The gaming watchdog brought to you by MetaFuture dug up some interesting info regarding the major gaming sites like IGN and Gamespot.
read on for all the juicy info and why IGN are being to leniant with their reviews....
I use Metacritic.
sounds like Joystiq's a bit jealous to me. i go to both ign and gamespot on a daily basis (a LOT more than i come here, due in no small part to the fact that those respective sites aren't plagued with idioic fanboyism like this site). i value both of their reviews and the authenticity of their news. i've come to accept the fact that, typically, games rating in the range of 7.0 to 7.9 are average, not great games, and that the buyer should purchase with a slight air of caution. games from 8.0 to 8.9 are good, but should still be researched (say...playing a demo) for the purchaser's own personal taste. games 9.0 and higher are great, and should be enjoyed by just about everyone. this should explain for the plenitude of games raiting in the 8 range: they are average/good games indeed, but not great.
This is the reason why I don't trust scores of 7.0 since really that just means a game is mediocre (and why i laughed at RealDeal's IGN 360 argument). 7.0 just means the title is average. Anything from around 8.5-10 is guarenteed to be good.
It's always best to compare Internet and Published game scores, 'cause there's some pretty wild differences that can come up.
I'm with you, DJ - I check many reviews...and a score of 7 makes me nervous.
Its the most trusted games review site.
i only buy games that get 9 or over. Of course they also must have an interest in that particular game, i don't just buy every game that gets 9+. That's why i don't own alot of games! But the few i have mean they are absolute excellence!
N4G is a community of gamers posting and discussing the latest game news. It’s part of NewsBoiler, a network of social news sites covering today’s pop culture.