IGN to sell ads to be put in games

[MarvinisaLunatic 0]

From Ad Jab via

Joystiq:

 

On Tuesday, IGN Entertainment announced in a press release that the company would be adding to its portfolio of gaming services (including registrations, statistics, chat systems) the ability to "serve dynamic content and advertising" for game publishers. It reads as if IGN is making it easier for game designers to implement in-game advertising and the opportunity for IGN to sell the space if a publisher wished. Not that the original few services didn't appear to cross the line, but isn't being in on a multitude of games and making money from the publishers on one side of your business a bit shady when you are considered one of the best places to check for game ratings and other information?

 

So..if they do this I wouldn't trust their reviews (any more than I trust any other reviews for that matter). You cant rate games fairly that you have some sort of vested interest in..

[AndrewTS 0]

The most popular game magazines and game review websites are in the pockets of game companies anyway. This is just an even more apparent example of the corruption of video game "journalism."

 

Unfortunately, many websites in general have been more fair and honest, since they have fewer costs associated with them.

 

However, paper mags have been in a decline in popularity and integrity for a while now. They're growing more irrelevant, and more corrupt to keep up. I guess online publishers are simply following suit as well.

[Skywarp! 0]

IGN is really the only place I still look, at this point. EGM's reviews, for example, are a paragraph long. You can't make an agrument for a game in one paragraph, even if 4 people are doing it back to back.

[Matt Young 0]

IGN vastly overrates games quite often. Gamespot's much more reliable as far as I'm concerned. However, I believe that if you are going to let a review dictate a game purchase, you should make that judgment based on the content of the review rather than the final score.

[Use Your Illusion 0]

I agree there, IGN can be QUITE liberal with their scoring system, often to the point where I just stop reading and look elsewhere. IGN is a great source for news, but I never buy anything based solely from their reviews or opinions.

[Anya 0]

I stopped taking IGN seriously after the McGriddle debacle.

[AndrewTS 0]

IGN vastly overrates games quite often.  Gamespot's much more reliable as far as I'm concerned.  However, I believe that if you are going to let a review dictate a game purchase, you should make that judgment based on the content of the review rather than the final score.

 

Sadly, people pay more attention to scores than the content of the review. Despite the fact that actual scores are arbitrary.

 

I forgot about the McGriddling.

 

MCGRDDL'D MFer!!

 

Ah well. Despite the McGriddling of GameFAQs, you know those idiot reader reviewers aren't being paid off. They're still idiots, but giving their honest opinions about it.

[chirs3 0]

I apparently missed the McGriddle incident. Was it an April Fools thing or something?

 

EDIT: Whoops. I thought it was recent. Checking the picture, this was a while ago it seems.

Edited April 13, 2005 by chirs3

[Ced 0]

The McGriddle Incident, as AndrewTS's posted pic shows, was IGN completely whoring out their welcome page with an ad for the new McGriddle from McDonald's that got a heapload of backlash from its visitors.

 

I started losing interest in IGN once they began making things "Insider" membership-based.

[El Psycho Diablo 0]

I don't really trust websites for game reviews. I'll read them for the features/bugs/bad points the games have, but the ratings are screwy.

 

I don't particularly like magazines, either..but OXBM seems to have their head screwed on straight. Except for the occasional case of stupidity. (Crashes in racing games "Not spectacular enough" popped up as a negative in several of their reviews. )

 

Gamespot tends to give reviewers who hate particlar genres games IN that genre. Like Steel Batallion, given to a guy that hates mech games.

[edotherocket 0]

I don't know if you guys get any form of Edge magazine in the UK, but I find that they write very good game reviews. Even if you don't agree with them, they at least devote a page normally to each review and give you an idea of why the review liked/disliked the game.

 

They also don't seem to shy away from giving controversial review scores. A couple of examples:

 

Gran Turismo - 7/10

Final Fantasy X - 6/10

 

In their ten year history, they've only given out 4 perfect scores. They released an Australian version of the magazine but they gave out three 10/10 scores in one month so the UK branch shut them down after 3 issues.

[Guest DVD Spree]

The most popular game magazines and game review websites are in the pockets of game companies anyway.  This is just an even more apparent example of the corruption of video game "journalism."

