Banned

Member 54

Level 45.72

Mar 2006

|
Jan 12, 2008, 08:08 PM
Local time: Jan 13, 2008, 02:08 PM
|
1
#1 of 9
|
IGN's whole interface never changes no matter what category they decide to make, and their interface is one that's cluttered, ugly, annoying to navigate, and something I can't be bothered with. Gamespot follows the same rule of thumb here, but it doesn't really matter considering 90% of all credible game reviewers and staff members have left there.
A retro category, eh, who cares. They're just going to mock old games which nobody cares about (or happen to appreciate deeply, thus fueling the IGN hate) or try to spark up interest in games that.. nobody cares about. When I want a review of a retro game, I take out an old magazine, and see if there's one in there. Not all games age well, so obviously reviewing them when they're newly released is a smarter idea.
As mentioned, it's a little odd that people won't give older games a higher score against newer ones, but this is called the age of gaming. People obviously want newer games, hell, some people don't even like 2D. Reviewers on IGN should be reviewing games (or "retro" games) that people care about, or are at least worth playing. Why did someone review Last Battle? I don't imagine a kid going to IGN, looking up locations of Cog Tags in Gears of War, seeing that review and thinking "Oh hell yeah I'm totally going to play this obscure Megadrive game that nobody's heard of since 1994."
Jam it back in, in the dark.
|