IGN review slammed, writer pissed

I've done my fair share of bitching about the group of IGN writers that appear to produce work at a fifth-grade level, and I'm definitely not alone in that. However, the writer of IGN's Dead Space 2 review caught wind of similar feelings today, and he is pissed.

Here's his response.

While I can understand that his feelings are hurt - anyone's would be in this situation - it still blows my mind that he doesn't realize how poorly his writing comes across. I mean, what if you opened up a trade magazine or newspaper and saw this in a review?

It's pretty bad. What do you guys think?

Annoying when people write more about their feelings than about a game. IGN's gotten better lately, but that first paragraph is something.

I stopped visiting IGN and 1UP a long time ago because of stuff like this...well I still go on IGN every now and then to check out their girl features HAR HAR HAR.

But seriously, it blows my mind how these writers seem to get paid for getting involved with flame wars...however ones instigated by the writer's inability to craft a respectable piece, thanks to either failing to be thorough in playing games or not knowing how to write on an engaging AND professional level.

Gotta love how he ended his response by calling out some commenter that he actually played the game multiple times. It's like my feelings were hurt and I'm going to take up two minutes of your life to bitch about it, oh by the way, the actual point of the article is in the PS section below.

Just got around to reading the rest of the review. Maybe a little subjective and personal in places, but if the first paragraph were different, I don't think anyone would've said anything. That said, it's all about how you begin and end a review.

e: From Reddit: "IGN Reviewer says, "not explaining why it sucks steams my hash." Challenge Accepted!"

Does IGN not have a copy editor?

All a review is is a recollection of one player's feelings about a specific game...

I think the problem with that clip is it reads amateurishly. He's making a ton of arbitrary statements that don't really tell you anything of substance. I understand that it's likely his introductory paragraph, but he sets a low precedent.

Also, I think it's unfair to compare IGN to a newspaper or trade magazine. Should they hold their writers to higher standards? Probably, but their target demographic and active readership are not 'high brow' gamers. Regardless of the actual written content of IGN's reviews I find myself agreeing with them more often then not. I think they've gotten a bad rap and people hate them because they're an easy target, and it's cool to hate.

Some might be, but I'd find those less useful than a balanced description of a game's parts, that evoke the author's feelings for the reader. Instead of the author having to say this is the emotional response I had, and here's what caused it, I'd rather read this:

"Somewhere near the halfway point of Dead Space 2, engineer-hero Isaac Clarke tiptoes through a ruined elementary school in the game’s new, scattered installation setting of The Sprawl. He comes across a window beyond which a woman is kneeling, her arms held wide as a baby drags itself awkwardly towards her. She’s oblivious to the fact that the baby’s body is an angry yellow drum of poison, and that its head sits obscenely backwards on its shoulders so that, when it climbs into her arms, it stares directly at Clarke, before exploding and bringing down on the scene a curtain of thick, textured red."

I'd say this is more than an emotional recollection of the author's feelings. This is the review we should be talking about and probably would be if Reddit's mom didn't hate IGN's Dead Space 2 review.

I suppose it's unfair, but you have to admit that this guy and Hilary Goldstein write in a pretty amateurish style. I don't hate IGN as a whole - their video crew is a pretty awesome group of folks. There are a few writers that really get under my skin though.

IGN's scores are usually fairly sound, but the meat of their reviews is often pretty iffy, at least presentation-wise.

This just drives me batty.

Oh my, am deffo shoked.

The reviewer is labeled an editor...

There is dread in my heart.

I don't have anything against anyone at IGN or the site either, but what's unfair about expecting journalists to follow journalistic standards and ethics?

I think you and I have fundamentally different ideals about reviews. This clip really sets the mood of the game but is probably a bit too specific for a game you're buying to scare you. And I don't want a whole lot of description in my reviews. I want to be told whether a game works mechanically or not as quickly as possible, and then told why it works.

My biggest problem with IGN's reviews in general is their reliance on the classic game review checklist. Graphics, gameplay, sound design, story, etc. They always have to hit every target, even if they don't have anything terribly revelatory to say about a given bullet point.

When all that matters is getting page views, it's easy for other things to slip down the list of priorities.

^pretty much how I feel about reviews.

I was just pointing out that there can be much more to reviews than what the reviewer feels. When they do talk about their feelings, and I know who the author is, that can be a lot more meaningful. But if I don't know the author personally, their personal emotions don't mean anything at all to me.

I understand where you're coming from but I personally do care about video game reviews. I go off word-of-mouth and the like but I also have favourite writers whose opinions I trust and will often read a selection of reviews to help inform my decision to purchase or not. I also enjoy video game reviews because I enjoy reading.

A good chunk of us write them, so yeah, actually.