Zunnoab

At least they know do recognize those that hate the score system and donned a ninja repercussion suit

Fyren

@Heyyou27: PS3

Swift_

valcox

thinred

kylo4

Good on them though, 10, 10, 10!

kylo4

Poltergeist13

Bruisedbaby666

"Faster loading times, better anti-aliasing and most importantly far less pop-in."

joelface

DONAR

thecubanratio

Soul Calibur was a 10 because it was an arcade port that kicked the arcades versions ass, it also helped that at the time Dreamcast was competing with PS1 & N64.
Ocarina of time was one of the first to games to make an open 3D world and it did it well. The experience was unlike anything else released before it.. and apparently GTA is the same... can't fricken wait

luigilogik

Zeliard

jambe

Coma

It's the same thing with Super Smash Bros. Brawl(In this case I did buy it). If someone didn't like it before, what would make them think otherwise now? If you bought the previous games before and liked them, you're going o pretty much buy the next installment, whether the critics love it or hate it.

KM91

Beasterling

mendo

Mister Adequate

They didn't mention that.

AndrewDB

Uzumaki_Kiba

Alex_Mexico

10 presentation
9.5 graphics (10 in the Snake eater review)
10 sound
10 gameplay
10 lasting appeal
9.8 overall

Grimmjow Jeagerjaques

Albanian_Killa

Strange Bedfellows

[switchgaming.blogspot.com]

OneSwitch.org.uk

guys, there has been another 10/10 review in IGN after Soul Calibur... you would NEVER guess which one was it:
[gameboy.ign.com]

That's right, the GBC game Metal Gear Ghosg Babel took home the coveted 10/10 score in IGN back in 2000.

Alex_Mexico

Cyanotic

Strange Bedfellows

TheSmiterer

So it doesn't look like I'll be helping Sony or MS score a victory with this game, cuz they'll break even with me. They both get a piece!

Strange Bedfellows

Ocarina of Time was a 10. Soul Calibur was also a 10, because it was better than whatever the hell they gave a 9.9, but that doesn't mean it was better than the other game they gave a 10, OoT. Now, GTA IV gets a 10, and they say it's better than Soul Calibur, but still also not as good as Ocarina of Time.

See? Both games since Zelda got 10's, neither one is as good as Ocarina of Time, but GTA IV is better than Soul Calibur.

Simple.

Strange Bedfellows

zonetrooper5

Who saw that coming? PS3 version it is.

Deviation59

Orionsaint

Prime-Omega

Nobody says the Chicago Sun-Times gave that movie 4 stars. Roger Ebert did.

R0bster

Pornosaur

Especially when we all know they are going to turn around and condemn a lesser-hyped game for the exact things they will let GTA slide with.

Kyouryuu

jackle

Ethereal006

Mongoosekun

Mezodon

Albanian_Killa

And their first ever 100%? Mario 64, which at that point, was largely seen as the best, most well done game ever - a game that completely advanced the series in a way never seen before.

@frank0127: Except kinda not. Just because they're different genres doesn't mean they can't be compared. Final Fantasy 7 was great. GTA: San Andreas was great. Ocarina of Time was great. While they're all different, it would be completely accurate if you said OoT was the best game since Final Fantasy and then to say SA was the best since OoT. Just because they're different doesn't mean you can't use the other, widely recognized as great, games as benchmarks to relate just how good they are to others.

@CockroachMan: A 10 obviously. And they'll then mention the fact that it surpasses GTA 4.

NinjaMarion

photoboy

breakblossom

Albanian_Killa

DING DING DING We have a winner! Nice point. I like to think about it when comparing flaws with accomplishments, but you have a good point as well.

Nice to see we both agree with the whole 10/10 thing.

