IGN: Mass Effect 2 (PS3) Review

Every generation of game consoles has its defining titles. When one thinks back on a system and its legacy, an association with those games is often made. For instance the NES and SNES eras gave us Super Mario Bros. and Zelda, while the original PlayStation served up Metal Gear Solid and Final Fantasy VII. Naturally, this generation isn't without its own defining set of games, too, and one of those titles is undoubtedly Mass Effect 2, a project from the minds at Canadian developer BioWare.

The story is too old to be commented.
Shanks2406d ago (Edited 2406d ago )

"Mass Effect 2 on the PlayStation 3 is the best, most complete version of the game available. Sorry, Xbox 360 version. You were good. But this is better."

Xbox 360 - 9.6
PS3 - 9.5

ROFL! as expected from IGN.

Kamikaze1352406d ago

idk..there was an incredible amount of hype when it first came out so the reviewer might have been a little too excited? Also, is it the same reviewer?

ExplosionSauce2406d ago (Edited 2406d ago )

You wouldn't be too far from the truth. I don't think a game like GTAIV deserved a 10. But to each their own, I guess. Maybe they're seeing something we don't(if).

But that aside and on topic.
I might be getting this. I already played ME on PC, but it wasn't able to run as smoothly as I would've liked. So I'll more than likely get it on PS3 (and finish it this time).

Xulap2406d ago

IGN only gives X.0 and X.5's now. That's why it can't be 9.6. It had to be either a 9.5 or a 10.

Anyway, 9.5 is fucking fantastic. I'll be getting this for sure tomorrow alongside LittleBIGPlanet 2, plus the PSPlus update tomorrow... Damn, and my semester begins Wednesday. I'm so screwed.

thereapersson2406d ago (Edited 2406d ago )

But, as Shanks quoted above:

"Mass Effect 2 on the PlayStation 3 is the best, most complete version of the game available. Sorry, Xbox 360 version. You were good. But this is better."

Xbox 360 - 9.6
PS3 - 9.5

Don't you think that statement would mean that the PS3 version would be a 9.7?

So, in essence, the reviewer is a complete moron. IT ISN'T ABOUT THE SCORE, IT IS ABOUT STANDARDS AND INTEGRITY. There is NO INTEGRITY this generation. How can you say something and not back up your words in your score?

Anyone who points out the triviality of a .1 difference is completely missing the point.

edit @ below:

OK so that makes a bit more sense. You have an extreme case of bad timing, where this version manages to come in at a time where it is guaranteed a lower score.

ksense2406d ago (Edited 2406d ago )


they do scores on a 20 point scale now and hence no in between scores. either 9.5 or 10. just go with the statement which says the ps3 version is definitely better and be happy lol
the score will still be under 10 but the way they figure it out is something like this:

96 0ut of 100 is 9.6 (96 divide by 10)
19 out of 20 is 9.5 (19 divide by 2)this way any score divide by 2 will come with a .5 difference. hope u understand that

BryanBegins2406d ago (Edited 2406d ago )

@Thereapersson: 20-points scale, so 1, 1.5, 2... up to 10. What the 20-points means is that you lose 1/20 every time (like passing from 10/10 to 9.5/10. No possibility of losing only 1/100 for instance.

Geez, was it that complicated?

-Alpha2406d ago (Edited 2406d ago )

Remember that IGN changed its scoring system. The only options would be to give it a 10/10 or 9.5

ME2 on 360 scored 9.6, and they rounded off.

And second, the game is a year old so there is no reason for the media to treat it like it's absolutely new.

The score is absolutely fine.

Shikoro2406d ago

20 point scale, meaning that going from 0-10 and increasing the score for 0.5 points counts the score 20 times. 0.5, 1, 1.5... :)

And I agree that if it is better than the X360 version as they say in the review, it should have scored higher. Still, 9.5 is an amazing score and the game's a must for shooter RPG fans. :)

thereapersson2406d ago (Edited 2406d ago )

Anyway, here's the great thing about Mass Effect 2 on PS3: It's running the Mass Effect 3 engine. Based off of the performance of ME:2, the PS3 version of Mass Effect 3 should be guaranteed to run good, and will not suffer the same fate as other multiplatform games.

I'm eager to support Bioware with my hard-earned cash. They are a development studio who gets it, and I respect that.

gta28002406d ago

They changed their scoring system, but does that mean they changed their glasses too? 9.0 for graphics while the 360 got a 9.5 for graphics even though it's evident that the PS3 looks far better. Am I missing something here?

TheLastGuardian2406d ago

Oh, IGN changed their scoring system did they? I wouldn't know. I stopped caring about IGN's reviews a long time ago.

morganfell2406d ago Show
NoBias2406d ago

Geez, it seems that's all you ever do these days.

Shepherd 2142406d ago

some smart people already pointed this out, but since its not getting through, i'll say it too.

