Snakeman

Ms. Pac-Man is a deeply flawed game by modern standards, but I'll be damned if it isn't fun. It gets at least a "9" in my book. And Mass Effect deserves every ounce of its high scores in my experience, because it's the most fun I've had playing an RPG in years, it's immersive and it's genuinely interesting.

tk.

Its not really exclusive to gaming magazines either ...

Of course we get the idea there is a payoff for something to be "exclusive", also do not think this is just "staying with the good graces" of the publisher/develope.

What it lacks is the public criticism of other areas, take movie reviews for example ... they can give 2 stars to a summer blockbuster and nothing happens, now try THAT to a Final Fantasy title to see the Square fanboys coming down on it, the gaming media most of the time ends up saying what the audience wants to hear because saying anything else will trigger said audience to leave.

Drakron

TearsandScreams

It happened in a big way with Halo 2, another deeply flawed game. It was hyped to death, and in response all the mags and sites rated it high, all competing for the exclusive. And none dared to give it what it really deserved because they all wanted to stay in Bungie's good graces.

And don't kid yourself: the same thing is gonna happen with MGS4. You may have heard that all these guys from websites and magazines went to go see MGS4 on Konami, so it was payed for them. So how do you think they are gonna repay them? With 9s and 10s.

It's a never ending cycle. It's shady business. It's unethical, and it certainly bodes badly for the industry. But it's never gonna stop until someone steps in and starts laying down some standards.

Until that happens, game "journalists" will remain the bitches to the game publisher's pimp. Every gaming magazine/website will almost always give a high profile game a good score because they want to maintain a good relationship with the developers, so that they might be called upon next time for the exclusive.

Amun-Ra

While reviews may not be "bought" per se on a regular basis, ad money in exchange for "THIS GAME WILL BLOW YOUR MIND INTO SEVENTEEN SEPARATE MINDS WHICH IT WILL THEN SIMULTANEOUSLY BLOW!!!" is basically all I've seen in most hobby magazine reviews for at least five years.

Those of us who care about finding out how a game is either rent, ask people on forums, or go to internet sites (like this one) for reviews that might be biased, but are generally at least far more forthright about it.

So I suppose I don't so much tolerate exclusive, obviously bribed reviews, as much as ignore them, and I think that's the case for a lot of us kids who've heard of the interwebs.

Kainy

Actually, the White House Correspondents Association controls access to White House press conferences and daily "gaggles". Obviously if the President doesn't like you (e.g. Helen Thomas), he doesn't have to allow you to ask a question.

Exclusive reviews only pose a problem when there is a general consensus in terms of score and the exclusive review is above that score. I don't think GTA IV is a problem in that sense.

robotaffliction

sparced

The press gets just as swept up as the rest of us.

Having said that though regardless of if GTA 4 is worth a 10 its still an incredible feat in gaming history and warrants high praise.

A 10? I dont know we will see.

Zootalor

LongDarkBlues

LongDarkBlues

Pornosaur

@chiefpoopingpants: That's waht I thought too.....then they gave Halo 3 10/10. It deserved at most an 8/10.

@MykalBloom: I only saw that abbreviation for Rocksatr recently, I like it, it does a pretty good job of recreating the actual Rockstar symbol unlike the M$ abbreviation

MasterDex

if_deez

MykalBloom

Samos42

Luckily there is Edge though.

chiefpoopingpants

jsf49

mugido

eastx

Friend: The aiming is fucked up! You try kill a cop that's chasing ya only to kill a pedestrian which ends up raising your star rating and getting the army on your ass! If it wasn't for that it's a great game but the aiming sucks so much I'd mark it down 2 points.

In the end, I'd still buy GTAIV because we have all gotten used to that suck-ass aiming....haven't we?

MasterDex

asthetics, technically flawless???

that has nothing to do with reviews, anyone who lets a small frame rate drop, or graphics hitch influence their enjoyment of a fantastic game be it mass effect, GTA4 or anyother non perfectly looking game should find another hobby.

