Variety discusses ethics of 'exclusive' reviews

IGN compromising its journalistic integrity for an exclusive ??

I do believe Ive caught the vapors....

I like IGN, but the moment their "exclusive" review went up, I took it with a big dino sized grain of salt.
But who in their right mind only trusts the review from a single site? Look at what the other guys have to say and then make up your mind!

When you get an exclusive review of one of the biggest games of the year (if not the biggest) and immediately put a 10 for the final score, something immediately smells rotten.

And it just goes to show how messed up Gamespot is right now, they still haven't managed to post a review.

"reviews are entirely subjective"

end of story

It must be a justified score, almost everyone has rated GTA a 10, who cares if ign got paid off to agree with the masses?

Actually, LaughingTarget, if you read the review, you would see that a 10 does NOT mean that it is the best thing ever made. To quote IGN - "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."

My concern is with the pandering, scaredy-cat way games journalism acts towards developers.

That's why I usually wait for the Metacritic to get at least 6 or more reviews. 'Cept for this sombitch. I'll have mine @12:01AM.

I hope all of the discs self destruct at 12:01

Clearly all 15 or so outlets that gave it a 10/10 are also paid off.

Clearly.

Happens all the time with car, TV audio, movies, TV, and other 'hobby' or specialty mags/sites. They all have 'exclusive' reviews/previews.

Move on nothing to see here.

Wouldn't it be nice if we could trust the industry we love? I know that there's payola in most entertainment industries, but video games are supposed to be different. I always have to remind myself that dork solidarity really doesn't go that deep. *sigh*

Considering "professional" gaming journalists are usually the first ones to fall for massive PR hype, I don't see why the hell any game publisher would bother with awarding "exclusives" to get a game better reviews.


The press has already decided long ago that GTAIV would be considered a good game. The same thing has happened before with Bioware's, Bethesda's, and Blizzard's games, to give a few examples.

The key to understanding and being able to trust reviews is knowing the source. IGN has, I believe, given out two 10s in the past decade (now three, with GTA). I understand GTAIV is one of the biggest, most hyped games of said decade, but if IGN were willing to sell 10s for insider information, wouldn't we expect to see them a whole lot more. Now Gamepro, that's a different story. If I had a nickel for every time they gave a perfect score...

I for one put a lot of weight in reviews when I'm buying games. A game is very rarely a lock for me until I've read through its Metacritic (not just the numbers, the words too) and I've found this very rarely betrays me. I really don't know who all you people are that say game reviews are 100% untrustworthy and a "crock", because if they were, how would it be such a thriving business?

IGN was shit to begin with...this just confirms how low they've become.

Seriously I love GTA and I'm sure IV will be fun and all but I doubt its a 10. Thats just my personal opinion.

Something I thought was amusingly hilarious was how they took action to block every YouTube video simulcast of their review. Dozens were posted, dozens were removed on a claim of copyright.

As if IGN has some kind of reputation to protect...

Many of you guys are missing the point.

It doesn't matter whether Grand Theft Auto IV deserves a perfect 10 or not. It doesn't even matter if IGN took money from Rockstar.

This is unethical journalism. It's as simple as that. As a journalism major, this is a perfect example of taking gifts from those that you are supposed to be objective about. If a newspaper gets a package of food from a politician, even if the politician doesn't explicitly say "I'm giving you this in exchange for you promoting me" it's still unethical.

Go ahead, ask Joystiq. Why do you think they have all these giveaways? Companies send them things, and even if they don't ask for anything in return. At least Joystiq does the ethical thing and doesn't keep the prizes themselves, and hands it out to their audience. But in the process of giving away this 'Joyswag' they still get in a few words of praise for the company. Look at this praise for Ikaruga:

"Treasure's Ikaruga holds a special place in our hearts. If you're like some of us on the Joystiq crew, today's Xbox Live Arcade release will be the third time you pick up this classic shooter. At only 800 Microsoft Points ($10), this HD re-release is quite a bargain -- but, thanks to Microsoft, we're able to give three Joystiq readers a free download of the game."

This is still not too bad, because at least Joystiq doesn't review these titles. But even IGN doesn't directly get any money from Rockstar, they still are getting web traffic because of the exclusive review. Web traffic=more money. Even if other forms of media do it, it's still wrong.

Frankly, don't understand the debate. Right now, the same gamers that are crying foul about the 10s were the very same people who were crying out for blood over the 8.8 on Zelda. As for exclusives, every other media does this, why can't games?

As for complaining about the number, who cares? The numbers are excessively uninformative unless you're running averages. Frankly, I find out more about a game from a bad review than, more often than not, a good review.

I think we need Spinal tap's system. the ratings need to go up to 11.