Video game reviews are so played out. For any given AAA title, there are between 50 and 200
“journalists” that feel the need to part their obviously superior analytical skills that you can’t
possibly possess – because you didn’t get your associates degree in journalism from Devry
So instead of reviewing games, why not review the skinny jean wearing nerds that run
the websites that give good reviews for a small fortune?
In the toilet bowl that is video game journalism, IGN is that one turd that refuses to go down the
drain. If IGN was a US president – they would be Bill Clinton (except nowhere near as cool your
boy Billy, but just as sleazy).
Founded in 1996, IGN proves that it’s a real 90’s kid and subjects us to obnoxious memes that stopped
being funny in 2012. Their acronym stands for Image Games Network, a supposedly expansive network of
entertainment channels, but let’s get real – no one gives a shit about the non-video game ones.
As far as I can tell IGN really only does two things, copy and paste gaming related stories
from other smaller websites, and review games.
I’ll give them credit they do one of these very well, I can’t tell you how heroic it is to get one of the
interns to highlight text from another website, hit Ctrl+C and then hit Ctrl+V after it. Then the poor writer has
to add 3 to 5 sentences of dribble so that it’s not a complete carbon copy of the previous website’s
information. The execution of this difficult tactic is flawless and it is something to be admired,
especially when the story has nothing to do with gaming and its only purpose on the website is
to be clickbait for advertising revenue.
Copy and Paste is good but it doesn’t bring in the money, for profits IGN relies on its blistering
game commentary and hard hitting reviews. Reviewing games is difficult, so difficult in fact that
IGN has had to change their scoring system 3 times.
At first ratings were scaled in the classic _/10 format. They then changed their rating system to _/20, because some idiot figured that rating
games out of 10 wouldn’t cut it, and using increments of .1s for reviews was too confusing for readers,
but using .5s is something everyone can understand. However, IGN overestimated the reader’s intelligence and decided that people are really only smart enough
to comprehend 1s, and thus IGN has now settled on a _/100 scale.
Making money on reviewing games is difficult, so IGN has done away with writing quality reviews to attract their readers and now resorts to
simply taking money for favorable reviews. In fact like Bill Clinton, IGN can deny it all they want but everyone knows that Activison CEO Robert Kotick was giving IGN staff members, blowies under their desks.
(A totally not paid for review)
I don’t blame IGN however, if someone was paying me a small
fortune to play a shitty game and say it’s good I wouldn’t say no either. All in all IGN is what we
thought IGN was, a big media corporation that will sell it’s dignity to the highest bidder. So IGN
I’ll take this review down and write a good one if you want, but it’s going to cost you.