 

Unfortunately, many websites in general have been more fair and honest, since they have fewer costs associated with them. 

 

However, paper mags have been in a decline in popularity and integrity for a while now.  They're growing more irrelevant, and more corrupt to keep up.  I guess online publishers are simply following suit as well.

Usually see eye-to-eye with you on most things, but you know that I have to take umbrage to those comments…

 

And with regard to the sites like IGN and Gamespot giving out high scores, I have to say that American sites and maagzines tend to give higher scores than Europe in general.

[edotherocket 0]

Cultural difference perhaps?

[Guest DVD Spree]

Guess so – we Brits are too stuffy and dry to get excited about things, I guess.

[edotherocket 0]

Guess so – we Brits are too stuffy and dry to get excited about things, I guess.

 

I remember a bemused report from a Brit at last year's E3 who was taken aback by the number of American journalists dropping on their knees and doing the 'We're not worthy' routine during the presentation for the new Legend of Zelda.

[Guest DVD Spree]

To be honest, Brits are just incredibly reserved in most aspects of life; from living in the States, I can safely say that Americans are far more vocal and outward with their opinions and ideas, and I think we could really use that.

 

It's like, people on TV. Over here, if there's a news report or something, the person being interviewed is very reserved, quite withdrawn, and politely states the facts after a great deal of coaxing. Over there, people just can't wait to get on TV – they geton there and don't need any prompting at all, they just fire away on all cylinders.

 

I remember when I first saw An Evening With Kevin Smith on DVD. I wouldn't call the audience rowdy by any means, but they were so forthcoming, so vociferous, so self-effecing – you would NEVER get that reaction if that took place in the UK. I've been in American theatres where people were yelling and screaming and heckling the screen – again, never in a million years would you do that in the UK.

 

At the risk of gross geenralisation, Americans are just more vocal, more demonstrative, more open and friendly – tightass Britain could really use some of that. Although I would have to deem bowing down to video presentations more than a little daft.

[AndrewTS 0]

Usually see eye-to-eye with you on most things, but you know that I have to take umbrage to those comments…

 

And with regard to the sites like IGN and Gamespot giving out high scores, I have to say that American sites and maagzines tend to give higher scores than Europe in general.

 

Nothing personal of course, and not accusing you. Just a general trend I've noticed.

 

The Driv3r scandal would seem to indicate they're no better. However, as I've noted in the past--anything that scores below a 7 is considered a terrible game, when really all that should mean is that it's only above-average at best. Keep in mind that our scores are (unfortunately) considered loosely based on school grades, in which a score less than 65% is an failing grade. In reality, a game with a 5 score should be totally average, but people don't think that way. So everything is inflated.

 

I honestly can't say first hand about today, but I know that ten years video game mags in Europe were largely the drizlits, and they certainly must have gotten better (Edge for instance).

 

Gamespot tends to give reviewers who hate particlar genres games IN that genre. Like Steel Batallion, given to a guy that hates mech games.

 

Sometimes a person who gets assigned a game when he/she hates the genre gets it because nobody on staff likes that genre.

 

For instance--when I'd posted that review and follow-up e-mails of the guy from GI who hated 2D fighters but ended up reviewing them anyway.

 

Of course, there's times when magazines meant to be honest, but were collectively buffaloed. Battle Arena Toshinden anyone? You could probably write a book about how lousy magazines are at reviewing fighting games.

 

 

OXBM seems to have their head screwed on straight.

 

Official US Playstation Magazine is pretty good, too.

 

My favorite was GMR, but it was axed.

 

Play would be awesome if it wasn't so horribly written.

 

GI and Game Pro need no introduction...

[Guest Salacious Crumb]

Game Informer started shilling hard for the PSP this month. They gave about every game they reviewed an 8 or 9.

[{''({o..o})''} 0]

I miss Diehard GameFan.

[AndrewTS 0]

I miss Diehard GameFan.

I do too, but honestly mainly for their attitude, their open-mindedness over genres most other mags wouldn't even touch, their coverage of imports of consoles most of the gaming press at the time never even heard of.

 

The writing was never really up to snuff, though.

 

Plus, they'd occasionally flip-flop big time on their reviews.

