The Truth About IGN's 7/10 Problem

Let's talk about IGN's infamous 7/10 rating and why their scoring system is completely POINTLESS.
More videos coming ‪@iFramesOfficial‬
Chapters
00:00 Intro
01:38 Review Manipulation
05:02 The Purpose of a Review
05:29 The Numbers
09:55 Fixing IGN's Scoring System
10:26 Entities not Individuals
15:41 Inconsistent Review Quality
16:57 What this is really about
19:34 So what should we do?
#dragonagetheveilguard #ign #gamingcommunity

[@Larry]

Over here in the UK, Magazines in the '90s would give games the safe, non-offensive score of 73%, to the point it became an early meme.

[@jasonoyola590]

Hey Larry! Huge fan here hope you’re doing alright

[@luckyducky7819]

I am both sad and not surprised to see this has been going on for decades.

[@turtleanton6539]

Yeeeh😮

[@GimpyGosling]

'Ello, you

[@jonathansoko1085]

I always thought it was obvious that they gave a game a 7 when they knew it was bad but didnt want to ruin their access.

[@AminaTorsdotter]

I've listened to an embarrassing amount of ign podcasts since they started making them, and early on the journos were very open and honest about how close they were with the various dev teams. They would even bitch about how their scores affected the developers bonuses, salaries and career opportunities. Access journalism is the tip of the iceberg.

[@turtleanton6539]

Yeeh🎉

[@turtleanton6539]

​@@AminaTorsdotterofccc

[@AirLancer]

@@AminaTorsdotter When you know people's livelihoods are being directly affected by the silly number you stick on the end of an article, that does complicate things somewhat... Consider how the devs for Fallout New Vegas missed their review score-dependent bonus by 1%.

[@window_cat]

KZbin algorithm absolutely killed it with this one

[@regularwomanizer]

Im sure you kiddies are loving the flashy editing. Good video either way tho

[@turtleanton6539]

Yeeeh😮

[@CorruptedDogg]

Legendary pull indeed

[@iFramesOfficial]

Wow, thank you all so much for the kind words!

[@TrueDetectivePikachu]

I think the data from the graphs is still not enough info to determine the bias. It would be better to cross reference this with the average review scores by other less known reviewers or reviewers with no incentive. That and compare it with reviewers that are known to have an incentive, making sure the reviews are towards the same games of course

[@kevo300]

I give you 7/10

[@turtleanton6539]

​@@kevo3002 much water

[@CorruptedDogg]

The algo’s on your dick bro, congrats! Ride that wave brothaaa

[@SquidGains]

Really solid first video. Seems like you've been doing this a while.

[@MikePhalin]

Considering IGN gave Alien Isolation 5.9/10 because the reviewer played it on hard and found it to be "too hard" sums up everything.

[@unicorntomboy9736]

This is why you need more than one person reviewing game, it should be at least three per game

[@Quizack]

That’s one of my favourite IGN moments, alongside the Cuphead tutorial moment. They’re such a meme

[@dmytrosoboliev935]

Famitsu does this. 4 reviewers ​@@unicorntomboy9736

[@turtleanton6539]

Aahahahahaa😊

[@MoonThuli]

​@@Quizack Cuphead is such a difficult game that the guy who got stuck on the tutorial was probably literally incapable of finishing the game.

[@SourRobo8364]

Personally, I prefer the 5 star method. I rate it as follows. 1 star, fails completely on a fundamental level. 2 stars, it succeeds in a few areas, but a majority of it is bad. Like a game looks nice, playing it is terrible. 3 stars, means everything definitely functions well, but maybe I don't quite like it. 4-5 is when things get more personal.

[@honza970]

A movie review website in our country uses 1 to 5vstars plus an option to rate it as "Garbage." I love that system.

[@SweBeach2023]

True, a 1-10 scale will always have too much weight put on the subjective opinion of the reviewer. While a 1-5 or even a 1-4 scale creates a more fair grading from "garbage" to "functional but subpar" to "pretty good with no real weakness" to "pretty amazing in all or almost all aspects and non weaknesses".

[@lenOwOo]

They'll just give them 4 out of 5

[@Dagumus]

is this your first video if so you killed it

[@iFramesOfficial]

Thank you for the kind words! Yip, first video. Let the KZbin journey begin!

[@Dagumus]

@@iFramesOfficial your going to do very well the quality was great

[@budbud13411]

For real, great video.

