• Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!

Matt calls out IGN... Zelda related.

Status
Not open for further replies.
Mr_Furious said:
When all is said and done, IGN's declaration of GOTY will not affect either Zelda's or Okami's (lack of) sales.

not if i go out and buy okami and not zelda as a result of this

i'm just saying

it could happen
 
has anyone stated the obvious yet and said that okami is zelda-lite for people who have sworn off nintendo products?

...anyone?
 
mysticstylez said:
The problem is that you think thats a problem.

"Letters from Iwo Jima" is third-rate trash. It's poorly made, poorly executed and just doesn't deserve the already limited screen time it gets.

Granted, I didn't actually see the movie, but that's not a problem, right? Are you Jack "Bully" Thompson, by any chance?
 
Odysseus said:
not if i go out and buy okami and not zelda as a result of this

i'm just saying

it could happen
That's one. Now there's only 999,999 left for this to matter.

We all know that Zelda will end up selling in the millions where as Okami will be lucky to sell a couple hundred thou. IGN's GOTY will not change this.

BTW, I'm talking U.S. sales.
 
ghostlyjoe said:
"Letters from Iwo Jima" is third-rate trash. It's poorly made, poorly executed and just doesn't deserve the already limited screen time it gets.

Granted, I didn't actually see the movie, but that's not a problem, right? Are you Jack "Bully" Thompson, by any chance?
I think youre confusing it with 'Flags of our Fathers' :P
 
mysticstylez said:
The problem is that you think thats a problem.

Let me clarify what I mean.

If you have editors who are voting for IGN's GOTY and they haven't played all of the games on the list, then that's a problem. They're basically making an uninformed decision.

When they are chosing IGN's GOTY, they are representing IGN, not their personal lists (which I don't have a problem with them not putting Zelda on).

Its like a person handing out an Oscar for best picture and they haven't seen all of the movies that are up for it.

As I said in my original post, this is Matt's words against Mark's words, that's it.

Personally, it doesn't bother me that Zelda didn't win, as Okami is more then deserving to win it (as is Gears of War).
 
ghostlyjoe said:
"Letters from Iwo Jima" is third-rate trash. It's poorly made, poorly executed and just doesn't deserve the already limited screen time it gets.

Granted, I didn't actually see the movie, but that's not a problem, right? Are you Jack "Bully" Thompson, by any chance?



No, but when you say its a problem that people (on IGN) didn't play Zelda, thats LUDICROUS!
 
linkboy said:
Let me clarify what I mean.

If you have editors who are voting for IGN's GOTY and they haven't played all of the games on the list, then that's a problem. They're basically making an uninformed decision.

When they are chosing IGN's GOTY, they are representing IGN, not their personal lists (which I don't have a problem with them not putting Zelda on).

Its like a person handing out an Oscar for best picture and they haven't seen all of the movies that are up for it.

As I said in my original post, this is Matt's words against Mark's words, that's it.

Personally, it doesn't bother me that Zelda didn't win, as Okami is more then deserving to win it (as is Gears of War).

So you have to play every game on the list in order for your own vote to be vaild?

Thats BS.
 
The point is, nobody cares.

This is not the academy awards of VG, it's not even the Teens' Choice award.

Life goes on, Zelda's still a great game, period.
 
Wii said:
I think youre confusing it with 'Flags of our Fathers' :P


colbiglaugsmuc7.gif
 
mysticstylez said:
So you have to play every game on the list in order for your own vote to be vaild?

Thats BS.
I see nothing wrong with each editor having to play each game in the top ten list. It is their job and if they are to voice a "valid" opinion about one game over the other, it's only fair that everyone be fully familiarized with the GOTY candidates.
 
mysticstylez said:
So you have to play every game on the list in order for your own vote to be vaild?

Thats BS.

How is it BS? People who give reviews of movies watch them before giving them reviews and ratings. What, next were going to hear that people are going to start giving game reviews without playing the game in question (which probably happens more then people think).

If you aren't going to have people knowledgable on what they're voting on, then what is the point of having them vote in the first place.

As I said, I have NO issue with them not putting Zelda on their personal lists, that's their opinion and they're entitled to it. The IGN GOTY award is the award that all the IGN editors have said is, in their opinion, the best game for the past year. How can that award be taken seriously if the people who voted for it are not informed on what they're voting on.
 
linkboy said:
If you aren't going to have people knowledgable on what they're voting on, then what is the point of having them vote in the first place.

it's good enough for politics, it's good enough for games
 
Odysseus said:
it's good enough for politics, it's good enough for games

True, and that's part of the reason the government is the mess it is right now (people not paying attention to what is actually going on, but that's another topic).
 
beelzebozo said:
has anyone stated the obvious yet and said that okami is zelda-lite for people who have sworn off nintendo products?

...anyone?

the obvious isn't what you think it is, but you've nonetheless stated it: nintendo fans may attempt to talk about okami, but their preoccupation with "zelda" and "nintendo products" invariably gets in the way.
 
linkboy said:
How is it BS? People who give reviews of movies watch them before giving them reviews and ratings. What, next were going to hear that people are going to start giving game reviews without playing the game in question (which probably happens more then people think).

If you aren't going to have people knowledgable on what they're voting on, then what is the point of having them vote in the first place.

As I said, I have NO issue with them not putting Zelda on their personal lists, that's their opinion and they're entitled to it. The IGN GOTY award is the award that all the IGN editors have said is, in their opinion, the best game for the past year. How can that award be taken seriously if the people who voted for it are not informed on what they're voting on.