rabidkeebler

This generation has been as harsh as they come for video game review systems. The unparalleled depth that current gen games provide dig deeper in to the human psyche than ever before, and the graphics will only continue to get better and better as time goes, so review critiques cannot just follow the curve as much as try as hard as possible to retain the values of what made games great, their style and execution of it. One great example of this is a game like Call of Duty 4. That game didn't just clone over the tried and true formula of the FPS genre, as much as refine and add new elements to make the entire thing much more immersive and to progress the way we see the games functionality being used. The aiming system alone puts top shelf games like Half Life 2 to shame, which is no easy feat. The only thing that Half Life 2 still has over COD4 is the length of the single player campaign, which didn't really stick too hard when you consider the emotional impact of COD's campaign. There are moments in that story that are far more gut-wrenching than even the most direly fucked up plot twists in HL2. Anyways, I stray from the point here. Grand Theft Auto 4 may not appeal to everyone, due to it's nature. But it's sheer technical achievements stand above every single game that we've all loved this generation, including COD4 and the coveted Bioshock. The art direction that provides everything from the robust global illumination lighting system, to the cracks on one street that aren't on any other street show the time and dedication from the people over at Rockstar to improve on what a game can be. The physics engine, while it is middleware, is revolutionary when it comes to character animations and NPC AI. For years and years, people have been developing characters that emulate a sense of emotion and self preservation, and have been moderately successful. This kicks that concept in it's teeth though, as the characters have a sensory system and care about others as much as themselves, which is only psuedo revolutionary, until you think about the context that in GTA, they are EVERYWHERE. Hundreds of thousands of them, all in their own respective parts of town, living their digital lives as you meander through your day. Wanna talk about immersion? It don't get any more real than that.

Stretching even farther, the story written around this kind of game, is extremely remarkable because of the unpredictable variables that are thrown in. Your missions are based more on luck than some people would like to think, but for some of the more hardcore players, the sense of right and wrong, as well as self-sufficiency will prevail, causing emotional response in the player, akin to the Little Sister's thing in Bioshock, only on a wholly unprecedented scale. Just because you CAN blow up old ladies with rockets, doesn't mean you always have to (though I guarantee it's fun.)

Now that I've rambled on a bit about how awesomely revolutionary this game is on a technical and moral slate, let me get to my actual point. How the FUCK does a reviewer look at a game like this?? Do you judge it on it's technical side? It's story side? It's music? It's relevance? It's flaws? It's loopholes? No. You don't.

You play through it and make a judgement. Every player will inevitably play differently, and find different emotional connections with the city and it's inhabitants. That's just what makes this game so amazing. You go through the game playing less and less as Niko, the badass russian dude, and more as you, his puppeteer, leading him down the dark road of his life. So by the end, you will perceive yourself far differently than you did before you started, and THAT is why this game has been given a 10/10. It's more than a game, for most reviewers it's an introspective into the human consciousness. It's a mirror into a fictional soul, a book that's being visually written with YOUR hands. So decide, as you run around gunning people down, remember that. It may just change the way you think about video games forever.

CitizenInsane27

The graphical hickups are present in basically any 360 title, and the GTA series has never received demerits for it's poor visuals on PS2.

The mission statement is basically opinion, those missions could be still very fun, and to another person, not detract from the overall flow at all.

I'd say the score is warranted.

jynxycat

You want to know what's good and what's bad, well the review points that out.

And to be honest, if you think that saying 'a bank heist mission in GTA goes bad' is a spoiler, you haven't played enough GTA. When does any mission in GTA go well ? There's always that feeling that looks like a mission is too easy, and then suddenly it explodes into something much more.

jynxycat

1) Shooting controls still a little wonky, ie difficulties with camera shooting in stairwells, can target incapacitated, but not dead enemies.

2) There is still some graphical hickups, but they are very minimal, and not anything like the previous GTA games. Mostly experienced on the 360.

3) One reviewer complained that a large number of the missions do not directly pertain to the main story. They called them "filler" missions.

Think about it like this. Many people have already placed high expectations on this game. The reviewers are coming back saying that these are their complaints. If this is all the negatives that come out of a game that is expected to perform like Superman benchpressing, then I think it should get a 10/10 (unless everyone is being bribed).

rabidkeebler

zwick78

DesmondHume

It may not have the newest extreme distance lighting mapping effect, but graphics aren't all about tech. It's about presentation.

jynxycat

futurebiblehero

now on the other hand, it is a good thing because it is afterall, GTAIV. No game in videogame history has ever recieved as much controversial recognition in over 20 odd years of the gaming artform - so with this onslaught of advertising is cheered on by gamers and support everywhere, and dares to piss off those who are against it - which of its own, is a reason to cheer on R*'s efforts for making GTAIV what it is. no matter what however, come Tuesday the 29th, none of this will even matter. we will all be well too engaged in the game to give a fuck what anyone else thinks.

Kristopher.W

Ixistant

yomondo77

"Best thing since Tony Hawks 3!"

Seriously reviews suck. :p

Jekht

M

You are my hero. I LOVE that game! And I didn't even ever play it I just watched my friend forever. I want sequel. Wow sorry for this rant, that comment just psyched me. That and the NFL Draft. McFadden to Jets, please???

Sonic_and_Tails

meltyman

FatalisticDread

and from your response: I don't see how where the developer is based has anything to do with the review score.

Nightshift Nurse: Mile High Colonic

Until they make a machine that measures more reliable numbers instead of pulling them out of their ass, my purchases are going to be based on word of mouth.

Game reviews should stop pretending to be quantitative, and focus on whether a game is good or bad depending on the taste of the reader.

mezcal

Bernard McGraw

Stick34

featherblade360

Lstormy10

Arttemis

And that if they want to pick the better game between two 10/10s, they can, since 10s are not created equal.

Zeliard

GPman

I am. I have my big final practical for my EMT certification Tuesday. Slamming that out, hopefully passing (treating and loading a critical trauma patient in less than ten minutes can be difficult when every step is failure criteria) and getting home.

Likely still won't be able to play, though, because I have to study for my actual WRITTEN final on Thursday, as well as my State Certification practical and written on May 10th, and my national certification on the 12th...

Kill me now. My brain can't take it.

PapaBear434

I believe a great deal of why is a simple matter of Western aesthetics appealing more to reviewers from America or Europe. But that being said, most media outlets seem a lot more willing to let things slide on major Western-made release.

Hell, why is it from one year to the next any media outlet continually heaps praise on yet another FPS while some true gems from the East go ignored? I'm sorry but first person shooters in particular are simply not warranted in the number of GotY accolades the genre collectively holds.

I'm not saying the same thing doesn't happen in Japan - cultural bias seems to play a huge role in game reviewing.

And while a good deal of this type of favoritism is perfectly natural and expected, theres still a significant quantity that appears manufactured.

And it's the latter that concerns me, because that's where this whole notion of "letting things slide" stems from.
In GTA, for example, glitches or shortcomings in the design are typically ignored. Even when they're mentioned, the reviewer will frequently announce that they have no impact whatsoever on the score (if memory serves, IGN's review of Bioshock did the same thing). Yet send along any Japanese title and suddenly a convention within that series or genre is referred to as "tired". Now will this impact Metal Gear Solid 4's score significantly? Often enough, no. But it's that same willingness to overlook flaws in one title while drawing attention to them in another that will get it those .5 - 2 points docked from it's overall review averages.

Nintendo is the only Japanese development house that consistently escapes this treatment. But their games are so damn culturally neutral that it would be hard to pinpoint any degree of accommodation for one group of people or another.

Nightshift Nurse: Mile High Colonic

Guy_Random

This is Ebert's exact policy, to rate films only in comparison to other films from that same genre, and yet he has no issue ranking films from different genres in the same list. He does it every single year.

So, once again, why the double standard?

By the way, "if you don't like, that's too bad"? Is it really necessary to go the childish route?

Zeliard

IGN's review gives way too much little details and is sometime just describing what's in the game without reviewing it.

You said: "anyone who wants to know about this game, appreciates knowing all of it's pros and all of it's cons"

I bet these people actually know a lot of things said in the review. Like: you get missions via your cellphones and then you gotta go to a marked place to launch it. Yeah, I know that, I've played previous ones, now tell something that would convince me that this game is good.

There's so much details that it might spoil a bit like when it says that Niko and Packie decide to rob a bank and it all goes wrong ...

There's four paragraph about the new cover system.

Anyway, insult me if you want, but doing it because we don't agree on the quality of the IGN writting of review isn't quite mature.

Shteve

HamThePharoah

Sheez, pathetic.

Benjamin Linus

Jnkzm4

Sevius

Also, Soul Calibur for the DC is still an amazing game. If you only played 2 or 3, you missed out on probably the most balanced fighter ever created. SC2 changed something fundamental that I can't even quantify. It's like Tribes 1 to Tribes 2. It's the "same" game with jetpacks and discs and so on, but something is off in the new engine that didn't capture the same magic as the first.

SC is definitely deserving of its 10.0 and is still the pinnacle of the fighting genre in my eyes.

KirbyMorph

Guy_Random

IGN's scores are not meant to be directly compared to other platforms.

jynxycat

They do not score games relative to other games on other platforms.

It's just how their scoring works. If you don't like it, that's too bad.

jynxycat

jynxycat

The score system don't work well for games.. :/

CockroachMan

SAGA

So what's the problem with doing that with video games from different genres?