All fairness to IGN, they did give Asassins creed 7.7, while proven sell out whore sites like gamespot were giving it 9.0;

No Mercy for the N64 had a bug in the game which prevents you from actually completing it cos it wipes all ur saves and has horrible slow down; I would still rate it the best wrestling game ever made and one of my all time favourite games. you have to look past flaws if the overall game has IT.

jigglypoofs

Cruithne

That "10 means perfect" view simply does not work for artistic creations. Yes, on a test with 10 questions, a score of 10 means that no questions were missed. But you can't grade anything subjective (art and media) with "perfect" being the ultimate and unobtainable score. Please think about this.

eastx

eastx

One thing's for sure though, this game does not deserve a 10/10. No game does, unless it's technically and aesthetically flawless, which GTA IV is apparently not. IGN is like a kid, easily worked up. Give it a candy or treat it nicely and it will say nice things about you to mommy and daddy. Accuse it of something, like being overly lenient, and it'll go hard on the next review, then rely on Gamespot scores for the ones after. I wouldn't trust IGN with my life.

ChiChi_BBQ

AUAnonymous

Azriel101

silkylove

Even with exclusive stories, it is well known, at least to anyone who has worked or studied media, that you go easy on the talent if you score an exclusive interview.

So explain to me what the difference is?

And isn't "ethically troubling" that someone from a news source that didn't get exclusivity whinges about it? For example, would you have made the same post if Kotaku got the exclusive?

FunkyJ

fecalchaos

Also, like someone else suggested, IGN does not do a 10 point scale, they do a 100 scale. grand theft auto could've been, 9.1, 9.2, 9.3 etc.

kylo4

Right, but that's what I'm saying. As consumers, we're just as at fault for only looking at a number in judging a game.

If a publisher markets a game as 10/10 on their cover...it should be the consumer who says, "Okay, WHY did they give it a 10/10?"

That's why I'm saying: People are just as lazy for only reacting to a score, as publications are for making them.

bauer19

jambe

[www.beyondthefirsthour.com]

hansamurai

@bauer19:
While you do have a point, keep in mind that most people look solely at a score (Metacritic scores count here too) and they can use "IGN: 10/10" on the game itself to advertise it.

man in gauze is king ramses II, silly.

Mister Adequate

It's the WORDS not the SCORE that describe what a game is about. There are no benchmarks with what a certain score means. Judging a game solely by a score/grade is a ridiculous way to go about comprehending a review. Do you even know what the score means? No.

Exclusives aren't the problem, as you're able to see through any BS a score means if you read what's written. In Hilary's review, you see that he says the game's not perfect, but the score represents the feeling/intuition/reaction that the game generated.

Honestly, numbers, stars, grades, etc. are a lazy way to base any judgment on games, or any other media for that matter. If you just take a moment to sample what reviewers say, you'd have an understanding about judging a game. The practice of journalists reviewing games is just as flawed as consumers interpreting/reading the reviews.

bauer19

KirbyMorph

Bando

If Rockstar paid for a certain review to be given in this exclusive review. And that review giving the PS3 the edge.

Does this mean that Rockstar also paid them to favor the PS3? Does this mean it kisses its Microsoft Husband as it heads out the door, while Sony sneaks in the back for a little bit of noon loving?! Huh?!

Dennen

And besides, this is GTA. People are going to buy it no matter what the review, especially hardcore fans, so the review means little except to the most fanboyish gamer. Same as for Halo or Smash Bros or Mario Kart. GTA is not a good game to judge the ethics of this practice. As others have said, its the games that are clearly of dubious quality, or at least potentially flawed in some way and achieve 10/10 scores in exclusive reviews that we should be wary of, as well as the reviewer.

It may be the cynic in me, but the fact that gaming journalism is clearly many rungs down on the journalistic integrity ladder leads me to think it feedback and blowback from other gamers will self correct this problem. Its not at all insulated from their readers, as Gamespot knows so very well.

StrikerGold

globones

obonicus

Sure some of it is unavoidable but I have no doubt that it is the contributing factor to the deteriorating state of reviews and game coverage that we see.

I think with video becoming more accepted reviewers should perhaps be altering their approaches to illustrating the pro's and con's of the games beyond mere words.