What it boils down to it, people are mad that Zelda didn't win and they are trying to find the lamest reasons as to why IGN's votes are invalid.
 
mysticstylez said:
What it boils down to it, people are mad that Zelda didn't win and they are trying to find the lamest reasons as to why IGN's votes are invalid.

Some people probably are (Matt being one of them).

I'm just calling it how I see it. If you're going to be voting for something (or giving a review or rating on it), at least be knowledgable on what you are voting on.

Here is all that this comes down to.

Matt is right (some of the editors didn't play the game) and we are seeing an uninformed vote.

Matt is wrong (the editors did play it) and we are seeing a informed vote and Matt is just acting like a whiny baby.
 
okami isn't even a special case. every perceived threat to a nintendo game gets this treatment. nintendo fandom is an impairment, and i'm happy to report that i haven't got anything comparable.
 
linkboy said:
If you aren't going to have people knowledgable on what they're voting on, then what is the point of having them vote in the first place.

It's kind of a slackass GOTY policy from the looks of it. Regardless of whether anyone here thinks Zelda deserved to win or Okami, or Gundam, or whatever, you have to admit it's kind of flawed and not very all-encompassing (and therefore, pretty meaningless).

Look at pretty much any other legit way of voting for entertainment, like films. 5 or 6 nominees are selected, and then those 5 or 6 movies are certainly viewed in their entirety, by everyone voting. There's no excuse not to experience those 5 or 6 finalists, as opposed to the way IGN appears to do it. Wittling it down to a small number, makes it possible for a somewhat informed decision by all voters.

And don't argue that "There was 5 or 6 finalists in the video, so there!". That list was most likely made as an afterthought, after the real voting, and almost certainly, all the voters did not play through all those games.

Regardless, as previously alluded to, I think there's deep-rooted bias that would still reign but that's unavoidable.
 
mysticstylez said:
I guess my opinion isn't vaild cause I didn't read this whole 12 page thread, thus I wasn't well "informed" to make an opinion.
Correct. Read the thread before spouting off assumptions about a topic you know nothing about.
 
mysticstylez said:
So you have to play every game on the list in order for your own vote to be vaild?

Thats BS.

I think if you didnt play all the games, you can only be expected to vote for the ones you did. Vote for what you like, there's no obligation to vote for something you didnt play..
 
Mr Toast said:
I think if you didnt play all the games, you can only be expected to vote for the ones you did. Vote for what you like, there's no obligation to vote for something you didnt play..

But given a list that includes games you haven't played yet, you aren't exactly making an informed decision by choosing the GOTY among those games.
 
drohne said:
okami isn't even a special case. every perceived threat to a nintendo game gets this treatment. nintendo fandom is an impairment, and i'm happy to report that i haven't got anything comparable.

This is the best post ever because it's so hilariously ironic and I'm sure drohne doesn't even realize it.
 
drohne said:
okami isn't even a special case. every perceived threat to a nintendo game gets this treatment. nintendo fandom is an impairment, and i'm happy to report that i haven't got anything comparable.

I think nintendo trolldom is very much comparable to nintendo fandom, you may wish to seek a second opinion.
 
Branduil said:
This is the best post ever because it's so hilariously ironic and I'm sure drohne doesn't even realize it.

there's nothing ironic about it all, jilted wiitards are something special
 
drohne said:
okami isn't even a special case. every perceived threat to a nintendo game gets this treatment. nintendo fandom is an impairment, and i'm happy to report that i haven't got anything comparable.
Ah ah ah ah Ah, boobies! The greatest logic impairer of all!
 
linkboy said:
How is it BS? People who give reviews of movies watch them before giving them reviews and ratings. What, next were going to hear that people are going to start giving game reviews without playing the game in question (which probably happens more then people think).

If you aren't going to have people knowledgable on what they're voting on, then what is the point of having them vote in the first place.

As I said, I have NO issue with them not putting Zelda on their personal lists, that's their opinion and they're entitled to it. The IGN GOTY award is the award that all the IGN editors have said is, in their opinion, the best game for the past year. How can that award be taken seriously if the people who voted for it are not informed on what they're voting on.

Problem is, a movie is 3 hours MAX. Zelda alone is at least 40 hours thus more than all the movies of a film festival combined.
With that said it's right to say a Game of the Year award is not really valid unless all of the editors (or the vast majority) have played all the games (well at least the best ones).

But remember this is no festival, no competition, it's only a website award. This has no real value and should not have a big impact on game sales. It could have a positive impact on lesser known games like Okami but I'm pretty sure it will never impact sales of a popular series like Zelda negatively.
 
argon said:
But given a list that includes games you haven't played yet, you aren't exactly making an informed decision by choosing the GOTY among those games.

In that case you can only vote for the ones you have played. I'm not under any false pretenses that these reviewers have time to play every single game.
 
Why does someone have to play a good chunk of the game in order to make an opinion about it?


What if the people playing Zelda were turned off by the long tutorial?

What if they were bored of Zelda games, and TP didn't do anything special for them?

What if they were never fans of Zelda games to begin with?
 
mysticstylez said:
Amazing game design doesn't mean you have to like the game.
Not knowing whether or not you like the game doesn't mean you can't make a qualified and knowledgable vote on it either, apparently.
 
Wow I'm late to this thread but to say Okami doesn't have anything innovative is ridiculous. Not saying is better than Zelda or whatever, but heck the whole brush mechanic was pretty new to me.

Sorry if this has been pointed out already.
 
haircut said:
Not knowing whether or not you like the game doesn't mean you can't make a qualified and knowledgable vote on it either, apparently.

it's ok to not be interested in a game

and it's ok to still vote on some useless goty award afterwards, too
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom