PDA

View Full Version : IGN review of AC Rogue is hypocritical at best SPOILERS



danglez benderz
11-16-2014, 11:37 PM
So IGN recently reviewed AC Rogue and gave it a 6.8. Their main complaint (same complaint of anyone who didnt give Rogue 8.0 or above) was that it re-used a lot of gameplay elements from Black flag and didnt freshen it up enough. I agree with this sentiment (although i really enjoy the changes they did make), and I think ubisoft should have co-ordinated to introduce some of the new features of Unity into Rogue. At the same time they wholeheartedly admit that they loved the story, they thouroughly enjoyed the gameplay and loved the naval combat just as much as they did in Black flag. So then why give it a 6.8? When they gave the last 4 COD 9.0 or higher despite recycling gameplay mechanics far more than Rogue (hell every one of those games uses the same cliches, even the story follows the same path every time since MW3, and they wont mix up multiplayer). To me it seems IGN and a couple of other review sites got extremely whiny about having to get the game the same day as everyone else. Especially considering most of the gaming sites that gave it less than an 8.0 all wrote the same article about 'our Rogue review is coming but Ubisoft didnt give us an early copy.. list reasons we hate that'. If I gave an unbiased review of rogue at worst I would give it a 7.8 (if youre hung up on similar game mechanics as BF) and at best an 8.6 despite the fact that my personal enjoyment of the game was about a 9.1.

Charles_Phipps
11-16-2014, 11:43 PM
So IGN recently reviewed AC Rogue and gave it a 6.8. Their main complaint (same complaint of anyone who didnt give Rogue 8.0 or above) was that it re-used a lot of gameplay elements from Black flag and didnt freshen it up enough. I agree with this sentiment (although i really enjoy the changes they did make), and I think ubisoft should have co-ordinated to introduce some of the new features of Unity into Rogue. At the same time they wholeheartedly admit that they loved the story, they thouroughly enjoyed the gameplay and loved the naval combat just as much as they did in Black flag. So then why give it a 6.8? When they gave the last 4 COD 9.0 or higher despite recycling gameplay mechanics far more than Rogue (hell every one of those games uses the same cliches, even the story follows the same path every time since MW3, and they wont mix up multiplayer). To me it seems IGN and a couple of other review sites got extremely whiny about having to get the game the same day as everyone else. Especially considering most of the gaming sites that gave it less than an 8.0 all wrote the same article about 'our Rogue review is coming but Ubisoft didnt give us an early copy.. list reasons we hate that'. If I gave an unbiased review of rogue at worst I would give it a 7.8 (if youre hung up on similar game mechanics as BF) and at best an 8.6 despite the fact that my personal enjoyment of the game was about a 9.1.

Yeah, that's just ridiculous.

The Assassins Creed series entire THING is that it is "the previous game plus some tweaked aspects."

And since when is changing stuff a qualifier for being good?!

That's just [censored] man.

JustPlainQuirky
11-16-2014, 11:43 PM
90% of majoras mask was recycled and it's my favorite Zelda game to date.

Its story is so great it has a cult following.

Just something to think about for people who dismiss recycled games.

Charles_Phipps
11-16-2014, 11:46 PM
Rate a game on whether it's GOOD.

Not whether it's original.

BOO! HISS! BOO!

danglez benderz
11-17-2014, 12:53 AM
Exactly! Now if it was a complete copy paste with the same character and almost the same story(which it is not) then I might agree that it deserves a low score.. but if it was still amazingly fun then it deserves atleast a decent review, not this half cocked bollocks.

Assassin_M
11-17-2014, 01:08 AM
Uhhh...it's not fact? By making a whole thread and drawing attention to the debacle, you'v given credibility. Who cares if IGN gave a game you like a low score? Unity got a 7 from them and I couldn't care less, I loved Unity. If you enjoyed the game, nothing else matters, man.

EmbodyingSeven5
11-17-2014, 01:37 AM
90% of majoras mask was recycled and it's my favorite Zelda game to date.

Its story is so great it has a cult following.

Just something to think about for people who dismiss recycled games.

agreed. tons of great recycled games.

batman Arkam origins, Fallout New vegas, borderlands pre-sequel, farcry 4

The_Kiwi_
11-17-2014, 01:45 AM
AC Brotherhood - 8/10
Assassin's Creed II - 9.2

ACB is just as recycled as Rogue
Actually, I'd say even more recycled.
The only major difference I can think of is the addition of assassins you can summon in a fight

Rogue - new characters, new settings, better gameplay
The only reason IGN thinks it's too much like Black Flag is because they share a HUD, but I actually like that, they share a HUD because they're both Abstergo Entertainment research projects

I agree wholeheartedly, IGN is extremely hypocritical.