[@schmidth]

@@iFramesOfficial first video? that editing? do you work in a relevant industry or something lol

[@TheSpongyMallard]

@@schmidth Probably made other videos, but never uploaded or spent a ton of time learning before making a channel.

[@cesarherreros6797]

absolutely killer debut for a youtube channel, keep the good work, subscribed

[@SystemBD]

Reviews should be written by at least three reviewers with different levels of familiarity with the genre. It is true that we do not care about who writes the review for IGN... so their editorial team should take advantage of that to present reviews that combine (i.e., not merely promediate) different points of view.

[@PaddaPlays]

This is very well made! Love the clean feel and vibe. You are a natural on camera-looking forward to watching more!

[@iFramesOfficial]

Thanks Padda, that means a lot coming from you.

[@zobiya17]

Dunkey made this point as well a while back and he was spot on. Reviewers are subject to their own tastes and biases, so a score has more context when you have a name and personality to tie it to and therefore can make a more informed decision on whether you'll like it or not. Their inconsistent scoring system with lack of nuance breaks how much weight their score holds.

[@DomSte128]

This is why I respect Jeff Gerstmann, who got fired from Gamespot because he refused to give a good score to a game he didn't like it. Nowadays game journalists don't even play the game they suppose to write about it.

[@tuc5987]

Don't just make stuff up. Dislike their opinions by all means, but "they don't even play the games"? is just BS.

[@cal5365]

"I havent played veilguard" for your own sanity, dont

[@BlackyGr]

After watching this video, I liked subscribed and thinking "Damn you algorithm, why have I not seen anything from this guy before?" Went to check the other vids, only to find that THERE ARE NONE. This was so well made and on point, that I doubt this is your first rodeo. Well done. Loved it.

[@FlyingGeneral1992]

“Too much water” never forget

[@matKilla9801]

Your video inspired me to try and come up with a better review system. Even when you know who the reviewer is, it just means that you know their biases, but the bias still exists. That’s why it’s better to have a massive sample size of reviewers to catch all the various bias and preferences. The score should be binary, either recommended to buy or don’t recommend to buy. Then there can be an optional text review for people to add context for why they liked or didn’t like the game. Make it so anyone can contribute so the sample size can be as big as possible. Then the final score will be out of 100 since it’s a percentage between those who liked it vs those who didn’t. Then I realized, I am really just re-inventing Steam’s review system. I am surprised that nobody has made a website using Steam’s review system for all platforms and games.

[@Boogfuardan]

Damn gotta thank KZbin for the recommendation, hope you get more subs you deserve it!

[@maxstr]

People spend years and years trying to get noticed on KZbin. And here we are for a guy that just uploaded his first video. It's like winning the lottery

[@domiTenshi]

i give this video an IGN/10

[@beartackle]

I feel like because the Modern IGN wants to be more caring and not offend anyone, they give everything a 7 as it's kinda high, but not really bad. Edit: Oh, yeah. If a game checks off boxes, IGN will give it a 9 or 10.

[@KoryCaines]

I hope this channel blows up 🔥

[@CorvoFG]

Excellent work. Clear, concise and backed up with facts. One of several new channels I’ve seen pop up over the past few months that are deserving of attention.

[@densteria]

Great video! Keep up the great work man

[@Shorty_Lickens]

I dont trust any big media outlets for reviews any more. Too many of them have been outright caught taking payments for reviews. And the rest are suspect. IGN is possibly the worst one still running. Way too many high scores for games I absolutely hated playing. If the arent dirty they must be stupid or insane. Either way, cant trust em. Cant trust user reviews any more for the same reason. Too many look like shills or write like shills and too many give excellent reviews to big studio products I know are crap. So mostly its just watching twitch streamers playing a game live and if it doesnt look too horrible I'll give it a shot.

[@osiriskid0]

Hell sometimes a twitch stream won’t even be enough cause they aren’t good at the game, gotta find a no commentary channel with straight walkthrough playlists

[@Nazquaza]

Nice video! Loved that you had actual data to back uo your opinion

[@WanderingSolaire]

Love your entry into content creation and I hope you keep on creating. This really reminded me of one experience with a gaming journalist I had online. Living in a non-anglophone country (a non-western one at that), some years ago I confronted a reviewer that purposefully gave strategy games mediocre and below scores, or their magazine even outright didn't review them, for in their opinion, that genre wasn't popular, and it wasn't doing what popular games (linear fps/tps games) were doing, so I think the issue is really ingrained and deep-rooted in mainstream journalism.

