darkSpyro

http://www.ign.com/articles/20...rap-team-review
8.2/10.

Quote: TTD

"Best game in the series yet"
*gives it a lower score than swap force*

#fail, IGN

I find it's wise when reviewing games in a franchise to remind oneself of the review scores from the previous games before scoring the latest one

Why is it fail? An improvement over the previous game can still score lower because the landscape moves on. What was impressive at first becomes harder to impress later. Does a game better than Mario 64 or Ocarina of time deserve an 11 or a 12 because those were deserving of a 10 at the time? No, because it isn't a baseline. And also, it isn't always the same person reviewing each game (though it was in this case).

Same old, same old with some minor improvements and some other pointless changes seems to be pretty much be the standard opinion from what I've seen. Trap Masters have some cool content, but the rest are just along for the ride to sell toys. In the end, traps are just another way to add playable characters (which Skylanders has never bee short on). For a game that has added 16-32 new playable characters a year, adding new playable characters isn't really an innovation, even if acquiring them is a bit different.

8.2 isn't a bad score. People have reached this whole mindset that sub 9 (or even 9.5) is considered "crap". And they think that reviewers need to hold similar opinions to them. It's just an opinion - no different than the ones they apply to other games.

Quote: TTD

"Best game in the series yet"
*gives it a lower score than swap force*

IGN logic right here.

Quote: gillgrunt987

Quote: TTD

"Best game in the series yet"
*gives it a lower score than swap force*

IGN logic right here.

Took the words outta my mouth.

Honestly Idk if I'm getting this or not
But really it feels almost like they were bribed, the review was negative but the score positive...

Most of these reviews almost sound like they watched the videos from the last 9 months. Except for a sentence here or there that makes it sound like they might have played it, any one of us could've written the review.

Given social media and online videos, dare I say people reviewing games seems rather antiquated. Best to deliver an app like Yelp and let the video game audience decide, I say.

Quote: Doomslicer

Honestly Idk if I'm getting this or not
But really it feels almost like they were bribed, the review was negative but the score positive...

Its been controversy for years that some of the major reviewing sites are known to take "incentives" to promote the big selling titles by companies. It keeps them getting free stuff, exclusives, behind the scenes looks, free access at cons/expos, and free copies of the games. We know for a fact that certain YouTubers get all sorts of things. Some for giveaways to continue fanbase, and some for their own personal use to show off in videos. Sometimes its the ability to post information that the company will yank off the site from everyone else. We saw that one from Activision this year, just shortly after a huge article about them being open to dealing with leaks in a positive matter. That was a blatant lie. Its nothing new. I dont see it ending any time soon.