Yeah, they only became the biggest gaming news/reviews site because what they publish is crap. The site may ride the hype train a little too much sometimes, giving games higher scores than they might deserve, but when they give a game a low score, it's usually accurate from what I've seen. To each his own I suppose.
I've played some of their games that gave poor reviews. Why would they give such a low score to a game they haven't even played fully yet? You can tell because the article was written the day before the game came out. Obviously, they've tried it earlier, but not enough (most likely).
There are many reasons to not like IGN, but this is bizarre. They come out with full walkthroughs about 3 days after the game is released-obviously they have played through the full thing. You can't accuse them of not playing the games, and I don't see how they are biased. In my eyes, they are a solid game reviewing site, that is prone to some errors of enormous magnitude (just look at their best iPhone games of 2010 list). They are credible, and I usually enjoy the games they rate high
http://www.joystiq.com/2011/05/10/brink-review/ http://www.1up.com/reviews/brink-review http://www.gameshark.com/reviews/3813/Brink-Review.htm
I'm willing to overlook the negatives if the game as it looks like it could he good fun. The lag seems to only affect the Xbox 360 and I'm getting it on the PC. The bad bots shouldn't be too much of a nuisance once you beat the campaign or get online. I'm also hoping the glitches can be patched by the dev soon. I was slightly disappointed by some of the reviews it's received bu it's also got a fair share of 70-80 reviews.
See, I don't understand these reviews. Personally I've only heard average to good things about the game from people who have played it, but every review I've seen has given it a negative score. Reading that Joystiq review, it seems they focus too much on technical things instead of the actual game. I don't care that the AI isn't the best, just tell me about how fun the game is and if it is worth my time. Obviously for a game like this, it is made to be played 8 on 8 with full teams of actual people, so playing it in a single player mode is just showcasing the game wrong. This seems like one of those games like Shadowrun, which got low critic scores but high (or at least higher) scores from the community. I loved that game, so I think I'm gonna give this one a shot. Maybe I'll wait for my friend to pick it up and play at his house and see if I like it. Also, here's these: I don't trust IGN at all with their reviews. God Hand was an amazing game, and the reviewer later admitted he couldn't beat the first level and gave up. And I KNOW Mafia II is a better game than Imagine Party Babyz.
You don't have to trust IGN, take a look at the overall reception and that should be enough to tell you most think the game is "average to good" but not particularly great.
If you don't trust IGN, I get that. That's OK. http://www.metacritic.com/game/xbox-360/brink Not good there either man. Just average. Which isn't bad. If there were no average games, there'd be no great games either. But a 69/100 critic score AND a 6.9/10 user score probably doesn't live up to the hype