[@argnator]

I would refer you to the venerated and long-issued video "Jackie Chan is an 8/10" by youtube creator Star_ That video is 8 years old, but the subject it broaches stretches back to the very founding of professional internet critique.

[@HombreGato]

Back in the day I worked for a huge videogame news outlet and the pressure from companies and readers alike was insane. In the end I had to quit since I was scared of ending up hating games altogether.

[@AminaTorsdotter]

I'll add my comment to the chorus of similar comments. Good video, w algorithm. I used to consume IGN podcasts, reviews and articles like mad. I was a legit fan of ign a decade ago. Even then the scale was useless, and IGN would attempt to justify it to me and other fans to no avail. I havent read anything from ign for years now, and this video sums up a big chunk of our critique very well. Thank you. I am now subbed i look forward to more videos.

[@tek_lynx4225]

Legacy media is pointless, they have always been questionable even back when it was magazines. Barely qualifying as gamers as you can usually tell by their poor quality reviews, and all companies want from them is a trophy they can blast on their store page\trailer. When I see game that slaps legacy media trophies all over their steam store page, I don't buy those games usually.

[@FordThunderCougarFalconBird]

This video has great production value. I rate it 7/10 😂(just kidding dude). I’m now subscribed to your channel. Keep it up, and I will watch. 👍

[@harrystyles7466]

What IGN doing is similar to starbucks naming their coffees "normal, large and extra large" instead of "small, normal and large" only that ign shouldn't try to market a product. Actually, it's even worse: the scores aren't even balanced when you adjust the rating system. They also seem to have no quality control or unifying properties in their reviews other than the branding and the overall ass-licking scores. Of what worth is a reviewing outlet when they can essentially do two reviews of the same game and get two different numbers and opinions where the only similarity is that they both are probably above a 6/10? Even Alana Pierce (the woman you quote) perpetuates the crazy dumb take that "games are just that good nowadays." Well, what do i need you for then? Aside from all that alot of these outlets also have a politics problem in the sense that just like their opinions about games their politics seem to not represent the population at all but instead a minority of heavily left leaning people. Which, lets be honest, is a problem of many journalists, essentially in my country, Germany. And their politics regularly seep into their reviews.

[@snakeplissken111]

Maybe that wouldn't be as much of a problem if the (far) right wouldn't perpetuate the picture of a "LÜGENPRESSE!" as much. Dunno about you. But as a young lad influenced by these folk, trying to get into journalism wouldn't be my first idea. Obviously it's a dirty job, let the other guys do it. ;-) Different topic though. Way different. Score inflation is of course real in Germany's gaming press as well. Gamestar for instance had 80s scores defined as: "Games that get the most out their genre." Well, that's still where most better games end up in (including practically every isometric RPG even way before BG3, some of which even with 90s scores.. I'm a fan of those, but that's generous). And even 60s scores are supposed to be for "ok" games, when in fact, most of the games ending there or lower already have severe issues, oft on a fundamentally technical level (bugs, balance, whathaveyou). Gotta love their Gothic 4 review starting right with: "This ain't a good game". Scoreline? 69%. Almost the equivalent of IGN's seven outta ten for everything. Review aggregators have adopted to this, by the way. That seven outta ten ranges equal to a "mixed" review (only for games though) on Metacritic. And as a flat out "not recommended" on OpenCritic. With so many games supposedly way above average, you gotta make the cut somewhere.

[@pinkchckn]

Me thinking I'm watching a big youtuber that I just wasn't aware of, and then I saw the sub number. Subbed to help. Great video, great editing, just some great quality content, keep it up bro

[@HaeravonFAQs]

A big problem with games journalism is simply how generic their reviews are. They like to play it safe, both with publishers and their audience, so unless they think it's okay to hate on a game (read: there's significant market backlash towards it), most games fall into that vacuous 7.0 to 8.7 score range. We need to expand the range, let 5's be mediocre, that would at least allow more range with review scores. This also falls on the consumer, though - anything that gets below an 8.5 is viewed as a deeply flawed game, which is absurd.

[@tantona9315]

There are many reasons to dislike IGN that finish way above their comical distribution of 7's.

