Greg Miller is NOT writing the WWE '12 IGN Review!!!!

Well, it still remains to be seen what the review actually IS. This guy could turn out to be even more of an uninformed clod.

Although I'm not sure that's even possible. But we'll see.

IGN does kinda suck, though. So, it's not like I have high expectations. I hate their entire site.

BUT, the fact of the matter is, that whether or not the site is a good site, lots of people still take their opinion seriously, and will base their feelings on their review.

And quite honestly, I think THQ deserves to sell copies, make money, and turn this game into a hit.

And favorable reviews help them do that, and make more money with which to put into next year's game.

That is why I am hoping for this review to break the 9.0 barrier of "Outstanding" this year.

Something that wouldn't happen as long as Greg continues to write, whiny, nitpicky, uninformed, crap reviews that harp on every little bit that's missing instead of concentrating on what's new and improved, which Greg constantly ignores.

The thing is, regardless of what IGN say, the games still prove to be hits. I have little faith that one reviewer will be any better than another TBH.

I never pay attention to reviews, in the main. I use them as a guide but if I still fancy something I'll go with what I like.

Ok, the review is up.............

It sucks.

Yeah, they gave it a high score. 9.0. And on that end it's nice to see, I guess. It was what I wanted. For it to break (or at least match) the 9 barrier....

But then I read the written review.

Dear god, you'd not know that the game got a 9 by the way this "Rich" dude describes it. It has all the problems that Greg Miller's reviews do. It's more or less, bitch bitch bitch complain complain complain. and "Oh hey, there's other stuff that's good. Not gonna tell you what it is, but it's stuff...."

Yet it's not even at all in-depth. It reads like a completely shitty, uninformative bare-bones overview that doesn't tell ANYONE what they need to know about any real details of the game. Complte waste of time.

And the criticism is basically "the story is lame, the acting is lame, these wrestlers can't voice act, the animations are dumb, Road To Wrestlemania is dumb, they stand around and blah blah blah, I don't want to see wrestlers act, I want to see them fight wah wah wa..."

So what does he mention of the create modes?

Oh... nothing? Ok.

So what of the features in Universe mode?

....oh.... just telling us that Universe mode exists and it's where you play a career?

What about the wrestlers, the DLC, the create parts, how exactly the gameplay works?

...All of these things are shortened to about half a sentence or so of "yeah there's something like that in there, I guess."

Basically, I don't like the review. It's an apathetic and lazy review.

They just slapped a 9.0 on there so that the wrestling fans would be happy, and then slapped this article together that just says "Yeah, it's a wrestling game. They do things, and you do things, and it's good. Go get it or something I don't care"

A lame review from a lame site. Completely basic, uninformative, lacking, and complains way too much about his stupid expectations about how the voice acting sucks and the commentary is lame, and so on, and then just says "But it's fine. Buy it. 9.0."

It's barely even 2 pages. Like, a page and 3/4th's of a page. This person writing this review just wrote it like they didn't even want to.

In general, I like the score, but it was clearly just a number given to make people happy, and the review is shit.

This new guy sucks. We might as well have had Greg Miller. He'd probably write the exact same shit. Hell, I think this might even be him under a "mask".

Its a shame that when they review these games they don't get someone to do it who actually watches and understands wrestling and the WWE, and therefore appreciates what a fan might be looking for from a wrestling game, or how closely it mirrors the product.

I doubt they'd ask someone to review a football game who had never seen a football match for instance.

I'll read the review to see what they say, but I don't puth any stock in it.

Hmmmmm...

Well, Mike, I'm not sure if IGN have posted a revised review since the one you read, but TBH I don't read that review as anywhere near as negative as you do.

Firstly, he does talk about create modes. He talks about making the Great Muta, about designing his own logos, and about the fact that you have options to amend arenas, create finishing moves, change superstar clothing, and of course create your own wrestlers.

I thought what he said about Universe mode was fair enough really in that he explains what the mode is about without having to go into too much minute detail, by saying it allows you to concentrate on booking the matches, and allows you to run your own brand. Of course we know that the detail changes over last year are important, but within the context of the whole review I don't think its that bad. And he does mention the extensive roster, and the DLC. He can't be expected to go into the level of detail "oh there are X new moves, Y new haircuts, this pair of boots are in".