Hood2theBurbs
11-17-2014, 02:42 AM
IGN is a joke, I don't rely on their reviews and most of the gaming news they "break" is usually days old.

steveeire
11-17-2014, 02:46 AM
Maybe they don't like Templers.

TheHumanTowel
11-17-2014, 02:53 AM
AC Brotherhood - 8/10
Assassin's Creed II - 9.2

ACB is just as recycled as Rogue
Actually, I'd say even more recycled.
The only major difference I can think of is the addition of assassins you can summon in a fight

Rogue - new characters, new settings, better gameplay
The only reason IGN thinks it's too much like Black Flag is because they share a HUD, but I actually like that, they share a HUD because they're both Abstergo Entertainment research projects

I agree wholeheartedly, IGN is extremely hypocritical.
I don't understand why people can't grasp the concept reviews are written by individuals. A different person reviewed Brotherhood than Rogue. Maybe they're not as forgiving to copy-paste mechanics. It's not hypocritical at all.

The_Kiwi_
11-17-2014, 03:48 AM
I don't understand why people can't grasp the concept reviews are written by individuals. A different person reviewed Brotherhood than Rogue. Maybe they're not as forgiving to copy-paste mechanics. It's not hypocritical at all.

It's all peer reviewed and edited by the same people
A newspaper won't publish an article without review, same with IGN
And publishing one review by one person per game is biased, they should offer insight from other people, just like other review websites

HypeR.tgL
11-17-2014, 04:46 AM
Reviews are based on personal experiences and opinions, it's not like 'LETS GATHER IN A CIRCLE AND PLAY THIS GAME + REVIEW IT', it's play it, what they thought of it and how the overall experience was, as well as some retrospective points(This case it's the re used assets).

Maybe if someone who was a super fan boy of AC then it may of gotten better :P, but they know better.

This is why I really don't care for reviews, I like to forge my own opinions on games and alike, the internet seems to blow every little small issue out of proportion, figures.

EDIT: Totally goes against the post above. lulz.

eddieoctane
11-17-2014, 05:12 AM
I agree with anyone who thinks the review embargo was bull. Not allowing a reviewer to get an advanced look at the game is rarely for a reason other than to prevent flaws in the game from eating into pre-order sales. And Unity has some flaws that really should have been addressed before the game was shipped. That being said, Assassin's creed has always used recycled bits from previous games. That's the very nature of a sequel. That's not a valid complaint. What is valid is how things have been cut, such as being able to fight with hidden blades, or how skills and systems that had become core gameplay over several entries in the series are now made "optional" by throwing them behind unlock points. (DOuble air assassination requires 3 different skill purchases? Really?) The bugs--falling through the ground, getting stuck inside of things when revived in multiplayer, getting kicked all the way to the dashboard when trying to use matchmaking--are far too common for me to believe substantial QC was done before release.

The game is decent. Coop is awesome when it works. But it could have been so so much better. And letting IGN and every other review source get copies and review them early would have helped. If they want coop to stick around, I'd hope they find ways of actually tying it into the story (working with other assassins through the whole game and letting people drop in and take over one of them could be one way).

danglez benderz
11-17-2014, 05:50 AM
Eddie were talking about the review for AC rogue not unity. The main reason I care is because a lot of people base their opinions on reviews alone.. if someone, especially someone influential in the community who is corrupt (IGN) gives a certain game a bad review for very biased reasons.. the less support that game receives. Now with a franchise this big that wont stop it from moving forward.. I just hate the blatant hypocricy and corruption of IGN.

TheHumanTowel
11-17-2014, 09:50 AM
It's all peer reviewed and edited by the same people
A newspaper won't publish an article without review, same with IGN
And publishing one review by one person per game is biased, they should offer insight from other people, just like other review websites
And you think it's the exact same people editing the reviews as it was for Brotherhood 4 years ago? Anyway it doesn't matter all reviews get edited and scrutinised but just to ensure the reviewer has a clear argument and justifies his opinion not to completely change whether the review's positive or negative. It still comes down to the individual's opinion. The more people understand that maybe they wouldn't get so fanboy-flustered about reviews.

#ghermergarte

The_Kiwi_
11-17-2014, 10:03 AM
And you think it's the exact same people editing the reviews as it was for Brotherhood 4 years ago? Anyway it doesn't matter all reviews get edited and scrutinised but just to ensure the reviewer has a clear argument and justifies his opinion not to completely change whether the review's positive or negative. It still comes down to the individual's opinion. The more people understand that maybe they wouldn't get so fanboy-flustered about reviews.

