252 réponses à ce sujet

[NeoGuardian86]

i'm actually a little surprise by their critique..

for a while it seemed the game media became some sort of corporate shill PR arm.

[pablosplinter]

Theb82 wrote...

Anyone wonder if IGN have been told something we dont know yet?

That is exactly what I am thinking. My main reason for not believing the indoc theory was the response of games journalists, who would surely have been tipped off by Bioware. Now all of a sudden they change their tune......<_<

I still can't belive the indoc theory, but it has put it back on the table for me

[Vhalkyrie]

I credit Marauder Shields for this turnaround.

[Vhalkyrie]

NeoGuardian86 wrote...

i'm actually a little surprise by their critique..

for a while it seemed the game media became some sort of corporate shill PR arm.

I think it is partially due to this.  The Forbes articles really put the heat on them.

Modifié par Vhalkyrie, 23 mars 2012 - 08:30 .

[FemmeShep]

What I don't get is, if IGN had such a problem with the ending, why didn't they ever mention this in the review? Or why not write an article about it?

I understand that not liking the ending, doesn't mean you agree it should be changed. But they never once made any indication they disliked the ending prior to today.

[Aetika]

Those are the same guys that have been doing that desperatly unfunny segment about fans who want new ending and now they are saying that ending sucks?! Confused.

[Skyblade012]

Ilzairspar wrote...

MissNet wrote...

So.. Can we add them to our war assets?

The podcast yes...IGN I'd say no atm.  Sort of like Cerberus.. you can get some but not all.


EDIT:  BTW does anyone know how the Forbes thing went?

So these guys are the equivalent to the "Ex-Cerberus Scientists"?

[TheHoneyRuns]

Vhalkyrie wrote...

I credit Marauder Shields for this turnaround.

That's what he does. Only when you least expect it. Brave little trooper.

[Welsh Inferno]

IGN just want your money.

[Vhalkyrie]

FemmeShep wrote...

What I don't get is, if IGN had such a problem with the ending, why didn't they ever mention this in the review? Or why not write an article about it?

I understand that not liking the ending, doesn't mean you agree it should be changed. But they never once made any indication they disliked the ending prior to today.

Because as another poster pointed out:

M U P P 3 T Z wrote...

Because... *dun dun dun* COLIN MOLIARTY IS THE ONE WHO WROTE THE ME3 REVIEW FOR IGN. 

People are certainly wondering why he never mentioned these problems.

Modifié par Vhalkyrie, 23 mars 2012 - 08:35 .

[Anteocitis]

FemmeShep wrote...

What I don't get is, if IGN had such a problem with the ending, why didn't they ever mention this in the review? Or why not write an article about it?

I understand that not liking the ending, doesn't mean you agree it should be changed. But they never once made any indication they disliked the ending prior to today.

Because the relationship between the games press and the developer VIA the strong-arm of the distributor, is generally missunderstood.

Particularly the way that distributors create and maintain very strong, close and often personal (working) relationships with their main point of contact within each organisation...that do not, often, represent the relationship between the distributor and the (press) organisation as a whole entity.

(Trust me, been there, done that.)

[Theb82]

pablosplinter wrote...

Theb82 wrote...

Anyone wonder if IGN have been told something we dont know yet?

That is exactly what I am thinking. My main reason for not believing the indoc theory was the response of games journalists, who would surely have been tipped off by Bioware. Now all of a sudden they change their tune......<_<

I still can't belive the indoc theory, but it has put it back on the table for me

Imagine IGN have recently found out indoc is true and DLC is coming, the way they have reacted would make them lose face for opposing us and supporting a incomplete ending.  What better way for the to cover themselves by doing a sudden livecast supporting us and our theories.

[Elite Midget]

FemmeShep wrote...

What I don't get is, if IGN had such a problem with the ending, why didn't they ever mention this in the review? Or why not write an article about it?

I understand that not liking the ending, doesn't mean you agree it should be changed. But they never once made any indication they disliked the ending prior to today.

They had no issue with the ending until they got a huge backlash for trolling fans.

[FemmeShep]

Vhalkyrie wrote...

FemmeShep wrote...

What I don't get is, if IGN had such a problem with the ending, why didn't they ever mention this in the review? Or why not write an article about it?

I understand that not liking the ending, doesn't mean you agree it should be changed. But they never once made any indication they disliked the ending prior to today.

Because as another poster pointed out:

M U P P 3 T Z wrote...

Because... *dun dun dun* COLIN MOLIARTY IS THE ONE WHO WROTE THE ME3 REVIEW FOR IGN. 

People are certainly wondering why he never mentioned these problems. 

