Top
250°

IGN, Gaming Media To Blame For Aliens: Colonial Marines Sucking

You know what we never do in the gaming community when the dog feces, the bird poop and rat dung hit the fan all at once? We never hold accountable the people who feed us the information, the hype, the lies. The people who know that a game sucks but do nothing but shove the hype down our throats. Well, this time the digital diarrhea hit the fan and someone from the inside has spoken up about it letting us all know that big gaming sites like IGN knew about it well before release.

Read Full Story >>
cinemablend.com
The story is too old to be commented.
PopRocks3591322d ago

To be fair, IGN and other outlets may have hyped it up, but the trailers and demo on their own also helped to make it look really good. You can only blame the hype so much about a game you simply did not like.

guitarded771322d ago

They also hyped Duke Nukem Forever. Hype me once... shame on you... hype me twice... shame on me.

Nimblest-Assassin1322d ago (Edited 1322d ago )

Was I the only one who thought Duke Nukem Forever looked awful in that first trailer, and knew the game would suck?

Honestly... it seems gearbox can't make games that have taken 5-6 years to make.... if they are announced as battlefront 3 devs... Im abandoning all hope right there

ON TOPIC

Also don't understand why IGN is singled out, when all sites are equally at blame. Cinemablend loves picking on IGN, not sure if because they are a good example or personal beef

http://www.cinemablend.com/...

http://www.cinemablend.com/...

http://www.cinemablend.com/...

However, journos only speak about what they see and play, and devs make sure these demos are spotless so they can give consumers a good impression... in essense, journos are as blind as us, except they tend to get gameplay of a very polished section of the game. Sure there are conspiracies of devs paying of reviewers and all and people assuming that money funds review scores... which is why the best thing you can trust is a demo (most likely the same ones journos played before you)

The game did not look good except for that rendered trailer... I could see that. People need to think and learn before they buy

knowyourstuff1322d ago

Yeah, hype happens whenever a fanboy of the said subject matter is covering the game. Is it really so bad that you expect a game to not be completely sh*t when it comes out? Hype is a good thing as it boosts sales at least somewhat, so as a developer it can only be good. Having no hype or viral marketing behind your game to at least get people talking about your game will do one thing - ensure people don't even know your game is even out, and watch as sales slump.

Given that the game was crap, its reviews would not likely have been any better than they were. What, all of a sudden those glitches and broken gameplay elements would have all of a sudden gone unnoticed by reviewers resulting in better scores?

MysticStrummer1321d ago

IGN had a two hour live stream of campaign and multiplayer. I'll take watching that kind of thing over a typical preview any day of the week.

modesign1322d ago

its totally the gaming medias fault for mediocre, broken, bugged and unoriginal games, (sarcasm)

DwightOwen1321d ago

No, but it is the media's fault for making you believe the game is not a mediocre, broken, bugged and unoriginal game.

Megaton1322d ago

You should never trust game previews. They are never negative for a reason.

CouldHaveYelledUiiW1322d ago

"They are never negative for a reason."

BUT- Sometimes it is like Night and Day between the Reviews and Previews-

It's like what was the guy who was doing the preview smoking?

Megaton1322d ago

That's my point. The previews always ignore the negative. It's pure promotion, even when you have to use massive deception to achieve it.

Baka-akaB1321d ago

Precisely . They all had issues with games like Assassin creed 1 . They all had extensive time to play and demo it .

All of the issues they had were clearly apparent from previews and yet they didnt say a thing .

Dont expect negative previews , especially for big projects

Nimblest-Assassin1322d ago

Because journos are playing extremely polished sections of the game... they are as blind as we are. As for them not being negative, although not obvious previews also state some of the flaws

Machinima and IGN both said that the last of us demo they played had more ammo than expected

tboyshinobi1321d ago

plus they only demo one piece of the game. when they have the game in advance, it's usually under embargo or given as preview code where they say "this is not the final blah blah blah" as a result you can't adequately report on it

Thepcz1321d ago (Edited 1321d ago )

but isnt there an element of suspense? they know they have an audience waiting for the final verdict, so in the previews they dont give away if the game is good or not, they just report the facts.

that is what the previews are for- facts. giving you info about the game.

the review is for opinions. the review is where you are given an opinion on the game.

the games media usually create a narrative for each game, from its announcement, through its development, all the way to the release date. its in the medias interest to keep you hooked on that story all the way to the end.

it would also be counter preductive to give your opinion on a game way before it is finished, or during any time before the game is actually released. that is reserved for the review.

so no, i dont think it is misleading to show a game in a positive light during previews.

it is however obviously wrong to lie about a game during the previews, and spread false info.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 1321d ago
Sarcasm1322d ago

In this case the Media really isn't to blame. If the game is crappy, the game is crappy. Technically sites like IGN aren't really allowed to post certain types of information before the game is released. They really can't flat out say "IT SUCKS, DON'T BUY IT WHEN IT RELEASES"

Blastoise1322d ago

Depends if you listen to the podcasts lol

WitWolfy1322d ago (Edited 1322d ago )

Yes they can, and have done it numberous times!

EXAMPLE!!! Leisure Suit Larry BOS review 2008!!

IGN bashed the game with a 3/10 score thanks to its broken controls, repetitive game play, and glitchy enviroments! IGN even as far as to suggested to its readers not to buy it... EVER! FF to 2013... Now as your self what makes Aliens:CM so special to make it sound like its the Holy Grail of space shooters???

NOTHING!!!

Sarcasm1322d ago

That's okay when it's in a Review, I meant before the reviews.

So yes, in a review they can say it sucks and not buy it.

ylwzx31322d ago

This game is NOT as bad as everyone is saying. Get the DX10 patch on the PC and you'll be even happier.

PopRocks3591322d ago

I'm fairly convinced at this point that a lot of the negative buzz is just word of mouth. Like with Duke Nukem Forever, I'm seeing a lot of people saying how bad the game is but it seems as if they read a few reviews and have not tried the game for themselves.

I'm reserving my judgement until I play it. I'm not fond of just going with what others say.

aliengmr1322d ago

DX 10 "mod".

This has much less to do with how it is and more to do with what was expected.

Question is; Could it have been better? Would you say 6 years of development was put into it?

ylwzx31322d ago (Edited 1322d ago )

There are many games that get mod improvements. Even without it, it still isn't as bad as ppl are saying. The problem is they should have never shown that original game play video. Yes, it should be enabled from get get go but. I don't think it shows 6 years worth of development but more like 2-3.

MysticStrummer1321d ago

Yes it could have been better. That doesn't mean it's as bad as many reviews say it is. The perfect game doesn't exist, so all games could be better. Rate it for what it is, not for what you think it should have been.

Show all comments (40)
The story is too old to be commented.