#ghermergarte

I'm not speaking for everyone when I say this, but I'm not complaining due to fanboy-ism, but because I prefer logical consistency.

TheHumanTowel
11-17-2014, 10:24 AM
I'm not speaking for everyone when I say this, but I'm not complaining due to fanboy-ism, but because I prefer logical consistency.
Rogue's review was perfectly logical. The reviewer shouldn't have to take into account a review written 4 years ago by a different person.

The_Kiwi_
11-17-2014, 10:30 AM
Rogue's review was perfectly logical. The reviewer shouldn't have to take into account a review written 4 years ago by a different person.

I don't think IGN should be publishing reviews that are hypocritical and inconsistent with reviews for other games of the same series
People go to reviewers because they trust them, if someone buys a game because IGN recommended it and they also liked it, they'll be more likely to trust IGN in the future
Because of this, there should be a consistency in the reviews for a particular series, so that people's trust isn't misplaced

As individuals, the reviewers are perfectly entitled to write their reviews, but when they're published by one company, there should be logical consistency between the two reviews.

TheHumanTowel
11-17-2014, 10:38 AM
I don't think IGN should be publishing reviews that are hypocritical and inconsistent with reviews for other games of the same series
People go to reviewers because they trust them, if someone buys a game because IGN recommended it and they also liked it, they'll be more likely to trust IGN in the future
Because of this, there should be a consistency in the reviews for a particular series, so that people's trust isn't misplaced

As individuals, the reviewers are perfectly entitled to write their reviews, but when they're published by one company, there should be logical consistency between the two reviews.
People should trust individual reviewers not companies. Companies don't have opinions. That kind of thought leads to very bland and uninformative reviews, even if the score at the end fits the fans expectations more...

The_Kiwi_
11-17-2014, 10:43 AM
People should trust individual reviewers not companies. Companies don't have opinions. That kind of thought leads to very bland and uninformative reviews, even if the score at the end fits the fans expectations more...

Do you really have the faith in people to look for the author of a review and judge their purchases based on that individual's review over just looking at the review published by a company?
I don't have that faith yet.

TheHumanTowel
11-17-2014, 10:56 AM
Do you really have the faith in people to look for the author of a review and judge their purchases based on that individual's review over just looking at the review published by a company?
I don't have that faith yet.
The solution is to look at a broad range of reviews and see if there's any kind of common problems or consensus across them. Some reviewers may be coming at the game from a perspective similar to your own. I think I've got a fairly good impression of Rogue from reading reviews, it's Black Flags mechanics with a decent story filled with fan service. That's fine for me so I'll probably pick it up when it's on sale. People only seem concerned with the score at the end though and scream "corruption and bias" when it doesn't fit with what they expected.

The_Kiwi_
11-17-2014, 11:02 AM
The solution is to look at a broad range of reviews and see if there's any kind of common problems or consensus across them. Some reviewers may be coming at the game from a perspective similar to your own. I think I've got a fairly good impression of Rogue from reading reviews, it's Black Flags mechanics with a decent story filled with fan service. That's fine for me so I'll probably pick it up when it's on sale. People only seem concerned with the score at the end though and scream "corruption and bias" when it doesn't fit with what they expected.

So like Metacritic, where it shows the average result of all scores from mainstream review publishers
And I agree that people are unfairly accusing the reviewers of corruption, yes
Rogue is as different to AC4 as AC4 was to AC3
People just think it's a copy because of the HUD
It's a great game, top 3 IMO
But when someone calls it a rehash or a copy-and-paste of AC4, I can't take them seriously, especially that reviewer from IGN.

joelsantos24
11-17-2014, 11:45 AM
90% of majoras mask was recycled and it's my favorite Zelda game to date.

Its story is so great it has a cult following.

Just something to think about for people who dismiss recycled games.
It isn't just recycled (or the recycling, for that matter), is it? It's a blatantly recycled AC4 game, no doubt, but at the same time that a game like Unity is released. For many people, reviewers mostly, apparently, Rogue was just another nail on the (already buried) coffin, so to speak.

I think games should be reviewed exclusively, but I understand the mindset of someone who simply can't disregard the game that is truly developing the series and carrying it forward.

That being said, this is exactly why I never read reviews, in any context, be it music, movies, games, etc. Reviews are mere opinions, and those are no more and no less important, significant or meaningful than mine. So, if it's music, I listen to some samples; if it's movies, I watch trailers and risk watching the whole thing in case I enjoy them; and if it's games, I watch gameplay trailers and play the demos. But regarding games, I don't (and never will) venture myself beyond my favorite series.

My advice, for all those interested, of course: pay no attention and give no significance to reviews, watch gameplay trailers or experience the games instead. :cool: