326 réponses à ce sujet

[Brovikk Rasputin]

Femlob wrote...

Brovikk Rasputin wrote...

So if none of you care or doesn't take IGN seriously, why are you getting mad?

Not trying to start an argument, I was just wondering.

Because it touches on a severe problem that has plagued gaming magazines and websites both ever since their inception: the lack of truly independent journalism.

We don't know if they were paid off though. Why would they? Why run the risk of getting caught and have your reputation ruined forever? Or did that already happen?

[Femlob]

Brovikk Rasputin wrote...

Femlob wrote...

Brovikk Rasputin wrote...

So if none of you care or doesn't take IGN seriously, why are you getting mad?

Not trying to start an argument, I was just wondering.

Because it touches on a severe problem that has plagued gaming magazines and websites both ever since their inception: the lack of truly independent journalism.

We don't know if they were paid off though. Why would they? Why run the risk of getting caught and have your reputation ruined forever? Or did that already happen?

As I said before, it doesn't matter if they were or weren't paid off. What matters is the suspicion of conflict of interest, real or perceived. In a nutshell, one can never be certain if a review is truly honest.

[Liamv2]

Its IGN they treat COD like GOD

[Deemz]

Femlob wrote...

Brovikk Rasputin wrote...

Femlob wrote...

Brovikk Rasputin wrote...

So if none of you care or doesn't take IGN seriously, why are you getting mad?

Not trying to start an argument, I was just wondering.

Because it touches on a severe problem that has plagued gaming magazines and websites both ever since their inception: the lack of truly independent journalism.

We don't know if they were paid off though. Why would they? Why run the risk of getting caught and have your reputation ruined forever? Or did that already happen?

As I said before, it doesn't matter if they were or weren't paid off. What matters is the suspicion of conflict of interest, real or perceived. In a nutshell, one can never be certain if a review is truly honest.

Exactly

[FlamingBoy]

Brovikk Rasputin wrote...

Femlob wrote...

Brovikk Rasputin wrote...

So if none of you care or doesn't take IGN seriously, why are you getting mad?

Not trying to start an argument, I was just wondering.

Because it touches on a severe problem that has plagued gaming magazines and websites both ever since their inception: the lack of truly independent journalism.

We don't know if they were paid off though. Why would they? Why run the risk of getting caught and have your reputation ruined forever? Or did that already happen?

No, we don't know for sure if they are paid off nor can i prove it beyond a reasonable doubt, but this is not a court of law its an opinion based on past histories, but we just know there are to many discreprancies with in this journalistic industry for it not to be some sort of subtle "paid off" business model.

as for there reputations, some value it more highly than others, ign and gamespot (eurogamer recently) had quite a few scandals to there reputation in the last few years.

[Brovikk Rasputin]

Femlob wrote...

Brovikk Rasputin wrote...

Femlob wrote...

Brovikk Rasputin wrote...

So if none of you care or doesn't take IGN seriously, why are you getting mad?

Not trying to start an argument, I was just wondering.

Because it touches on a severe problem that has plagued gaming magazines and websites both ever since their inception: the lack of truly independent journalism.

We don't know if they were paid off though. Why would they? Why run the risk of getting caught and have your reputation ruined forever? Or did that already happen?

As I said before, it doesn't matter if they were or weren't paid off. What matters is the suspicion of conflict of interest, real or perceived. In a nutshell, one can never be certain if a review is truly honest.

Hm. To me, people are innocent until proven otherwise. 

[LPPrince]

Sion1138 wrote...

YOU DON'T SAY!?

said Nicholas Cage.

[SNascimento]

People who think ME3 is not GOTY worth have no idea what they are talking about.

[ObserverStatus]

legion999 wrote...
What a twist!

said Manoj Shyamalan

Modifié par bobobo878, 05 décembre 2012 - 09:31 .

[Han Shot First]

TsaiMeLemoni wrote...

I kind of agree. Outside of the last few minutes, it was (for me) a really great game.

This.

Honestly up until the ending I thought it was the best game of the series. The game still has a lot of moments where it shines above ME1 or ME2.

Is it Game of the Year material? I suppose that depends on how many games are being nominated and who the competition is.

[Brovikk Rasputin]

Sion1138 wrote...

Brovikk Rasputin wrote...

We don't know if they were paid off though. Why would they? Why run the risk of getting caught and have your reputation ruined forever? Or did that already happen?

Man, honestly now, not a single website out there has been over this game's nuts as much as IGN. It's almost too transparent.

Maybe they just really like the game?

[LPPrince]

SNascimento wrote...

People who think ME3 is not GOTY worth have no idea what they are talking about.

Or perhaps they simply have an opinion that differs from yours?

We should accept all opinions. There are those that loved ME3 to death and believe it should be GoTY. I support them.

I also support the group I'm in- those that did not love ME3 and believe it very much shouldn't be GoTY.

Opinions all around, and its all good.

[FlamingBoy]

Brovikk Rasputin wrote...

Sion1138 wrote...

Brovikk Rasputin wrote...

We don't know if they were paid off though. Why would they? Why run the risk of getting caught and have your reputation ruined forever? Or did that already happen?

Man, honestly now, not a single website out there has been over this game's nuts as much as IGN. It's almost too transparent.

Maybe they just really like the game?

Well in many ways thats even worst, impartiality is the most important tool for journalist.

To draw the line, to sacrifice that at "liking" a game, well its not that long of road to being paid for it as well

[clarkusdarkus]

News of the world( Biggest selling newspaper in the uk ) = Gets closed down because of scandals and propaganda........moral to the story is journalism is ripe with scandal and the higher up you go the worse it gets............IGN had there own journalist in the game for crying out loud how can anyone take what they say seriously.

ME3 turned me off the series, hardly GOTY.

Modifié par clarkusdarkus, 05 décembre 2012 - 09:36 .

[Kel Riever]

DOOD YOU ARE NOT TALKING ABOUT MASS EFFECT 3, THIS THREAD GETS LOCKED!

Like I said in the other thread, IGN gave Diablo 3 a 9.5. I can only wonder how many dollars that cost....

And yes, that has something to do with Mass Effect 3, IGN and what it all means...

I need to get in the business of taking money for reviews.  I mean, you know, not directly. But having my game adds be right in the amazing review I am writing.  I have 75 perfect scores waiting for the highest bidder.

Modifié par Kel Riever, 05 décembre 2012 - 09:37 .

[Brovikk Rasputin]

Sion1138 wrote...

Brovikk Rasputin wrote...

Maybe they just really like the game?

They like it a little too much.

They put themselves in the line of fire with fans in order to defend it. This is not just liking the game, this is saying you have a vested interest.

I don't see why a writer on a video game website shouldn't be allowed to defend a game he likes.

[Ryoten]

SNascimento wrote...

People who think ME3 is not GOTY worth have no idea what they are talking about.

Lets have some truth between us.  You repeated a few grades.  Didn't you.

[Someone With Mass]

Constipator369 wrote...

Someone With Mass wrote...

Constipator369 wrote...

Well, then point out at least one logical reason the ndings were bad.

Well, for one, you really shouldn't introduce a new and important plot element when the story is starting to wrap up.

Second, I don't think they stopped and thought: "Why?" during the development, since there's really no rhyme or reason behind the Catalyst (or his creators, for that matter), who lets you destroy him and flush all of his work down the crapper, which isn't just a little counterproductive.

The Crucible's introduction was also very sloppy and came across as the most blatant plot device in the entire trilogy. Which also kills the suspense rather fast, since everyone knows it'll work one way or the other, despite of what the game is telling the player.

Did I mention that they changed the theme within the last fifteen minutes to something about how the created will always rebel against its creator? That's called a lack of consistency, which really isn't good for a story-driven game.

Well, for one, nothing new was introduced. The crucible and the catalyst have been mentioned from the very beggining of ME3. And if you say that catalyst suddenly turning out to be the Citadel is bad, then most crime fiction is bad, becausee we know there's a, for example, killer, but it is only revealed who he is near the end of the book.

Did not understand the second. Might need a little help with that.

Well, and what was the theme before that? We didn't even know the reason for the harvest and, knowing the reapers are synthetics, we might have anticipated that. Especially that the 2 major example from this cycle - the krogans and the geth - hve been introduces in ME.

Video games and books are two pretty different mediums. A book tends to often jump between character perspectives. This would be rather jarring in a video game, unless it's specifically made to do so, like Heavy Rain, or the protagonist is in deep and need his/her sidekick to save them, like Ratchet & Clank. Mass Effect isn't either of these.

I'd also say that the more consistent theme throughout the trilogy is beating the odds. Shepard beating Saren and Sovereign despite being told that he can't stop them and kicking Harbinger's Collector ass back into dark space after being told that he must do what no-one has done before. Sure, it's cheesy, but I think it's the good kind of cheese.

There's also no proper buildup to that new theme. Javik? He's not available to everyone and not everyone wants him (I think he's cool, though), so relying on him to tell about a new focus is a rather poor choice.

The new theme suddenly just appears in the center of attention after a total of one similar situation during the Rannoch arc, which doesn't really follow that theme either, since the geth were almost taken over by the Reapers after the quarians attacked, which pretty much removes their ability to think and act for themselves.

Which also contradicts the Reapers' goal, since they're there to "preserve" life (I put that in quotation marks, since they're not really preserving anyone's life, just their memories), yet they're constantly sparking war between synthetic and organics.

The Catalyst could might as well been an inanimate object (which still would have more of a character than the actual thing) and little would have changed, aside from some explanation about the Reapers, which didn't feel like it was given much thought.

[Neizd]

What a big suprise it is...I for one didn't see that coming /sarcasm

[shepskisaac]

Whether ME3 deserves GOTY from Game Informer, VGAs and other website it currently is and will be nominated in the upcoming weeks at is one thing, but IGN and Mass Effect 3 are in conflict of interest here because IGN's employee stars in the game. This is just indisputable. It doesn't matter that Jessica Chobot didn't personally review the game or decided it would be nominated for IGN's GOTY.

I think all 3 parties - EA, Bioware and IGN are just incredibly reckless to allow this to happen. What were they thinking? That people wouldn't say this is a conflict of interest? Every party involved loses on credibility after this at their own request.

Nothing against Jessica or her performance as Diana Allers, this is strictly about the situation.

Modifié par IsaacShep, 05 décembre 2012 - 09:41 .