Jelster

Damn you, rum! Damn you to hell!

And no, perfect 10s are not ethically troubling. These are video games we're talking about here.

billnabors65

Both Variety and Kotaku don't hold the same clout or readership as IGN, which is also another reason neither is granted exclusive review privileges. That's not a knock against either site, but it's the truth. These are major publications (IGN, Game Informer, etc.) securing these advance rights, so they've got cloud. It's the old, "You wash my back, I'll wash yours" syndrome. But considering game reviews vary depending on the person, it doesn't bother me much. I never saw the appeal of Zelda or Metroid, but that doesn't mean the folks that love it and give it near-perfect scores are wrong. They're just...different...than me.

People stress too much over review scores. Enjoy the game or don't. You're free to have your own opinion.

billnabors65

Kotaku isn't immune to this either; flameworthy posts like this one is a great way to attract hits and visitors, but at the same time, depending on the content may end up turning away potential big-name customers from feeding them advertising dollars. Post too many news unfavorable towards a certain console and its fans deem it a 'xbox fanboy site' or 'ps3 fanboy site' and stop looking (though I presume numbers that actually do that are small). Horrid online play on an XBLA game might make news, but abysmal lag causing sky-flying cars on a high-profile race game might not, for one reason or another. Maybe it's only something worth wasting on a slow news day; maybe there's something else working in the background. Who knows, but then again, you'd be a fool to take ANY site at face value, regardless of its quality or trustworthiness.

muu

10.0 (Masterful)
No game is absolutely perfect, but 10s represent the pinnacle of gaming brilliance. It doesn't get any better than this, and products in this range are virtually flawless. This is like winning the lottery on your birthday. It takes a rare and special game to earn a 10 from IGN.

Why would you have a grading scale of 1-10 and have it impossible for any game to get a 10? It's absurd.

How is this not perfectly logical and sensible:

A "10" is not a score we give out very often. In fact, the last time we gave a 10 to a console game was Soul Calibur in 1999. A 10 doesn't mean a game is perfect -- it means a game is pushing boundaries, expanding a genre, and doing many things to a level so far above and beyond its competitors that they overshadows any flaws. Certainly, GTA IV has some issues, the most noticeable being the occasional flaw in the cover system, but there are many more pieces of GTA IV that are better than anything I've seen from a game in the past decade. We don't give 10s often -- just to games that merit the score.

How many times does it need to be said that 10 =/= perfect before people finally begin to register it? It's literally a grade-school mentality that people are afflicted with here.

Zeliard

KidU

KidoftheThird

Defenestrated

Not sure what's so hard to understand..10 means a perfect 10 and the game has to be perfect with no flaws whatsoever.Maybe,some peoples definition of perfect is just different.

That's why I hate the 0/10 grading system.

enewtabie

My second issue is with the whole rating systems and why even have a 10 score if your never going to use it. Just giving all the best games 9/10 doesn't give you credibility. If Ocarina of Time since he mentioned it as a example of a perfect 10 game was released today. I doubt that it would get a perfect score in its reviews.

I do agree with his take on exclusive reviews but even that is a issue that could be said of other media too with exclusive sneak peeks that go on with tv shows, movies, and music.

The lesson is to not use one site for all your information but to look up reviews on numerous sites.

NullsRevenge

Vincent060

jfreela

vincentprice

silenthill4vid

lammy742

Game Informer, on the other hand, throws 10s around waaayyy too easily. Bioshock got a 10; Mass Effect didn't. God of War and GTA:SA both got 10s. Twilight Princess got a 10. Clearly, despite their own subheading of "Perfection" for GTAIV, Game Informer's standards for a 10 are a great deal lower than IGN's. Having read GI for many years and played many of the games they've reviewed, I can confidently say that they tend to take it easy on virtually every highly acclaimed game, and therefore the Mass Effect 9.75 made perfect sense.

bluetom00

Why hasn't anybody seemed to consider that the game might simply be that amazing? OXM UK came out with the very first review of GTAIV, and gave it a 10, and people started crying about "bias" and "R* money bags" the like. PSM UK came out with the next review, also gave it a 10, same response.