IGN only scores with increments of ".0" and ".5" now. They figured that .1's and .2's didnt mean anything, so they changed it. Theres no way they can fix it and make it a 9.6 like the 360 version.

blahblah2405d ago

don't know about the rest, but i was depressed to see what all the hype was about.

mediocre shooter with mediocre graphics, annoying speech wheel, not to say that i hate when graphics differ between story and action. story has wonderful graphics while action doesn't get to level where games in '95 were. even fallout seems like revelation compared to mass effect and i never liked it very much either.

i'm rpg fan, but this one i'm passing.

MeanOldman2405d ago

nobias you are whining. dont know if you realize it but at least morg had reasons behind his comment. maybe thas the problem. you couldnt debate him so you just attack him. hes right tho. ign didnt say nothin in an article tat was about the game of the year. i also like how they waited right before a flood of big ps3 titles to change the scoring system. wouldnt do it before halo reach, no. lets wait until sonys on the cusp of they biggest year ever.

jeseth2405d ago

Besides the fact that this game is awesome and IGN changed their scoring system about a year ago and the flaming fanboyness going on right now. . .

I am very encouraged to hear IGN say that the PS3 version is superior. Not that ME2 on PS3 is a year later and SHOULD be better by now, and not that I am a primary PS3 player, but the fact that they didn't have to improve it but did.

Bioware could have just done a direct port and made plenty of $$$. The fact that they took the time to improve it on PS3 is encouraging and comendable. Some reviewers said the PS3 version of Dragon Age was a smidge above 360's version. . .which shows that Bioware is a dev that will put in the time to program on PS3. ME2 solidifies that and the fact that ME2 came out so good makes me even more pumped for Dragon Age 2.

I'll definitely be picking ME2 up this week and just got even more excited for Dragon Age 2.

Christopher2405d ago (Edited 2405d ago )

***idk..there was an incredible amount of hype when it first came out so the reviewer might have been a little too excited? Also, is it the same reviewer? ***

IMHO, doesn't matter. As a sign of a site's score, which is what each review on IGN is, they need to make the scores match up when a game plays the exact same and shows the same (or better) quality.

Unless this game is a lesser version of the game on the 360, which all signs point to it being a better version of the game, then they have a duty to uphold the score.

That's my perspective of IGN as a business. As far as the score itself, it's a good one.

Edit: I didn't know about the "scoring change", but it would still make sense to make an exception when precedent is already set.

+ Show (16) more repliesLast reply 2405d ago
ForzaGT2406d ago (Edited 2406d ago )

perphaps the standard of gaming improved in a year but I still believe that the sheer amount content added to the PS3 version of Mass effect 2 and (as they say)the use of MS3 engine in comparison to the 360 version warrants at least the same score if not higher

SoapShoes2406d ago

I'm sorry but standards only change significantly over 5 years or more. I doubt that is the case, but I really don't care about the score. lol

starcb262406d ago

Multiply that .1 difference by 10 and it becomes a 1 point difference!

visualb2406d ago


the numbers don't matter. the words do.

Boody-Bandit2406d ago (Edited 2406d ago )

It's IGN, what did you expect?
This has been going on this whole generation now and I'm not talking about one console to another but even with sequels this happens. You will read captions like, "this sequel takes everything that was wrong with the first and made it right plus all that was right and made it better. Than they go on to give the newer gave a slightly lesser score than it's predecessor.

Review numbers are meaningless. I just read them for the content even though that usually isn't much better than the grading.

NYC_Gamer2406d ago

IGN is full of crap like always

Raendom2406d ago

I agree man but this is under their new scoring system.

For example a game can only be ".5" not ".6", ".7", ".8" etc.

Therefore there are only scores :

1, 1.5, 2, 2.5, 3, 3.5, 4, 4.5, 5, 5.5, 6, 6.5, 7, 7.5, 8, 8.5 etc.

trounbyfire2406d ago

yeah ign only gives whole numbers or .5 numbers
but if they fixed so much shouldn't it get a 10

Raendom2406d ago


Actually, and I'm probably going to fail due to my complete lack of knowledge when it comes to maths... Should this actually be a 10 anyway?

Assume they'd give it 9.7 on the old scale... 9.7 rounds up to 10 doesn't it?

Heh. Doesn't make sense, but this is IGN...

-Alpha2406d ago

9.6 rounds off closer to 9.5, not 10/10

People are complaining, it's incredibly childish. I'm thankful the game made its way on to the PS3 and is actually a solid copy instead of a hand-me-down

FrankMcSpank2406d ago


In America we round up to the next highest score. If this is the ultimate complete edition, which is superior in everyway, giving 2010'2 GOTY a 10/10 is not at all unfair. If IGN can give Halo 3 and GTA IV 10s, this one can get it.

-Alpha2406d ago (Edited 2406d ago )

IGN didn't give Halo a 10/10 first of all.

And how does it make sense to round up? You round off to the CLOSEST number to the original, not the highest. A 9.5 is closer to the original 9.6

Your logic that it deserves a 10/10 just because other games got it doesn't make sense.

despair2406d ago

seriously guys, complaining first that it did not get the same score as the X360 and PC versions, then realising(from other posters) that the score system is now in .5 increments and finally debating that if it was to get the same score as the other versions it should be rounded up to a 10/10. lol talk about serious nitpicking.