Zeliard

Now, Soul Cal obviously "expanded" the genre in IGN's eyes. I played SC2 on the cube and I would agree that fighters (at least for me) are now in need of some improvments (*stares at SSBB*) The entire package was awesome, so SC1 had to be pretty badass BACK WHEN IT FIRST CAME OUT.
OOT..do I need to explain anything? Nintendo is still trying to perform that magic trick again.
GTA4, honestly, I'm sick of the hype and could care less about ratings. The IGN video review sucked compared to the written one. (Didn't even know there was a cell phone in the the game till I read the review) BUT, from what has been said, GTA4 seems to have pushed the boundries of open-world action adventure games.
Who cares about the rating? If they had given it a 9.9 people would be up in arms, if they had given it a .01 people would still buy it. It doesn't matter how the number looks, or the history of said number, what matters is how YOU, THE GAMER, likes and plays the game. Rockstar didn't put three years of work into this game for IGN, Gamespot or official xbox mag, they made this game for me, you, Crecente, Zolbrod, my mom, your brother, Mini-bash (WHEN HE'S OLD ENOUGH!!!) They made this game for us, the players who will play this game on tuesday and forget all about IGN and other sites the instant we beat our first Next-Gen Hooker to death. None of this will matter come tuesday and beyond.
~Peace~

Cozwic

robbie158

ananag

Eschguy

but i like the 10 point review score
it makes sense

mrhankmanthe3rd

RatsOffToYa

Satis24

three COMPLETELY different genres, therefore, three COMPLETELY different angles of perfection.

the only way you could compare GTa IV to OoT or SC is if GTA4 was a fighting game or an adventure game-- both of which it is not.

the only way GTA4 can be graded accurately is against other sandbox-style games, aka the other GTA games. simple as pie.

frank0127

I'd love to see what the Journalistic take is on GTA4 but I've already made my decision and no 3.0 or 10.0 is going to make me change my mind about at least buying and playing the game.

okenny :)

ghnvt

Aimless

If Tekken 6 was on PS3, and got a 9.9, that doesn't mean it's worse than Soul Calibur, it means that it's not a 10 based on the PS3 platform and it's fighting games.

This is according to IGN.

jynxycat

Hey no shame in calling in sick. In my mind this a better reason to call off than all the idiots who take March madness off. At least then you're doing something productive

Sparx

Your comparison between GTA4 and MGS4 does not make sense as they are totally different games.

IGN gives out 10s very sparringly and I don't see MGS4 receiving a 10 from them. Obviously, I think MGS4 will receive a high score nonetheless.

Lstormy10

It means nothing because they are two different types of games. It's a pointless comparison. If Tekken 6 comes out and a review says it's the best game since Soul Calibur, THAT means something.

Another important point is, Soul Calibur was reviewed by Anoop Gantayat, GTAIV was reviewed by Hilary Goldstein. Suppose Goldstein isn't even a fighting game fan (i don't know one way or another, but humor me) is he really going to write in a review that GTAIV is the best game since SC, just based on a review score from 9 years ago? Of course not. He's a person writing a review, IGN is an entity that has existed for over 10 years. The scores past games got really shouldn't be a consideration unless it's the same reviewer, and even then, who's to say over ten years the reviewers opinion doesn't change?

This is exactly the problem with scores: people place them above everything else, even genre. A 10 for a fighting game can't be compared to a 10 for an adventure game. If a new Madden game comes out and gets a 10 (again, humor me) are they gonna say it's the best game since GTAIV?

@regnez:

LOL. 13 of those games are GB games (and one NGPC game!)

Can you imagine that headline?

"GTAIV, best game since Dragon Warrior III GBC!"

skullivan

peAr nectAr

xIvSlowDeath420

Safe to say anyone who wants to know about this game, appreciates knowing all of it's pros and all of it's cons.

If you're that ADD, watch the video review, read the closing comments, or the second opinion. All of those can be done in less than a few minutes.

jynxycat

Eltigro

Well every Zelda game since is the same game, with the same formula, and one small gimmick added in that no one likes. It makes sense that people remember that OoT is the most enjoyable.

Every GTA since GTA 3 has only been more refined, and polished, with plenty of new features added. Of course no one talks about GTA3 anymore, San Andreas is better in every conceivable way.

So, unless rockstar never makes another GTA (which in one of IGN's interviews, they said they would continue to make them until they basically made a game that WAS real life), people will forget the last one, and pick up the new one.

jynxycat

Quilt

Hate to say this but Gamespot reviews are way better, even though they're far from perfection too.

Shteve

jynxycat

It's also holding down a solid 100 at metacritic right now.

Maybe it's just that good.

Zeliard

My point is that the games may be good today (or not), but will they stand the test of time? Usually not. Ocarina of Time (as mentioned in this post) is a good example of one that still gets mentioned in high regard frequently a decade later.

