) and they have just been on a downward spiral IMO since Jeremy left (and even before really). Fuck man, there was a mass exodus TWICE on their boards! Once for IGN Insider, and once just a year ago.

I thought we were talking reviews, not their massive assfuck of the board community.
(I too was a known member on the vesti/game gb's since 03 and left due to IGN's modnazi'ing and general retardation).

Oh come the fuck on.

They've been making fools out of themselves for like a decade.

Unnecessarily hostile response to a simple question don't you think?

I personally don't trust IGN's reviews after purchasing a game way back in 03 based on their glowing review only to be burned. However, with that said, I was under the impression that the accusations of IGN having no credibility was based on multiple proven occurrences of moneyhatting or unethical conduct, and not just shitty reviews.

 

[Infernodash]

Game reviews barely ever even talk about difficulty anymore, so probably?

Well if it isn't stated in the review then it's inaccurate from the start. Why have a profession for gaming journalism if the journalists are gonna put in less effort than a third grader would doing a book report?

 

[AcceptableGhost]

Well if it isn't stated in the review then it's inaccurate from the start. Why have a profession for gaming journalism if the journalists are gonna put in less effort than a third grader would doing a book report?

I don't know if your talking against me? I am agreeing with you, this is really bad.

 

[echoshifting]

The OP really should be updated in some manner to reflect some of the changes to the story rather than the pile on which is still going on. You have these huge screen shots then a single line link at bottom.

This would be nice. It's kind of a hard thread to jump into at this point...

 

[Infernodash]

I personally don't trust IGN's reviews after purchasing a game way back in 03 based on their glowing review only to be burned. However, with that said, I was under the impression that the accusations of IGN having no credibility was based on multiple proven occurrences of moneyhatting or unethical conduct, and not just shitty reviews.

I guess half-assed journalism isn't unethical, even if it involves, not completely finishing games, misrepresenting information, and generally being extremely dogmatic. Cool...

 

[Limanima]

But they gave Uncharted 3 a 10.

This proves they fail. They obvioulsy rushed thru U3 too, or else they would have give it a 11/10.

 

[Infernodash]

I don't know if your talking against me? I am agreeing with you, this is really bad.

No not talking against you, just clicking quote and replying when I have a thought. We're both in agreement. I just happened to be clicking your name. lol

 

[MrPliskin]

Just because someone made some great games doesn't mean they can't be wrong. That's insane if you think so.

There's a huge list of talented people who are giant douchebags.


In the end, this is over a cutscene, a inconsequential, non-playable cutscene.

Let me sum this up:

Dude played game, didn't really like it = 6.5.

Dev mad, calls out reviewer on not playing all the "levels"

Dude retracts comment about ending, then posts blog explaining what happened.

Dev admits it wasn't a "level" it was a "cut-scene"

Gaf explodes with hyperbole and conclusions.


Did I get it right? Seriously, this isn't about anything but the 6.5. Anyone who thinks it's about something other than 6.5 is lying to themselves. Score of 8 or higher then this thread isn't made.

Have you even followed this? Cuthbert wasn't upset, and simply commented on ONE PIECE of the review. It is not possible to be this dense...

He stated that the game has no ending, and boots you out to the main menu. Dylan simply says "if you play it on normal, you'll get a cool ending".

Deamon blatantly lies and says "oh yea, I beat it on normal". Notice that Dylan has NO ISSUE that he didn't like the game. He still only clarifies that if he would have completed it on normal (not casual) that he would have seen the ending sequence.

Deamon saves face (tries to) removes that piece from his review, and is called out for it (he did, after all, tell a white lie over twitter).

At no time does Dylan have an issue with the score, his taste, or anything else. Not once.

 

[Hela]

I don't get how this one reviewer who fucked up equals to everyone one at IGN doing the same and it being like their prime directive for reviews.

 

[MrPliskin]

I don't get how this one reviewer who fucked up equals to everyone one at IGN doing the same and it being like their prime directive for reviews.

Well, the fact that so many are willing to back him up (co-workers from IGN) means they clearly don't have an issue with the behavior, no?

 

[erpg]

Ha. Makes me wonder how many reviewers played through Bayonetta on automatic.

 

[vulva]

so... nothing really happened and this is 19 pages longer than it should be?