[@Radostin-us7uq]

bro the video is great thoughtfull and well presented , but how you clean you glases that well !?=]

[@StellaKagami]

Quality content. Instant sub 👍🏻

[@benwilson622]

This video needs more views. Informative, entertaining and accurate imo

[@Slomoshun4u]

"We don't go to IGN to be informed about games, we go to be entertained". Facts.

[@2006louisb]

Stumbling on this has really restored my faith in the algorithm - amazing debut and keep up the good work 👍

[@Eonymia]

Game scores were already inflated in the 2000s. I remember reading complaints and musings about this in one of the oldest gaming magazines running (Pelit) even at the time, where the editorial staff mused about how scores had moved "up" on the scale and no one used the bottom half, so mediocre to fine games got 70s and anything under a 70/100 was not worth buying. Iirc the gist was that as a magazine they faced a conundrum: do they follow the "universally accepted" scale, or use the whole scale and how it's difficult to come up with a proper answer to this question.

[@majorshepard2]

Hope to see more in the future. great video, very informative, better memes than i do in this post. 7/10.😎 458 subs is criminal. You will blow up. Keep it up

[@youngkhronic2243]

556 subs with editing this good is a crime. You earned my sub instantly. I know this is your first video but you definitely deserve more attention

[@SumOldGitt]

For a NewTuber with 1 video, this was absolutely outstanding. Subbed in an instant. Hope you make more.

[@NuStiuFrate]

Nice edit of IGN shooting around a good review. Good luck with the channel, it's already off to a great start.

[@Axterix13]

I agree they should adjust their score. Most gamers play the big games, so the scale should be based on that. An okay big budget game should be your 5.5/10 or 6/10. And the other thing they should do, but don't, is leverage their size. They shouldn't have just one person review a game. Toss a few people at it, have them argue a bunch, and then write a review that incorporates the various thoughts. That's the type of thing that would make people turn to them, because the discussions on the merits and lack thereof would provide insight other day 0 reviews lack. Like the DBZ game should have the DBZ fanboy's view and that of someone not influenced by that.

[@unicorntomboy9736]

I heard that Famistu, the Japanese equivalent of IGN, have up to four or five people review a game, each gives their score, with the overall average score for the game at the end

[@PLKinka]

Ok now I need a Games Got Talent or the Gamer Voice with 4 ppl jury with an overly nice one and a grumpy one. Is anyone already doing it?

[@ghamski4118]

Good analysis in this video. Id be curious to see the distribution of the difference between IGN review scores and user review scores. Are there just a few notable outliers which generated discussion, or is it a consistent pattern?

[@iFramesOfficial]

Appreciate the comment! That's a great question. While I didn't calculate IGN reviews against user reviews, I did check many of their reviews. Most had a mixed like-to-dislike ratio, especially the more recent ones. This may be a reflection on IGN's reputation rather than the review itself, but it is a point of reference. The ones I highlighted in the video were particular standouts that people really didn't like. What I didn't mention in the video was that the easy, slam-dunk scores like Astrobot, Shadow of the Erdtree, and Metaphor: ReFantazio were received positively, and all the discourse in the comments was about the game rather than what IGN scored it. This was probably because IGN's overall sentiment aligned with that of the people watching it. But when the overall consensus of a game is mixed, that's when things get interesting.

[@CorruptedDogg]

Hey man, awesome first video! This format is great. Your video’s perfect, but your audio is juuust a bit hot. As in there is a tinge too much gain on the mic. It’s noticeable with headphones. Just letting you know!

[@Ashamaxa]

Good stuff mate. You're calm, have a soothing voice and explain your points calmly. As long as you dont step on a giant gymnastic ball, you have a new sub.

[@voteDC]

Alanah Pearce raised a good point. A 7/10 is seen as a low score by people when in fact is is quite a high one. The numbers 1 to 5 may as well not exist these days because a 7 is now an average game instead of a 5. Personally I like reviews from people who don't like a genre or who are unaware of what came before. They'll often spot problems that fans simply don't notice or deem unimportant to mention.

[@samtrixOutHands]

"Pretty fine video, 7/10" - IGN probably

[@jinwei996]

Blown away by your insightful analysis. Can see your channel ballooning in popularity in no time. Subscribed! 😁

[@GoRyder]

I do very much agree on the points of reviews from "Entity Vs Individual" which leads me on a though I've had on this topic for a long while now: Why in this day and age, with thousands of content creators making independent, unsponsored reviews, playthroughs & streams of games, many of which are genres they enjoy, would anyone bother with review scores from gaming outlets?