 

FFVII got the usual praise as gr8st game ever, then months down the line they'd be lukewarm about it. They gave good reviews and scores to Blasto, then later used it as a synonym for mediocrity. It puzzles me to this day that they LOVED the Virtual Boy.

 

They were a lot like Play, really, although a bit more critical when they needed to be.

 

Of course, the competition at the time were the bland, filler-heavy EGM (which spun off to EGM 2 as well), the hopelessly juvenile Game Players, the chronically-terrible but inexplicably-popular Gamepro (it's a big, fat, stinkin' cockroach as game publications go) and a handful of less popular ones.

 

Nintendo Powerganda has also been around forever (and in my opinion, they're decent these days. Nothing spectacular, but they do the job). Sega even tried to duplicate the strategy with "Sega Visions," a short lived mag based around how great Sega was.

[Guest Salacious Crumb]

I loved GameFan. It was a sad day when they disappeared.

[Guest reek]

DVD Spree, do you write for XBM?

 

Because if you do, your magazines original scoring method ruled. You know, having multiple reviewers each giving a score with the final mark being the average. It's the nearest thing I've seen to the Famitsu method of rating and I was very disappointed when it was dropped. I actually wrote to the magazine about it too but it was never printed.

 

Changing over screwed up past score too as I distinctly remember JSRF being rated 9.5 and it dropping half a mark when the new system was brought in.

[{''({o..o})''} 0]

Can't knock the changing of opinions too much. We've all known girls we thought were alot better than they turned out to be when better ones came around.

[Guest DVD Spree]

Nothing personal of course, and not accusing you.  Just a general trend I've noticed. 

 

The Driv3r scandal would seem to indicate they're no better.  However, as I've noted in the past--anything that scores below a 7 is considered a terrible game, when really all that should mean is that it's only above-average at best.   Keep in mind that our scores are (unfortunately) considered loosely based on school grades, in which a score less than 65% is an failing grade.  In reality, a game with a 5 score should be totally average, but people don't think that way.  So everything is inflated.

 

I honestly can't say first hand about today, but I know that ten years video game mags in Europe were largely the drizlits, and they certainly must have gotten better (Edge for instance).

Sure, nothing personal. But just to let everyone know that – certainly, within my company – these concerns are taken VERY seriously. While we might make steps to be diplomatic about criticising a game (rather than just giving it a total hatchet job) in order to not flat-out piss people off, we would NEVER NEVER NEVER NEVER EVER hand out unjustified scores in exchange for cash, favours etc.

 

Sure, you might not agree that we gave Forza 10/10 or WrestleMania 9/10, but those are the sort of disagreements that inevitably come down to personal opinion – whether Forza was a 9 or a 10, it's still a fucking ace game and deserving of a high score. Giving something like NARC 10/10 on the other hand…

 

Sure, mags here weren't great for a while. There were some awesome publications that just got completely watered-down and shit on over time (C&VG, Mean Machines, GamesMaster), and the mag scene was pretty terrible for a while. But things have really picked up, and if you're a stickler for REALLY critical reviewing, I can heartily recommend Edge or our own games™ (which just won this year's MCV Industry Excellence award over Edge – hah!).

 

DVD Spree, do you write for XBM?

 

Because if you do, your magazines original scoring method ruled. You know, having multiple reviewers each giving a score with the final mark being the average. It's the nearest thing I've seen to the Famitsu method of rating and I was very disappointed when it was dropped. I actually wrote to the magazine about it too but it was never printed.

 

Changing over screwed up past score too as I distinctly remember JSRF being rated 9.5 and it dropping half a mark when the new system was brought in.

That's interesting – I'll pass that on to the decision-makers. That was before my time here, so I've no idea if it iwas just one of those things that caused even more of a logisitical editorial nightmare than usual, but yeah, it was a nice system. I'll put in a word…

[Anya 0]

I can't even remember the last time I've been swayed by a review in either a magazine or a big online site like IGN. All of the games I buy I am already sold on or familiar with because of it being a sequel, from a company I like, from previews or impressions from other people online. By the time the reviews are out I've already made up my mind. The vast majority of the time I only buy games I end up liking. I can't even recall the last time I bought something and was surprised to find out it sucks.