Sure, GTA IV is probably a good game, will get reviews between 9.5 and 10, and will sell millions... nothing we didn't know, however, the second it was announced. Same thing can be said of most upper echelon games now. But will we still be talking about GTA IV in 2018? I seriously doubt it.

Mezodon

Ok, somebody had to say it. Seriously though, I'd say since No More Heroes. I give mad bonus points to any game that promotes critical thinking and consideration even after you put down the controller. I find games like NMH are crucial in establishing games as an art from so that we can one day, hopefully, be studying them at an academic level. Most games these days avoid ambiguity and artistic interpretation and I think that's what leads to things like a lack of imagination within the industry (countless sequels, genre titles, shovelware, etc). There's a lot to consider in the GTA games though and I really hope IV keeps the tradition alive.

NeoStarr

So does this mean Pokemon Special Yellow Edition is as great as GTA 4 and vice versa?..

IGN is hypocritical.

AndrewDB

Wasted_Paper_Cow

Zolbrod

Heyyou27

Pretty simple.

brianewing

Morrowind was vastly superior, hell, Fable was better.

But that is my opinions of those games and IGN. I'm still stoked for GTA IV.

Krondonian

[gameboy.ign.com]

FP Furious_Liver, lacks independence

subnet6

regnez

homernoy

Solid_hedgehog

toefer

foxwarrior88

AlKusanagi

Zeliard

Sureshot

How many games were released since 2001, until now ?

I'd say that means quite a bit.

jynxycat

If they said GTAIV was the best game since Soul Calibur, it wouldn't really mean much.

Tony Hawk's Pro Skater 2 is one of the highest scoring games of all time because sites were handing out high scores like candy to it when it hit Dreamcast. It got 9.9's from IGN AND Gamespot. It's certainly not a benchmark for anything at this point.

skullivan

It's very likely that an editor used to console gamer mistook one effect for another though.

If a game ran natively at 1080p, and another natively at 720p, the need for anti-aliasing would be less on the 1080p native title.

As it is, most 360 games have basically no AA, maybe 2x.

The order of preference for me:

1080 native with good AA > 1080 native with no AA > 720 with good AA > 720 with little to no AA.

jynxycat

Good GAWD! Monday 12:00:00 AM will not come soon enough. I turned down doing a raid with my WoW guild Monday night so I could sleep to stay up and play GTA after I buy it.

IndustrialJones

Faster loading times, better anti-aliasing and most importantly far less pop-in. Probably my biggest bugbear with GTA games was draw-distance and pop-in. No better way to break the immersion in my opinion.

Guy_Random

I would also base a purchase on which of your friends are getting what version. The online in this game is likely to be worth a few hundred of hours of entertainment :D

jynxycat

In the case of a game like GTAIV i don't read reviews and definitly don't read them. I just want to find out for myself.

Cchrist

Zeliard

The Shteve stands alone. (=

Islandkiwi

No, I understand it obviously is an improvement. But it's not like you're comparing abysmal load times vs. bearable ones. It's just good vs. better.

It is a difference, but not a huge selling point, in my mind, especially when IGN said it doesn't even load that frequently.

karasu is my homeboy

Heyyou27

GOD

Zeliard

Darth Navster

The higher the resolution, the smaller the edges look on any given polygon.

Hence why people who play PC games at 1900x1200 aren't as worried about adding levels of AA, versus upping texture quality or AF levels.

At the end of their written review, they mention higher AA for the PS3 version specifially, so not sure who to believe at IGN :P

jynxycat

On 360, they say the load times aren't even bad at all(30 seconds), so it's not as much of an advantage.

Eliminating 30 second loading times IS a good advantage. People complained about 5-10 second loading times on the PS2 in comparison to the Xbox back in the day.

All other points stand, and when it comes down to the bottom line, they're irrelevant. Both versions look great, and the masses won't care about which has better AA etc.

SG79

hansamurai

Abriael

I think it would be an interesting revelation if we ultimately found out that the PS3 version was actually outputting at a slightly lower resolution, which would give likely give it blurrier edges and make it seem like it has less aliasing.

Zeliard

jynxycat

StarStabbedMoon

If you read the week coverage IGN posted about GTA4, Rockstar has put in 3 years of ridiculous amounts of development into this title.

Kudos to them.

jynxycat

Now 3.141592653.... point rating systems are pure genius.

robbie158

No one. Why wouldn't you want to play it?

For attention is a funny reason.

rochec

Fallible

Schoolimangooli the doogie mag goosie!

Chanaluss

jynxycat

Shocky

Mr Fortitude

Zeliard

Touy