[@Me_Myself_Maly]

Your closing argument is exactly why I watch Skill Up and Gamranx for reviews mainly. They don’t score. They at best give recommendations. Review scores are so archaic and pointless nowadays. They ask you to not think about the game and what it offers and go off what the big number says. The worst types of comments are the ones that just put the review score like that does anything to tell me about the game!

[@pulsar729]

nice video! i like it - greetings from germany ✌ Edit: WOW, i just saw that this is your first video? at least its the first in this channel. The overall quality of your recording, the cut and editing, and above all the research you made and your critical input are very very good. This is not what i would expect from a first video. If it is - keep it up - its allready perfect for me! Take my subscription - i am very eager to see where this channel is going and what will come next.

[@IvaN-cf7qt]

oh man, i was ready to binge watch more of your videos, but it turned out this is the only video. loved the style , keep it up .

[@Ca2C4]

Solid video. You'll have 50k rather than 500 subscribers soon.

[@svee7597]

What a great video. Can’t believe this is your only one. Looking forward to more.

[@justinross9833]

IGN has long lost their credibility. They're just a meme at this point.

[@KhanKhav7]

Such high quality video for a new channel. Keep doing what you're doing

[@marcbraun5342]

Even with the revised scoring system presented here, God Hand got a 3, that's even more off than the Doom score, that's unexplainable from a person who's paid job it is to judge games and give them a recommendation based on their, supposingly informed, judgement.

[@dmytrosoboliev935]

Yeah. In my opinion God hand was one of the best games of 2006

[@marcbraun5342]

@@dmytrosoboliev935 I think so as well. Admittedly it is a hard sell based on video footage, you only recognize it's brilliance when playing. And that's exactly the kind of sell journalists have to do and IGN failed hard on this one, giving the readers and viewers the score they very likely assume the game has when only seing it. Back in the day IGN had more influence, therefore many still haven't played God Hand and just have the 3 in their mind. That sure is one of several reasons why we never have seen something similar, either mechanically and stylistically and that's just wrong.

[@drxym]

I think most gaming websites are guilty of payola - they will hype up games with previews and exclusives that obviously point to a financial arrangement with a studio. Their staff receive all expenses paid jollies and swag to go with the new game too. I bet that arrangement also extends to advertising on the website. So there is a very strong incentive for the site to score games higher than they deserve if there is money at stake or if they're scared the advertising will stop or their employees could get blackballed. There is a smell about all these websites to be honest.

[@sealsharp]

I think 7/10 is the perfect rating for the whole gaming industry. AAA games are standard formula, focus tested and QA tested enough to be mostly fine. But they are also too safe to be outstanding and since the industry relies on Day1 patches that never really completely fix everything, every AAA game should be left to be fixed for another month at least to enjoy the real 7/10 "it's like that other game" experience.

[@snakeplissken111]

Scoring systems aren't fully utilized across the entire industry. Even if most review policies have 5/10 scores as mediocre/average, and 6/10 still as "okay" -- most games come out around a 7ish regardless. Unless they're technically inept upon launch, like Fallout 76, say. Review aggregators have long since adopted. A 7/10 for a game counts as "mixed" on Metacritic. And doesn't count as a "recommendation" on OpenCritic as well. And those are scores that mark "good games, time well spent" according to just about any review policy. But if almost every game manages to get that kinda score or close... It takes quite something for a game to get mediocre reviews or being universally panned in general. For Hollywood it's been regular business to see even its biggest and most prolific releases treated that way. Lately even Star Wars wasn't spared. (Metacritic btw. lists a whopping ~60 games in decades total with a Metascore below 30.... gaming's just an industry of unparalleled quality, surely.)

[@Jakjakattack]

Really happy the algorithm sent this video to me. Really good video :)

[@BainesMkII]

Despite the criticism of Joab Gilroy, IGN ultimately gave Doom 2016 a score of... 7.1 (Good). Gilroy also reviewed Call of Duty: Infinite Warfare, with IGN giving it a score of 7.7 (Good).

[@noneatall9060]

The reason is that, academically, 70% is "pass" (while in the "real world" 50% is average and closer to 20% is "fail"). "Normal" people would see this, but the "academic" view now sees the "average" as 70% rather than 50%.

