IGN's Cheers & Tears: Fighting Games

IGN just put up a list of the best fighting games on the X-360 and the worst fighting games on the system.

On the list of best games we have DOA4, Blazblue, SFIV, MvC2HD, and of course VF5 Online. Here's a snippet of the writeup on VF5:

More free press for the VF series...and without question this would have been written about VF5R had it been out on consoles. VF5 version B is also on the PS3's best list as well.

 

It's good to know that the VF series hasn't been completely forgotten, and when they think that lot's of people feel that VF5 is the most technically accomplished 3D fighter imagine what they would say about the improvements that VF5R made from that!

 

Yie ar kung fu is a classic...
How dare IGN put that down as one of the worst fighting games..

 

Especially when they list DoA4 as one of the best

 

pretty terrible list

 

It is a pretty terrible list. HDR > SF4. DoA shouldn't even be there, GG > BB. etc.

They also got their facts wrong: Namco broke into the arcade scene via Soul Edge, and Tekken was a side project? Uhhh nope. 'twas the other way 'round idiots.

Kind of reminds me of those "Top 10 car choices of celebrities", and then most of it is made up of generic Lexus', Inifiti's, and whatever silly hybrid they seem to fancy.

People who have no clue, shouldn't review.

 

Matter of factly i can use a DOA5 come december time.

 

god... all the "WHERE IS SC4" comments are annoying (although i guess its prob close to or better then DOA4..)

the vf hate in the comments is so annoying... ONE comment out of 5 pages acknowledges its the best fighter ever.. it rele is "as good as a fighter can get".. while there are 5ish+ comments saying its bad, sigh... (Although VF really needs a REAL story mode, seriously..)

and damn all the comments for BlazBlu rele make me wanna get it...

 

DoA is such an inferior game it's not even funny.

DoA's like the Mortal Kombat of 3D Fighters. It was never about the gameplay.

 

If you saw IGN's review of BlazBlue, it was bound to be in their best fighting games on 360. They pretty much put it on a pedestal and kissed it's rear end repeatedly.

The fact that DOA4 was in the best games part and their comments on KOFXII were enough for me to not make me take it too seriously.

 

The reason IGN gave Blazblue a high score was because the limited edition DVD/BD of Blazblue has a giant IGN logo pop up when you play the disc and an IGN employee narrates the entire thing. You think they would let IGN put their brand in the game and have Jessica Chobot narrate the special disc and then give the game a bad (aka honest) score?

Bias there at IGN for Blazblue? Yeah I think so. Aksys or whatever made a deal with IGN to have their logo be in the special edition disc. In exchange, the person who works for IGN, who is a huge GG fan, reviewed the game and gave it a positive score. At least in the review the guy admits to being a huge GG fan and not being objective whatsoever with his BB review.

But that being said IGN rarely gives objective reviews anyways (not that most other major outlets do either) so it's hardly anything new with them.

 

I miss EGM... They were the only outlet left that gave unbiased reviews.

 

Well with all the hate on VF5 (the many comments) then maybe that will convince some of you guys on why Sega won't release R.

 

I love it too. I've been playing this since it debuted in the arcade. I still play it on my DS occasionally.

 

I disagree with this, if you look at the average score for metacritic IGN is usually pretty close.

 

I've never trusted IGN's reviews, they said God Hand is one of the worst games they've ever played

Also the amount of shit developers get from their publishers because of metacritic is unreal.

 

How do you mean?

 

Basically if their game gets below an 80% on metacritic, then their publishers will give them hell. Even refusing to fund further games, cancelling projects and in some cases closing the studio that developed them.

The quality of the game doesn't matter at all, the publishers just use metacritic to judge the performance of the games they're financing.

There was a big article about in Gamestm, they spoke to lots of developers about it and they all was saying the same stuff.

 

I remember reading that. The article also questioned the validity of metacritic.

 

Hm well that's kinda a safe way to do it. A bit short sited sure but what do you expect? The people who finance the games won't be anywhere near them or share any of the same love for them as the people who play them. That's buisness man, how it's always been except instead of metacritic they used to use contractors, analysts.

Wouldn't mind reading the article though.