Gamespot or IGN ?

IGN or Gamespot

  • Gamespot

    Votes: 27 41.5%
  • IGN

    Votes: 32 49.2%
  • Other

    Votes: 6 9.2%

  • Total voters
    65

DigiQ8

Tank
Joined
Jul 6, 2003
Messages
5,955
Reaction score
0
Me and my friend were talking about that
he says Gamespot and i say IGN, Gamespot always gives low score to games that worth more :P.
i dont really trust Major gaming site thaat much, i always look for people opinons.

Anyway
Who do you trust more ?
 
I have fewer disagreements with IGN than Gamespot so I will say IGN.

EDIT: Thread needs a poll. :burp:
 
ign have gone up imo lately mostly coz gs has gone down even if i find some of their harsher reviews refreshing,also to the guy who said eurogamer,yes they are good too,a bit too much waffle and some of their reviewers are a tad neurotic but good nonetheless
 
IGN...

I can't stand consolekiddyspot who denies amazing games the ratings they deserve while handing out near-perfect scores to undeserving games. Don't need to mention any titles (COUGHHALO2COUGH) but you all get the idea.
 
Zeus said:
IGN...

I can't stand consolekiddyspot who denies amazing games the ratings they deserve while handing out near-perfect scores to undeserving games. Don't need to mention any titles (COUGHHALO2COUGH) but you all get the idea.

Um... GS gave Halo 2 a 9.4, while IGN gave it 9.8 :P

IGN for me, but I'll usually look to GS for a second opinion.
 
Bad^Hat said:
Um... GS gave Halo 2 a 9.4, while IGN gave it 9.8 :P

IGN for me, but I'll usually look to GS for a second opinion.
yes i visit them both regurly,when i go to ign i then go to gs etc then to eurogamer,never really visit gamespy
 
Gamespot does tend to have more coverage, and the free streaming of videos is a plus. They also have a free content-delivery system with no lineups or additional fees.

They are one of the hardest graders in the industry.
 
I overall treat both equally.
I like IGN a little bit more but overall I dun really mind for either. They are both overall exceptional when compared to others.
 
Bad^Hat said:
Um... GS gave Halo 2 a 9.4, while IGN gave it 9.8 :P

IGN for me, but I'll usually look to GS for a second opinion.


Peh, gamespot is still console kiddie zone for giving hl2 a 9.2 when it deserves at least a 9.7/10 (well let's not get too far into that before we have a halo 2 vs. half life 2 war here), and I hate that greg guy as well.

Halo 2 singleplayer was so boring and repetitive I began to ask myself why am I even playing this thing, the multiplayer was decent only because of the ranking system and clan support
 
I prefer Gamespots reviews - so they get my vote.
 
I was a long time subscriber to IGN Insider. However, I became annoyed when they started using popups. Plus, it seems that they didn't have as many exclusives and features as Gamespot Complete. I cancelled with IGN and I am now with Gamespot. :)
 
I say IGN. They know how to review games, movies, etc.
 
ign tend to over rate games so im gonna go with GS
 
I like reading IGN's reviews over Gamespot's, but they're both equal to me.
 
Gamespot - awful review of hl2 - halo 2 higher
IGN - right on! - i usually agree with their reviews
 
I like both for difference things.
 
Gamespot have more accurate scores, but at the same time they seem to suffer from elitism. For example, most hyped games often receive some of the lowest scores from Gamespot (Half-Life 2, Halo 2, Deus Ex, System Shock 2) and sleeper-hits are usually given the highest score from them (Riddick, Freedom Fighters, Far Cry, WoW - Not really a sleeper but definately didn't have as much hype as the other games coming out). Also Gamespot are very inconsistant. Take the GOTY awards. They gave Half-Life 2 (9.2)the FPS of the Year but Halo 2 had a higher score of 9.4.

But at the same time, IGN tend to give in to hype alot more then Gamespot. Take Fable for example, very short and average RPG, yet it got a higher score then KOTOR despite everything it had wrong with it. But they have more extensive reviews. Usually 3-4 pages longer.

So in the end, Gamespot have more accurate scores but IGN have better articles.
 
ive been using ign since the www.n64.com days so i tend to lean toward their ratings. they are generally always on target with my views of good games. i guess it depends on the types of games ur into but nearly every one on ign that scores 9.0+ deserves its score
 
Gamespot reviews are put together better, but IGN rates them more accurately. (ie. they arent gamecube fanboys)
 
bliink said:
Gamespot reviews are put together better, but IGN rates them more accurately. (ie. they arent gamecube fanboys)

ur absolutely right. also, im not sure if gamespot does anything like this, but IGN gives you their score, the press average score, and the reader review score plus reader reviews. This is probably the most helpful feature to balance out the possible over or under scoring that occasionally occurs on ALL gaming sites.
 
Gamespot are tools in more ways than one, plus their site design sucks.
 
I'm a bit picky when it comes to games so GS is just right for me ^_^.
 
I never use either.

someone recommend me to a good review site.

I enjoy listening to a magazine absolutely rip a game in a bad review. Love it when they say how much of a turd a game is, gets me laughing forever.

Magazines:
I remeber Electronic Gaming Monthly used to have me laughing a bit, back in the SNES days(EGM) recently I've enjoyed reading Game Informer(GI) reviewers. THEY ARE FUNNY


What is the best site for reviews like that? anyone know?
 
Sparta said:
Gamespot have more accurate scores, but at the same time they seem to suffer from elitism. For example, most hyped games often receive some of the lowest scores from Gamespot (Half-Life 2, Halo 2, Deus Ex, System Shock 2) and sleeper-hits are usually given the highest score from them (Riddick, Freedom Fighters, Far Cry, WoW - Not really a sleeper but definately didn't have as much hype as the other games coming out). Also Gamespot are very inconsistant. Take the GOTY awards. They gave Half-Life 2 (9.2)the FPS of the Year but Halo 2 had a higher score of 9.4.

But at the same time, IGN tend to give in to hype alot more then Gamespot. Take Fable for example, very short and average RPG, yet it got a higher score then KOTOR despite everything it had wrong with it. But they have more extensive reviews. Usually 3-4 pages longer.

So in the end, Gamespot have more accurate scores but IGN have better articles.

I agree about inconsistancies being a bad thing in reviews,., but the second paragraph is complete opinion. And i dont agree with it.

IMO Fable is one of the best offline RPG's ever made, if not the best, so I can't agree with you there.
And what can you mean when you say"despite everything wrong with it" I have found nothing wrong with it except that it is only for XBOX and not PC.

KOTOR It had alot of good qualities, but kinda sucked IMO and was pretty disapointed after all the hype

Just by reading your quote I would absolutely pick IGN. Sounds like I would agree with thier taste in games.
Gamespot sounds like a joke
 
Gamespot is inconsistent with their reviews, each one differs completely from the last.

IGN is a bit too much "OMG favorite game EVAH!!!" with each and every title.

So neither.

EDIT: Agrees with Sparta
 
I don't like either really, gamespot is to harsh and i never find myself agreeing with them much, and IGN are far too overly generous, and when they play a game they like, its just as PvtRyan said...Favourite game EVAH!!
 
IGN; their year subscription for $11 cannot be argued with. Granted, it was a special offer at around E3 time, but it's still a fantastic deal. Their reviews tend to be accurate, even if the end rating tends to be a little high (but who looks at ratings? The whole point of a review is the writing itself, not a score), and they regularly offer lovely exclusive hi-res video footage for pretty much every game.
 
Back
Top