[@elricmon2099]

IGN gave 7/10 to: - Doom 2016 - Dragonball Sparking Zero - Dustborn - Concord - Starfield IGN also gave 5/10 to Mario Luigi Brothership, and 9/10 for DA Veilgard. So yeah, I dont get how people keep wasting time watching their reviews and giving them views and money if they have 0 credibility. The fact that the reviewer for Sparking Zero was a totally different guy than the one who did the previews, and was totally not a DB fan is just proof that IGN as a company just doesnt care, except for inflating scores on specific games like Veilgard. I wonder why they did that

[@FarmlandSecurityy]

Dude this was awesome! Helluva first vid

[@azure5584]

Best, most clear and concise video on the topic. Unfortunately, IGNorant is still read by shittonne of people who are unaware or just don't care about all this and we, as gamers, don't quite have one huge platform where we all could agree to instantly stop visiting/watching IGNorants at the same time. Not even Steam serves that purpose, sadly.

[@zazenbo]

I miss my wife

[@maxwortel8986]

Yeah, I miss your wife to

[@Yafacemate]

I generally agree, I don't really go to IGN for reviews anymore. Unless it's a racing game. Luke Reilly is legit good and knows his stuff when it comes to cars and racing. Gamers can distinguish between a general review and an educated one. If I was Peer Schneider IGN.. err leader, I would only hire/sub contract genre experts from youtube.

[@BainesMkII]

Who actually determines an IGN score? Polygon states that a reviewer has to meet with a group of senior editors to determine the final score, but there is no indication of just how much say those editors have in the matter. In a similar vein, I once knew a few aspiring freelance reviewers. I know one had a few reviews published (not for IGN or Polygon); he told the story of how he'd written a positive review for a particular game, only for the editor (who may have barely played the game, if at all) to remove some of the positive sections and give the game a lower score before publishing it.

[@Yolanda8419]

Love the research. Hope you do well, it was a lovely informative video.

[@OldyAlbert]

I don't think it's that people are lazy - it's the speed of information. You want to go from simple_and_fast to complex_and_slow. For example you open game's Steam page - you look at the %. It doesnt give you all you need to know about quality of the game, but it is a good starting poing. Then, if you interested in this particular game, you can start actually reading reviews and learn specifics. I think that's why steam reviews work best - unlike gaming media it starts with a number and then you go into the specifics, while traditional reviews talk about and THEN give a number - no wonder people want to know the score right away - score it lower resolution information then the actuall review - you want resolution to go up not down, if that makes sense.

[@russelljackson8153]

7 is the safe number. If you rate a woman a 7 she won't think you're calling her an uggo.

[@casbalt7763]

I think the issue with game companies manipulating scores by witholding stuff has gotten worse because the companies a lot of times know that the game they made isnt as good as it should be.so rather than making better games they just dont let people play them

[@Mr-E-Meat]

Anyone else remember the cuphead tutorial dumpster fire? Chefs kiss

[@kbar4462]

Great content and great presentation. Looking forward to next one

[@senquidam6318]

IGN: You get above 7/10 if you pay IGN, 7/10 when IGN don't give a shit about proper journalism and needs to feed the algorithm and below 7/10 when IGN actually tries to proper review but fails because of incompetence.

[@Paelmoon]

On the one hand, you all say IGN is irrelevant, a meme, no one cares about them. Yet, EVERYONE AND THEIR DOG makes content about them. All the time. Constantly. So which is it?

[@Rufiowascool]

Oh shit. Birth of a new channel. Good shit bro. Points for using STEAMING SHIT in your first drop. Production values already through the roof - looking forward to where this goes!

[@Cyberpsychos_Dirge]

Part of the other huge issue with IGN and other profession games “journalists” is their mixture of elitism and arrogance. They can’t fathom that the public disagrees with their poor take, so it must be all of our faults. So to try and shut down dissent they use words like “bigot,” “sexist,” “chud,” and others. They are so high on their own supply they can’t see that we, the consumer, are phasing them out. Recently an IGN employee Nathan Grayson, (I think IGN, he’s a games journo) said some extremely messed up things. He wanted non-“accredited” reviews, aka everyone who isn’t a professional like him, to have their stuff snuffed by youtube as he sees the public being able to review games as helping fascism grow in the U.S. (I’m not kidding) It’s insane

[@joshuacrowley8887]

10 - masterpiece 9 - excellent 8 - great 7 - good 6 - okay if not flawed 5 - very mid 4 - bad 3 - really bad 2 - unplayable 1 - not a game

[@_Kakoosh]

IGN reviewers don’t pursue a career in games. They pursue a career in writing

[@CYBERBUNS]

Stop even talk about them. Just ignore IGN completely and soon enough whatever they do or don't do won't matter anymore. Stop giving them any audience.