Got ya. I still think it's weird though, that as a company they never offered any counterpoints (articles, opinion pieces). Maybe they will. Sometimes they do 2nd reviews from other staff members. 

Modifié par FemmeShep, 23 mars 2012 - 08:39 .

[Wowlock]

So Bioware decides to throw us a bone ....and IGN suddenly comes up with a ''fair'' comment ?

Not suspicious at all........

[TheHoneyRuns]

Theb82 wrote...

pablosplinter wrote...

Theb82 wrote...

Anyone wonder if IGN have been told something we dont know yet?

That is exactly what I am thinking. My main reason for not believing the indoc theory was the response of games journalists, who would surely have been tipped off by Bioware. Now all of a sudden they change their tune......<_<

I still can't belive the indoc theory, but it has put it back on the table for me

Imagine IGN have recently found out indoc is true and DLC is coming, the way they have reacted would make them lose face for opposing us and supporting a incomplete ending.  What better way for the to cover themselves by doing a sudden livecast supporting us and our theories.

Let's be clear about this. IGN is not supporting the fans. They are supporting the IT. The *fans* are still the angry lil ducklings who aren't smart enough to grasp these heavy themes. IGN is simply CYA-ing just in case.

When all the dust settles, if IT is true, who's to say IGN didn't report and support IT first. They're the voices of reason, always. And they can spin this any way they like, just so long as they wind up always having known what they were talking about and always having the last word.

And they're the media. They will always have the last word.

[Jayce]

When you're an editor, you know it's time to have a rethink when a big slice of your readership are pissed off with you and even mainstream journalists are starting to scrutinize your practices.

[mupp3tz]

They got a huge backlash because of articles and videos by Colin Moriarty (a.k.a. the one who reviewed the game for IGN) calling us all whiners and, essentially, stupid for not "getting" the ending. As I said earlier, it's curious because, in a recent video, he said "everyone at IGN liked the endings." -- obviously, this spoiler cast proves otherwise.

If you've watched any of Colin's videos, you can see how personal he takes it by the way he backlashes/belittles against everyone who thinks the opposite of him. It's because his rating, his ego, and his integrity is at stake -- the latter being basically zilch.

[Anteocitis]

M U P P 3 T Z wrote...

They got a huge backlash because of articles and videos by Colin Moriarty (a.k.a. the one who reviewed the game for IGN) calling us all whiners and, essentially, stupid for not "getting" the ending. As I said earlier, it's curious because, in a recent video, he said "everyone at IGN liked the endings." -- obviously, this spoiler cast proves otherwise.

If you've watched any of Colin's videos, you can see how personal he takes it by the way he backlashes/belittles against everyone who thinks the opposite of him. It's because his rating, his ego, and his integrity is at stake -- the latter being basically zilch.

Well that is why I called it bizarre: not his review, the fact that he so publicly backed himself into a corner with absolutely no way to manouver out from there (other than complete capitulation and admitting his review was biased)

Thats what i find bizarre.

[GabrielK]

OK decided to watch the recorded cast...and only about 15 minutes in, but damn that "Eternal Pizza Party" guy is...kind of annoying.


EDIT: OK thankfully he doesn't continue being annoying through the entire thing, just when they first start.

Modifié par GabrielK, 23 mars 2012 - 09:39 .

[mupp3tz]

It's not really all that bizarre. He got the game early for reviews and throughout the week before release, and, my best guess, is that they anticipated an overwhelmingly positive response to the game OR they were pressured by EA/Bioware to put out a good review so as to encourage sales (thus granting them early access to future games/content, etc. and ad revenue.)

So, Colin paints this picture perfect review of the game like a puppet. I don't think he anticipated how strongly people would react AGAINST the ending, so now he is at full defense mode.

[Paparob]

What did I miss?

[Vhalkyrie]

M U P P 3 T Z wrote...

They got a huge backlash because of articles and videos by Colin Moriarty (a.k.a. the one who reviewed the game for IGN) calling us all whiners and, essentially, stupid for not "getting" the ending. As I said earlier, it's curious because, in a recent video, he said "everyone at IGN liked the endings." -- obviously, this spoiler cast proves otherwise.

If you've watched any of Colin's videos, you can see how personal he takes it by the way he backlashes/belittles against everyone who thinks the opposite of him. It's because his rating, his ego, and his integrity is at stake -- the latter being basically zilch.

Yeah, now that I know that Colin wrote the IGN review, his ranting video is a whole new take.  It's got to be pretty uncomfortable if suddenly a lot of people are wondering why he didn't reflect these problems in his review.  Did he not actually finish the game, or did he gloss over it?

[tomcplotts]

ThatGuy39 wrote...

Meh, who cares. It's Fox News for gamers.

lol genius