Lol this is why you read shit in games and actually try to pay attention. Yes, even you reviewers.
IGN retracts large portion of RE2 review and updates score after it becomes clear their reviewer missed a large chunk of the game.
- Thread starter Datajoy
- Start date
Yeah, that's the part that made me scratch my head. Both for giving it an arbitrary 8.8 instead of a 9 to begin with and a whole .2 points for an entire half of missed gameplay smh
Lmao!!!!!!!!
The original score being that high for half a game, the .2 increase afterwards, the fact this reviewer didn't know anything about it all, just everything around this is absolutely hilarious. It's also absolutely sad that ign hires people who don't seem to be capable of doing the job correctly time and time again. What the hell man.
The original score being that high for half a game, the .2 increase afterwards, the fact this reviewer didn't know anything about it all, just everything around this is absolutely hilarious. It's also absolutely sad that ign hires people who don't seem to be capable of doing the job correctly time and time again. What the hell man.
Daemon's a good guy. He just messed up pretty bad this time. It happens. If you don't mess up at work every now and then you have an easy job.
Assuming the people over at IGN can read of course.
True but where is the editor? Why is no one checking? Did everyone over at IGN missed this as well?
Yes the handgun is the only different weapon. The ending is more of an extended ending with the extra fight.
I wonder where they get these people. I mean wasnt he around when the original released? The whole thing with Leon A route giving you Claire B campaing and vice-versa.
Just seems like a very weird mistake to make for someone that makes a living by reviewing and playing games.
Just seems like a very weird mistake to make for someone that makes a living by reviewing and playing games.
This is really bad. But CAPCOM should've just labeled it Chapter 2 or something. New Game [2nd run] is too vague.
lol...I predicted on how they'll screw up, not wishing them to. No worries, I'll blame the developers instead to protect IGN honor.
You're giving the guy far too much credit and discrediting people who are great at their jobs regardless of difficulty.
I have reviewed the game as well. In the end of Leon A, for example, you have the message that people posted here that the 2nd Run is now available. But besides all that, the story ends with a teaser. I cannot say this without spoiling the game. But you see a teaser for something and the story didn't end. It is pretty obvious what it is if you played the original or at least did your research.
But there is something else that you can see that we have two different campaings.
Part of my review (it is in portuguese):
"Explaining the difference between campaigns without spoiler: if you start with Leon, sooner or later you will arrive at the police station and play what you saw in the 1-Shot Demo. That is, as soon as he enters the police station, Leon searches on the computer for survivors. Later, Leon finds Claire in the courtyard of the police station. If you start the game with Claire, the role will be changed. Claire is the one who will arrive at the police station and check the monitor for her brother Chris, but will eventually see the same thing as Leon (the police officer asking for help). On the second run, if you have finished with Leon first, you will start playing with Claire in the courtyard of the police station - which is where Leon found her."
So, if you at least start playing the 2nd run, you will see that the beginning is different. Also, you are going to see as well that the puzzles are different etc. It is not something so hidden that can be confusing. You only have to start the 2nd Run to see that they are different things.
But there is something else that you can see that we have two different campaings.
Part of my review (it is in portuguese):
"Explaining the difference between campaigns without spoiler: if you start with Leon, sooner or later you will arrive at the police station and play what you saw in the 1-Shot Demo. That is, as soon as he enters the police station, Leon searches on the computer for survivors. Later, Leon finds Claire in the courtyard of the police station. If you start the game with Claire, the role will be changed. Claire is the one who will arrive at the police station and check the monitor for her brother Chris, but will eventually see the same thing as Leon (the police officer asking for help). On the second run, if you have finished with Leon first, you will start playing with Claire in the courtyard of the police station - which is where Leon found her."
So, if you at least start playing the 2nd run, you will see that the beginning is different. Also, you are going to see as well that the puzzles are different etc. It is not something so hidden that can be confusing. You only have to start the 2nd Run to see that they are different things.
It isn't half the game. A poster on this very page who has finished Claire's second run even talks about how little difference there is between first and second runs.
Someone who makes a living reviewing video games probably does not remember the details of every game they've played, especially ones from twenty years ago.
Imagine if they gave it a 6 out of 10 for it. That could be damaging. Godhand and Alien Isolation deserved better.
To be fair, I have a bad habit if skipping vital messages from spamming X or A... But... shouldn't this stuff be documented in the review guide sent by capcom?
IGN then and IGN now are inherently different given the passage of time. The IGN reviewers who reviewed those 2 games are different people to begin with.
Stop holding weird edgy grudges for over a decade because someone didn't like a game you liked.
It's funny and in the grand scheme of things not really a big deal since the overall score is already high up with many other reviewers putting out great impressions.
It's just an unfortunate that it adds to a long line of IGN hiccups and further cementing the narrative that reviewers don't know how to play video games.
Of course, if shit like this happen to DMC5 I might not be so chill about it.
It's just an unfortunate that it adds to a long line of IGN hiccups and further cementing the narrative that reviewers don't know how to play video games.
Of course, if shit like this happen to DMC5 I might not be so chill about it.
But if you *were* to play the game a second time, you would choose that, because it is the NG+ (and you recognized that it at least changes the ending). That's not what the IGN reviewer did, he supposedly saw that option, and decided "Eh, I'll just choose normal New Game and choose the other character".
Wait I thought reviewers are supposed to just hit New Game and then give it a random score without even finishing the story?
They are not paid to review what the game has to offer or give any informative insights, they are paid to give numbers based on their mood, that's it.
Yeeeeeeah. few people here are thinking the same thing. That's really the only way I see this mistake happening. played a bit of leon then restarted as claire, but it really is nothing but conjecture and speculation. The reason why I think this too is because a big prompt shows up stating there's new stuff in the new run and a new menu option appears on the main menu. Confusing as the title of the 2nd run is, how exactly do you miss it...but eh, I guess anything can happen.
I think you're quibbling cos you feel personally hurt by the disparaging of your profession by that other poster. Reviews are widely accepted as part of journalism.
It's not exactly half, you're right, however it is a significant portion of the entire Resident Evil 2 experience.
Seems you really just picked a side huh. Its a concern based on previous IGN reviews like the very recent Ace combat 7 review where they played with the auto-combo equivalent which is barely playing the game they are just not reliable and affect the industry way too much.
I mean if you want to get yourself all worked up and Big Mad about something they haven't actually done, then by all means live your truth. It's super weird though!
Yeah, it's pretty messed up for them to play the game using a feature the developers deliberately implemented. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
If you wanna talk about how they effect the industry you should probably focus on how dev companies put waaaaaay too much emphasis on arbitrary number scores.
It doesn't seem to be the case here because it sounds like RE219 doesn't incorporate specific zapping mechanics and Mr X is in the A paths. Which sounds like a crying shame, because if anything I would have wanted that kind of stuff to be expanded upon.
What!? I didn't know that happened this week as well. This Re2 review and that Ace Combat review are just as suspect imo. I honestly don't read reviews off major sites anymore but I know lots of people still do. That's all unacceptable.
Context. IGN has a long history of inaccuracies in their reviews.
I don't know if it's an easy mistake given how nobody else made it.
Me: "based on IGN's previous blunder, here's how I think they can mess up".
Me according to you: "man I can't wait for KH3 and DMC5 screw ups lololololol".
Oh dont worry, i played through all the endings, its my probably my favourite game. I just couldn't think of any other game where you play the "same" story again from the perspective of a different character haha.
So he presumably didn't finished the first run, gets called out and pretends he now played the second run in a couple of hrs and adds .2. Seems totally legit.
Not an easy mistake to make, thats exactly the point. Plus the weird response to all of it.
Not an easy mistake to make, thats exactly the point. Plus the weird response to all of it.
It's a pretty egregious mistake in a long line of review mistakes under the same umbrella. Review scores effect many facets of this industry, which all boil down to money. It's not an unimportant thing to just brush aside when it's been a continuous issue.
No one is talking about ''gamer rise up'', we are talking about ''IGN step down''
Thank you! As long as it comes close to the experience you have on your 2nd Nier playthrough I'm going to be pleased.
You think someone who skips through stuff like this will take the time to actually read the review guide?
Yeah, Its a really bad look. Honestly, this is why I dont pay much attention to review scores anymore. The majority of people literally dont read anything/pay attention to anything in games so it's no surprise it happens with reviewers as well. Couple that with the need to play a game and skip to the next big thing quickly and you end up with mistakes like this and non-critical analysis of games ala RDR2.
OP
OP
Have people been saying that? I think most people are just sensibly chuckling.
I haven't played the new one myself so I'm just going on my experience with the original, but if so that is a shame.
That's still not really the best way to say, this is part B of the story. The way that sounds, is like play it in a slightly different context with some minor differences. It's not really that clear.
The thing is I know reviewers talk when they realize they may not be understanding something. It's crazy that you don't DM your friend who is also reviewing the game and go, "this seems weird... Is this right? "
(and I believe they are capable of doing this without influencing each other)
(and I believe they are capable of doing this without influencing each other)
I'd agree if it was some obscure game from 20 years ago, but c'mon it's Resident Evil 2. One of the most popular games of the PS1 era.