IGN gives it a 10 (their first in nine years), with Hilary using up an entire paragraph at the end of a 7-page (aka very detailed) review to elaborate on precisely why they gave it a 10 (including emphasizing yet again that a 10 doesn't meant "perfect"), and what's the response from most: "omg they gave it a perfect score and no game can be perfect!@!!". Not only did they clearly not read the review, but they also apparently didn't bother to look at the myriad of other 10/10s the game has gotten, as well as its review aggregate.

It gets old. Now I know why Edge wanted to get rid of their scoring system altogether. Nobody bothers to read anything anymore.

Zeliard

ostartero

That A in my mind says a very good game..The A+ says great,with maybe a minor imperfection or whatever. 10 indicates perfection and that just doesn't exist.

This is just my opinion so I'm sure we'll differ,but that's fine.

enewtabie

Other then that, I disagree with what he has to say. I feel that a review being "exclusive" has no effect on it. However, if a game is hyped enough, then it might get a higher score then it deserves, regardless if it's exclusive or not. He gives a perfect example, Mass Effect. Despite all it's flaws that would have killed a less hyped game, they almost completely ignore it, or at least make it seem like it's no big deal. Same thing with Halo, where the person who reviewed it for this site (I think it was Brian Crecente, though I'm not sure) states that he died numerous times from bad ally AI, but then says it's not a game killer.

I feel the best thing to do is ignore the number scores and instead read for yourself what the reviews have to say about it. It's the only way to see before hand whether you might enjoy a game or not.

Vincent060

I am no fanboy...but to make an analogous statement, icons of the political party you hate (whichever it is), do have good ideas from time to time, whether or not you want them to.

TheNthDegree

Forkball

eastx

Personally, I don't bother too much with game reviews any more because I don't trust them. I'll listen to word of mouth from folks I know.

BrianM

Barf#1

I do appreciate the fact that this was written, as it brings the issue to the forefront and makes people think about the topic, even if the conclusion is one with which I disagree.

Darthvinder

Quazimojo

Bruticus

Strange, I know. But I don't think that, say, IGN when composing the review was thinking "wow, we'll get all these hits from being two days ahead of the pack!" Maybe there was some marketing wonk who put that together, but then he's structuring the deal for a kickback or whatever have you behind the scenes anyway. Thus, nothing to do about that.

However, said game review is still human. Humans like to be treated special. It makes them happy. So it doesn't matter whom you give the exclusivity to, whether or not there's a high ranking. It's that you, the developer, have just said "hey, you're special. Don't you feel the glow of our love?"

Combine that with how journalists live for a a scoop, and you ensure your reviewer is curling up to that game with some serious afterglow. It's going to make the game look better than it is.

Slatz_Grobnik

lammy742

Scrudy

frankenfine

Lstormy10

On the topic of exclusive reviews..
It's a slippery slope,if the publisher is using you to gain favor with the audience.Does the publisher believe by giving early treatment,a better score will come about? I don't know.

Of course,exclusive reviews draw in readers,uniques and lots of traffic..so they aren't such a bad thing.

enewtabie

Cirem0

Moonshadow101

shubleedsblue

Remember State of Emergency? In the dutch press, several magazines were promised a review copy of GTA: Vice City early, if they gave State of Emergency a 95% score or higher. One of them declined, and told the masses about this little secret. (The Official Playstation Magazine 2 for the Netherlands)

I haven't trusted any 'exclusive' reviews for any of Rockstars' games since then.
Once a crook, always a crook.

Tendrak

I'm not saying the practice isn't a questionable one, but I'm not sure there's much to be concerned about in this case. Actually my concern is in the opposite direction - people or publications who want to gain credibility by seeming to not go along with the hype and hubris, and giving it a lower score than it deserves.

Mister Adequate

Now if the game company told the reviewing party, "Hey, give our game a 98 or better and we'll give you a 48 hour exclusive window.", that would be wrong.

What am I missing?

kagai

Cartman86

Best Comment I've seen on here. Also I think since IGN has had a ton of exclusive reviews over the past few years and this is the only one thats been a 10. Since well Soul Calibur it's not really a big deal.