 

Magazines in general have really lost their appeal to me. I used to subscribe to like 5, now I only get GI and that's only because the guy working at GS pressured me into it so much I just gave in to get him to shut up about it. There's no point. I can get all the news earlier by reading the internet and reviews are always late, way after I've made up my mind about buying something(or already bought it in some cases). They really should try to get some more exclusive content. I don't know what kind, but I do know articles about celebs playing games is NOT the key.

 

 

And GI just really sucks. Last issue they rambled about how MK Deception has great gameplay while basically ignoring T5. and it seems like EVERY issue of the letters section has some girl gamers complaining about mistreatment.

[Use Your Illusion 0]

Nintendo Power is really the only serious magazine I can think of that is literally up to date with all its information. I think that is due more to Nintendo's anally retentive nature than anything else though. I'm a pretty big Nintendo fan though, so I don't look too far elsewhere in the magazine world.

[Use Your Illusion 0]

Shame they aren't all like you then, DVD.

[Guest DVD Spree]

Shame they aren't all like you then, DVD.

Hey, I'm a beacon of integrety…

 

The role of print media is certainly changing in many respects. While we can still offer exclusive reviews and early coverage – Forza and WrestleMania are two good examples of games where we beat even IGN to the punch – when the general rule is that we all receive the same code at the same time, only print media has a three-week lead-time, then obviously there is a limit to how up-to-date we can be.

 

That doesn't mean that we can't provide relevant news; there is arguably a difference between, for example, a posted update that's only a couple of lines long and an in-depth editorial. Every media outlet has its own sources, so in addition to providing a different editorial perspective, opinion and coverage, there is still something to be said for individual sources providing individual content.

 

I think the thing with magazines is in finding an editorial style that you like (Super Play is a magazine over here that was universally praised simply as being a great mag; something that you read as much for entertainment and opinion as news and informity) and reviewers that you trust – there are no online agencies, for example, that score as critically as games™ or Edge. You don't get covermounts from websites, and when you need a guide to a game you're stuck on, crudely-drawn maps on GameFAQs just don't cut it.

 

But hey, journalists all use the internet just like everybody else – we're not oblivious to the changing role of magazines. The thing is, and this is an age-old argument, magazines will ALWAYS have a role because you can't drag your computer to the can (and trying to clench while balancing a laptop on your knees ain't easy).

[Anya 0]

I don't know about foreign magazines, but Gamefaqs is much better than any mag I know of. That's another thing that has really sucked the past few years. I remember back in 97 EGM2 had a complete guide to FF VII when it was first out. With FF XII you'll be lucky to get a full page. Magazines used to also actually cover fighting games. Even Gamepro had some actual content. Now all you get is awful reviews from staff who know next to nothing about the subject.

 

 

Another thing about IGN is that they are extremely unprofessional. They don't come off as journalists at all. More like dumb teens. It's hard to take them seriously. Just look at how Matt Cassimassma or whatever his name is hypes up all the Nintendo fans with his cryptic hints at how great and world changing the latest Nintendo project is. That's what I hated about Gamefan and Gameplayers. It was impossible to take them seriously. They spent too much time trying to be funny and wacky.

[Guest DVD Spree]

I don't know about foreign magazines, but Gamefaqs is much better than any mag I know of. That's another thing that has really sucked the past few years. I remember back in 97 EGM2 had a complete guide to FF VII when it was first out. With FF XII you'll be lucky to get a full page. Magazines used to also actually cover fighting games. Even Gamepro had some actual content. Now all you get is awful reviews from staff who know next to nothing about the subject.

Well, for looking up the odd cheat or code or whatever, of course, you can't go wrong with teh million or so cheats sites.

 

But our cheats mags here are really strong (not to mention good sellers) – complete, fully-mapped guides to the PS2 and Xbox versions of Splinter Cell, on shelves before the game hit, and much cheaper than the glossy guides. Seriously, you just can't get the same level of detail on maps for games like that online.

 

But I'll also admit that, in general, I've found most American games mags to be pretty much a joke. It's been a while since I've picked up an EGM or GamePro, but I agree – they really did seem like they were written by a bunch of overeager "look at us, we're so wacky" teenagers.