Butthurt much? I'm not a fan of IGN but I agree with this list as far as the games I've played. The entire Fable series was a disappointment really. They could have been great but each game fell far short. I'm still yet to understand how you can make a <10 hour rpg. Fable III managed to dumb down one of the most dumbed down rpg's there is.Hunter65416 said:
Breaking News: IGN really does = Ignorance
- Thread starter Hunter65416
- Start date
Recommended Videos
lol Playstation Move is on there? Granted it's only just come out and it's not the most original innovation to gaming, but it's only early days, like with the Wii. I did have a shot of it as well at a friend's house, and it was pretty damn fun I guess we can clearly guess who's payroll IGN is on, oh, wait, Kinect is four spaces down. XD
literal definition aside people rarely use the word disappointment when talking about things they like
Why is the (misleading) title of the article "Top Ten Biggest Gaming Disappointments of 2010" instead of something like "Highly anticipated that were good but didn't meet our expectations. IGN is resorting to flamebaiting for hits. And no, their opinion doesn't deserve to be taken seriously considering their intent.
Oh for the love of god;
[HEADING=2]boo fuckin' hoo.[/HEADING]
It's their goddamn opinion, who the fuck cares if they're "right" or "wrong"? I personally agree with most of the choices, not 100%, but I can certainly see why they thought certain games were disappointing.
And even then, you do realize that this IGN Australia's opinion on the matters? They don't reflect on IGN US's scores.
In short;
Grow some thicker skin, and cry me a river, and get over it.
[HEADING=2]boo fuckin' hoo.[/HEADING]
It's their goddamn opinion, who the fuck cares if they're "right" or "wrong"? I personally agree with most of the choices, not 100%, but I can certainly see why they thought certain games were disappointing.
And even then, you do realize that this IGN Australia's opinion on the matters? They don't reflect on IGN US's scores.
In short;
Grow some thicker skin, and cry me a river, and get over it.
I think they mean disappointed based on the idea that they expected more out of the game. They may have liked it, but it was not as great as they were expecting. So, it may make sense that they call these games "disappointing." Alan Wake was in development for a number of years. They must have raised their expectations too high, and felt the finished product wasn't up to snuff.
Final Fantasy 13 was a huge disappointment for me. Though I am in love with Lightning and Fang, the game otherwise failed to impress.
Fable 3 was kind of a disappointment. I didn't like how they completely cleared the UI. I would have also loved a map that was more detailed. Also they needed to keep the character appearance changing based on good/evil/corruption/pure ratings. That was my favorite thing about fable 1/2 and they got rid of it.
Fable 3 was kind of a disappointment. I didn't like how they completely cleared the UI. I would have also loved a map that was more detailed. Also they needed to keep the character appearance changing based on good/evil/corruption/pure ratings. That was my favorite thing about fable 1/2 and they got rid of it.
If you're not already asking that question, you're doing something wrong.MrhalfAwake said:
This ain't some deep mystery for the ages. Game magazines are not some hive mind, and it's not counterintuitive that two editors would disagree. Especially when content from the two only crosses on the web.
Especially since IGN AU has its own content, own editors and *gasp* own scores.
Complaining that they are ostensibly professional is kind of pointless; they are professional, this is not unprofessional. That reeks of the same sort of "but I liked Alan Wake, so I'm throwing this in as proof" nonsense the topic started with.
Several sites go so far as to have multiple POVs. The idea that multiple, possibly opposing views of thought as bad is asinine and should be stamped out. It should only be confusing if one is incapable of processing complex thought.
Literal definition aside, IGN AU makes it crystal clear what definition they are using, and it's the one in which it doesn't automatically mean bad.MrhalfAwake said:
I completely agree with that list
However, IGN have the most stupid and corrupt idiots of game reviewers so they give pretty much any score to games. Sometimes I wonder if they have even played the game
Still, hype is the reason behind it. Halo is a very good game but the hype is what turns a lot of people to disappointment when they play it
However, IGN have the most stupid and corrupt idiots of game reviewers so they give pretty much any score to games. Sometimes I wonder if they have even played the game
Still, hype is the reason behind it. Halo is a very good game but the hype is what turns a lot of people to disappointment when they play it
I think alot of people are missing the point here.
They voted these the most disappointing games, yet gave them high scores in their reviews.
They voted these the most disappointing games, yet gave them high scores in their reviews.
IGN was talking about games that disappointed them, not games that did bad. they were talking about games that were super hyped and everybody expected them to be amazing and original when they actually have the same or similar elements to previous games
i remember i was majorly disappointing with fable 2 when it came out because of its ending. im not saying its a bad game but i felt it was just more of the same thing and it lacked any type of amazing story an RPG of its budget should have. disappointing is not the same thing as bad
i remember i was majorly disappointing with fable 2 when it came out because of its ending. im not saying its a bad game but i felt it was just more of the same thing and it lacked any type of amazing story an RPG of its budget should have. disappointing is not the same thing as bad
While this does seem like a pretty polarizing list, IGN has clearly put some thought in this list, and while I don't completely agree with this list(There are a lot of obvious choices and lesser disappointment here), but its a reasonable list...i.e., the opposite of ignorant.
hunh.... Never heard of that, whats it mean?Hunter65416 said:
I agree with the list though. you're not looking at x factors.
For example. Alan wake wasnt one of the most DISAPPOINTING games of '10, just an honorable mention. But the fact that it took five years to make, that is something to say. If a game takes five years to make, it should be atleast a 9. Or at least a high 8 (8.7-8.9). esepcially when games made in less time are better. There's just no excuse for it.
you're just mad and biased because some of your favorite games are there and need to let everyone know. get over the bias and maybe you could actually see they make sense.
...This time.
You obviously didn't read the entire article and just dashed off a rage post un-informed. IGN mentioned repeatedly that many of these games scored highly, but not highly enough for their discriminating tastes, given the development time. Criticize all you want, but get your facts straight.
yea...agreed with IGN. Only thing on the list I disagree with is Fable 3, but maybe even that. A game can be good, maybe even great, and still be a letdown, you know...though most of the actual games on that list were just bad, I stand by my point.
EDIT: Good lord, they gave FF13 an 8.9? Wow, I think I'm starting to see why people don't trust their reviews (I've always avoided the site)
EDIT: Good lord, they gave FF13 an 8.9? Wow, I think I'm starting to see why people don't trust their reviews (I've always avoided the site)
So I get the feeling that many people, including the OP, didn't actually read it so much as scrolled down it and read all the bold titles.
Second Paragraph:
"While the games on our list might have turned out pretty well on the whole, we've selected the titles that had the highest expectations on them to begin with. We're talking about epic development cycles, big franchises and ravenous fans. So - even if they scored well, we were disappointed these games didn't quite achieve all they could."
Second Paragraph:
"While the games on our list might have turned out pretty well on the whole, we've selected the titles that had the highest expectations on them to begin with. We're talking about epic development cycles, big franchises and ravenous fans. So - even if they scored well, we were disappointed these games didn't quite achieve all they could."