I'm sure R* got some money out of the deal and IGN got some publicity. But other than that i'm not too worried about the credibility of the review or the people who wrote it. Even if people think he's a girl sometimes.

gamedismantler

Also keep in mind that books, tv shows, and movies are not often a $50-a-pop venture, and the need to convince customers to part with that amount of cash requires a bigger effort.

klew

I Spit On Your Comments

SAKY

Plus, I consider Kotaku a pretty unbiased site, and if they had numbers (which, thankfully, they don't, to prevent this sort of crap), it would seem that the review would be close to a 10, if not a 10.

peAr nectAr

It all leads back to that kind of grading scale for game reviews being a load of crap. To me, whether it's 8, 9, or 10, it doesn't make a bit of difference.

Pickens

xbulletholes

metallicorphan

I think they gave a top notch review, and since other outlets who didn't have exclusive access are also giving it 10's, it most likely deserves it.

kylo4

Noks415

Certainly it can be cause for concern, but IGN is a pretty big site whether you like them or not.

rochec

Gam3r

If President Bush doesn't like your news outlet, say good bye the press conference invitations and interviews.

Point being, this is a major issue that goes waaayyy beyond the gaming press.

stevesan

rainking187

okenny :)

RTW

Point being, I personally don't give two squats about what IGN thinks of GTA4. Neither should everyone else. At best, take into consideration IGN's opinion.

Owen you make a good point, it is very POSSIBLE that IGN kicked up the score on this one because of their "first crack" at a review and the traffic that comes with something like that. Only god and the folks at IGN and Rockstar can say.

SAKY

steliosco

The bottom line is that the video game press is filled to the brim with little nuances that we accept.

If we were going to be strict about the whole thing, the press would ignore things like private screenings and embargoes and operate like the press that covers conventional news. One could argue that embargoes are no more than an advertisement given that the companies get to decide when elements are revealed, but also let reporters prep for said reveals to be able cover them more thoroughly.

Exclusive reviews tie into all of this, with the game maker usually being assured of a good score (even if it's the score the media outlet would give). Add to that a precise time when the info is released, so as to generate the right amount of hype, and you can almost call it advertising.

The downside to getting rid of these practices is that outlets who would choose to cooperate with PR would always have content before those who don't. This means everyone has to play the game so as to be on the same page.

So, like I said in the beginning, it all has to do with trusting that you're getting fair coverage.

keyrat

Messer

But then again, everybody is giving it a very high rating. Gamespy (basically IGN?) 1up (A+), Teamxbox (10), Eurogamer (10), CVG (9.5), etc.

Honestly, reviews by EDGE are the ones I really trust now.

reddevil3

Master Saji

And if the question is, would GTA IV have gotten a lower score from IGN if their review hadn't been "exclusive?" I think this answers the question. That's a whole lot of non-exclusive 10/10.

Bluecell

(俗・ ) Grey Gecko

Lots of people gave Bioshock a 10, and I don't think that it's worthy of it, CONSPIRACY!

jynxycat

steliosco

however, kotaku has been sponsored by game companies NUMEROUS times.

i see EQUAL amounts of problems with that.

and who knows if rockstar paid kotaku to make 300 gta posts in a week and a half.

so, as far as ethically troubling goes, perhaps ign's exclusive review isn't the only place we should be looking, hey?

joelface

Inglix

CHU BOI

tomsamson

I feel that gaming tolerates this because the culture of competition that's a major component of interactive entertainment. If you have the exclusive review, you can be the first guy to lay claim to finishing a game. It's kind of silly because it makes game seem like the ultimate consumable product. Just eat it and spit it back out. Where's the enjoyment and the ability to reflect on the product with a bit of hindsight?

Vabor

Anarchist_Gamer

Trowble (XBL/PSN)

PogiJet

Blinkstale

As an aside though, I don't think reviews have as much impact on sales as they do in this industry though, so constantly comparing it to the movie industry isn't always an acceptable side to stand on.

PlayingKarrde

Jim Reilly