[@DuggyDarko]

The problem is people literally just want an arbitrary number rather than reading a more nuanced view on a game.

[@derrickcrowe3888]

I disagree that an average score should be 5. Game quality doesn't exist on a normal distribution, so I don't see why scores that judge quality ought to either. You _can_ force it into a normal distribution by judging games not by solely their own merits but rather comparing them against a hypothetical "average game". However, I think that's both less helpful and less clear than a raw score.

[@MiniKodjo]

I don't understand why in 2024 People still care about magazine review score....

[@badbeck76]

keep the momentum going. I like your presentation and excellent work that is obviously put into your video's. As for IGN... I block them even coming up in my searches and videos... they are an example of false media news and need to be shut down!!!

[@spamspam1281]

They don't care about gamers and just want to keep the games companies happy. But then again modern audiences have memories like goldfishes anyway.

[@swopeboi]

Great video man hope you get more subs

[@Darqion]

It's been many years since i actually watched an IGN video to be informed, and even then it was hit and miss. I basically guessed the score on how well i knew the title, because when i watched, basically any big name game would get a 9 or a 10, and a lot of the review just sounded like some fanboy creaming over how great it is... actual info was often lacking It was around then that i decided to just stop caring about scores, and even other peoples opinions entirely. What people like is too diverse, and i've never met someone who matches my tastes in gaming exactly.. They'd love a game i 'm playing(which brings me to their channel) and then they shit on my favorite game. it happens a lot, for some reason. So what draws me to a review now, is if the reviewer doesn't just share their opinion, but actually dives into the what and why of the opinion. If the writing is bad, show me the writing. If the gameplay is boring, explain why that game's combat is boring where others are not. Sadly not a lot of people meet my "requirements", but i can piece together an opinion after watching enough people.

[@chrisbj5251]

We all know IGN stand for Ignorant.

[@young5395]

Yeah bro keep this work up and youll be massive. Love this video yiur talent is definitely apparent.

[@Relkond]

Do what I do - subtract 6, call it a 1-to-4 scale. No more mystery.

[@maltep3100]

all hail the algorythm 🎉🎉

[@oldmanharley4018]

because all major gaming outlets are financially benefited by never giving a bad review to major publisher titles. it is THEIR JOB to hype and sell, not to give honest reviews. It's been embarrassment after embarrassment for years for gaming journos, driver3, gamergate, cp2077 getting a 10 on IGN and then cdpr saying they didnt send them any review copies so the whole score was based on the cinematic trailer, not the game, then filip, a known plagiarist discovered working for ign, writers for gaming outlets resigning because their reviews were edited by their editor to seem in a more positive light and not "rock the boat". gaming journalism, and ign in particular are a disgrace and an insult to both gaming and journalism. others arent any better. eurogamer giving a PERFECT score to veilguard and the review itself being 90% about some real world social politics bs while disgustingly evading talking about the game's many shortcomings, the story being poorly written to such a degree it goes against established series lore, a complete remaking of the narrative tone and visual design, shallow, repetitive combat so bland people are putting it in easy mode just to have combat end faster. Truly repulsive behavior from "gaming journalists". they should not, ever, be trusted. you say you dont want to hate on these writers. I think your stance is wrong. These outlets come out of their way to insult an even threaten (look up alyssa mercante from kotaku's threats of physical violence and inviting someone to fight over her review criticism) the people who criticize them and then sneakily changing the reviews when they get find out of either bs, plagiarism or straight up objectively wrong information. So yes. they SHOULD be hated, they should be called out on their bullshit. and as an aside, these cowards will give AC:shadows a 9/10 because ubi advertises on their site. how could you possibly trust these people. literal definition of conflict of interests

[@Nero_PR]

The Algorithm God's have spoken. Give this man the likes he deserves for a well done video.

[@relhimp]

IGN is going same way as my local game magazines where they were published on paper (it was 20 years ago, my fellow kids). Nothing new. We even got meme-term "solid mid" for 7/10 rated games. When journo can't score it, but have to put it in a way publisher don't cut access, it's solid mid.