The comments on Road to Wrestlemania. Well he could perhaps have tried to appreciate what they were going for a little more, but its honestly nowhere near as negative as you paint it. I think its fair to say that we've all thought some of the voice acting on WWE games has been poor in the past. I don't think he's saying that the RTW is dumb - I think what he's saying is that the core mechanics of the main game are so good, its a shame when you are taken away from using them.

As to those core mechanics - which are after all the meat of the game - he's actually extremely positive, and clearly thinks it works extremely well. He could hardly have heaped more praise on the game.

The 9.0 is a good score and I don't think this is a bad review. I think perhaps you might want to read it again.

I just read the review, and think it was a good one. The reviewer definitely knows what he's on about when it comes to Wrestling. I want to see his Muta CAW!

I dunno, I just had this feeling while reading it that it's extremely short, doesn't say a thing that even people with casual interest didn't already know, like listing the features off of an official website blurb, and then harping on irrelevant aspects like voice acting. But I agree that, it's really not that negative. He only dismisses RTWM. It's just that I don't think he goes into enough detail in other modes to really sell anyone on them.

I agree that the article speaks nicely of things, but when it does, it feels vague, as if it's saying, "the game has this mode, it's good. I played this mode, this mode is also good." Maybe it's just me feeling that he needs to SELL it more. Because a lot of people turn up their nose at these games and a lot of explanation is needed to convince these hard-nosed people that refuse to give the games a chance, and make a sport of bashing them every year.

All in all, I really don't take issue with any negative tones as he ONLY is negative on RTWM, really. Just that everything else he does seem to like, but doesn't say much or say why. This review should have at least gone 4 pages, like most other game reviews get.

Maybe this is just me, though. I realize this could be that I've already gone and done detailed research and read what everyone else has said, so this IGN article just seems extremely bland and rushed by comparison, imo.



However, even so, I shouldn't care. It's just a review, and I'll have the game soon enough.

I am happy at the score at least. A 9.0 is well deserved. I wish the written review was better, or more in-depth. But hey, none of it'll matter when i'm playing. So I probably shouldn't harp on the review or care that much.

.

P.S: Looking at my opinion above... wow. I was harsh on this guy.

I do think the review was lackluster, but it almost looks like I insulted the guy.

Man, that was uncalled for on my part. I do kinda take that back. :/

At the end of the day, a review is just one persons opinion. What the reviewer thinks of the game will differ from many other peoples opinions. I read reviews of many games, but never let those reviews (unless Dave is the reviewer ) influence my decision when I'm considering buying a game.

Yeah, I know. I just think he should have sold what he liked so much about it, more. There are a lot of naysayers and bashers and I just believe it takes a lot more than what this article gives to change the mind of the "THQ Sucks, these games are the same crap every year" snobs.

If the review is supposed to be a selling tool, it could have told people more of what they needed to know. imo.

That having been said, I do feel bad for near-insulting the reviewer, and I should not have.

I've read a few IGN reviews but I don't really like their site.

The way I figure out if a game is most likely going to be good or not is by going on gamefaqs.com, looking at the Review section and seeing the average score from all the reviews, as people usually post loads of reviews on there, even for games that have been out for years like the PS1 Final Fantasy's. That's usually a good indicator if the game's any good.

julius seizure wrote:

I've read a few IGN reviews but I don't really like their site.

Agreed, there.


However, I actually pretty much roundly despise any "mainstream" gaming website or "company". When it comes to reviewing, the common man, the indie reviewer, those are the people who'se opinions matter.

Anyone else, their opinion is only mere entertainment and should be taken entirely as such, if they're taken at all.

The only reason I give anything close to a shit about what a mainstream review says, is because I know how many people follow bullshit like Metacritic and "professional reviewers" as religious gospel truth, and as bullshit as mainstream reviewers are, they can sway a lot of people away from giving things a chance.

It's crap like that, that leads to things like good games like Metroid Other M being killed because a few mainstream critics throw a hissy-fit soley over Samus having a voice actress and a personality they didn't agree with.