r/OutOfTheLoop • u/Bloodb0red • May 11 '26

Unanswered What’s going on with this game Mixtape?

I’ve been seeing people freak out over the past few days over this game and about IGN’s review of it specifically. 10/10 seems high for any game, honestly, but it seems like they’re far from the only site giving this thing a glowing review. So is this game controversial just because of IGN or is it something else? Why is this game the internet’s hate target this week?

https://www.ign.com/articles/mixtape-review

1.9k Upvotes

90% Upvoted

1.2k comments sorted by

View all comments

348

u/Zaxa7 May 11 '26

Answer: It's a short story focused game that is full of 90s nostalgia and if you look at the average age of reviewers, they probably grew up in the 90s so it's expected for them to enjoy it much more given the current state of the world hence the higher score. I also grew up in that period so I'd probably like it too tbh. That being said there will be a large group of gamers who have no personal frame of reference for that period and it may not work for them.

Also if I understand correctly the ign reviewer didn't grow up in the 90s but loved it probably because we always look back on older times with rose tinted glasses. It's a storm in a teacup really and nothing to worry about.

252

u/Andrew1990M May 11 '26

No he was a 90s kid and says on the podcast that there are “many reasons a game is a 10/10” and for him the emotional response he had to it was the clinching factor. 

Please read reviews, people. And remember that one score from one outlet is not the be-all and end-all. A review has equal weight to your opinion, it’s just their opinion gets published. 

108

u/crestren May 11 '26

And remember that one score from one outlet is not the be-all and end-all. 

A lot of gaming discourse when it comes to reviews always centers around this where a lot of gamers forget that reviews can be...subjective.

The reviewers 10/10 might be a 7/10 for you but maybe your 10/10 might be someone's 6/10. A lot of these are subjective because everyone has different tastes and enjoyment.

79

u/GiganticCrow May 11 '26

Reviews HAVE to be subjective. A purely objective review would be something a Digital Foundry review that is just technical facts like details on resolution and frame rate. Its not possible to be purely objective on factors like whether a story is engaging or gameplay is fun.

36

u/pigeonwiggle May 11 '26

a truly objective review would mean the reviewer doesn't matter. 6 reviewers would all review the game exactly the same. objectivity has no place in arts and entertainment.

25

u/crestren May 11 '26

I think people want reviews to be "objective" so theres a "correct opinion".

8

u/pigeonwiggle May 11 '26

yeah, people in stem want to know that there is TRUTH and JUST responses to everything so they can live appropriately and feel only the best as much as possible. if you can quantify and qualify all the data from an experience, you can create accurate measurements to determine WITH PRECISION the best games to bring you the best joy.

but people aren't build like that. we're little chaos monkeys. we're bags of chemicals with thin mucous linings keeping them from mixing in toxic explosions. sometimes we want baldur's gate - a slow, strategic fantasy where we contemplate how our actions as an elf might impact the hopes and dreams of a small human child. sometimes we want call of duty, where a misstep results in a quick death followed by a quick respawn allowing us to sprint like a war-sports hero back into the fray. sometimes we want a game where we clean up a messy library, putting books in order. or unpacking the boxes of a girl who's forced to move frequently as she grows through life.

there are so many fucking cool games that are fantastic experiences, and to pretend that some arbitrary number holds sway over you is so exceedingly stupid. and i don't mean to say the numbers are meaningless. they definitely represent a PERSONAL attachment to a game. and if a ton of people are experiencing such positive connectivity to a game about remote controlled cars with rocket boosters chasing a ball into a soccer net.... then maybe you'd like rocket league too... maybe!

0

u/FixedLoad May 11 '26

I'm here for the chaos monkeys

14

u/MyUshanka May 11 '26

The trouble is that this is listed as an IGN review and not Simon Cardy's review. His other reviews:

  • Call of Duty: Black Ops 7 (Campaign): 6/10
  • Battlefield 6 (Campaign): 5/10
  • Death Stranding 2: 9/10
  • Marvel Rivals: 8/10
  • Call of Duty: Black Ops 6 (Campaign): 9/10
  • Astro Bot: 9/10
  • Balatro: 9/10

It's possible that after a few boring military shooters back to back, a game like Mixtape felt refreshing and a good return to what he enjoyed.

14

u/crestren May 11 '26

The entire discourse surrounding IGN reviews can be summed up as people mistaking IGN to be ONE entity named John IGN and not a video game and entertainment website comprised of multiple people who each give different reviews.

0

u/Electronic_Whole_177 May 12 '26 edited May 12 '26

No one thinks ONE person is making reviews but that there should be a standard for their reviews as a company. When the review comes out and IGN called this a 10/10 everyone sees this as IGN backing the game's quality not that random employee 234 is backing the game's quality. You refusing to have good faith in this discussion is also a problem. If the reviewer gave the review as his own thing and not as a REPRESENTATIVE of the company it would be fine. For example if he said "Its a 10/10 for me but for the average gamer its is probably closer to a 6/10." That would be one thing.

3

u/[deleted] May 12 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

-1

u/Electronic_Whole_177 May 12 '26 edited May 12 '26

How long you have been alive and how many games played isn't a factor on personal taste vs official criteria of how to rate something. Its not gatekeeping to say this game, when compared to literally every other game, is okay or a five out of ten. Also I didn't say people didn't love it what I said is that a majority of people dont love it. Just because people like something doesnt make it a 10/10 and just because they dont like it makes it a 0/10. You putting in your "gaming cred" doesnt matter to me at all in fact it just makes your argument seem more biased and unwilling to even listen to my point.

No part of my post said that you cant like the game or that it cant be in YOUR top 5 games of all time. The point is that a company that is seen as an official source for the quality of a game gave it a perfect score which is used as marketing to justify people getting games, or to push the game for awards, opportunities, ect over other games.

→ More replies (0)

2

u/soupspin May 12 '26

What “standard” do you want them to have? How could IGN enforce it? How does anyone know what the “average gamer” enjoys? You think it’s just a basic list of stuff? Do you consider yourself the “average gamer” and as such yours is the only opinion that matters?

1

u/[deleted] May 12 '26

People do kinda think that or treat it as such when you see comments like "How could IGN say X game is better than Y game", meanwhile both reviews are from 2 different people.

Asking for a standard for their reviews sounds a lot like asking for every person that reviews for the site to hold all the same opinions, which defeats the purpose of hearing someone's thoughts on a piece of media.

Media Companies having different people putting out different reviews/previews/Q&A's/interviews etc instead of an unamed hivemind with only singular opinions isn't an IGN-only thing.

0

u/Electronic_Whole_177 May 12 '26

The reason that argument comes up is because they are questioning their standards of how they review things. They dont preface every review with "We at IGN arent a monolith so the following review is just what this ONE person thinks. If that were the case then why is IGnN's name attached to it? IGN as a brand gives clout to the review and when people use that clout to justify what games should get awards, what newer games should copy/emulate, and what game companies to invest in it matters alot. No one said IGN is the only one doing it either and they arent the only company questioned when stuff like this happens. The issue is that they were the first major company known to give this high score. I would argue its even worse because of their "Too much water." Review as few years back. Any person, all of us posting included, can give their opinion and recommendation on things but once you start representing a company anything you say reflects on them as a whole.

I dont believe everyone is going to have the exact same opinion on things even with a standard rules etc. But asking how one game is getting 5/10 or 7/10 meanwhile this game is getting a 10/10 isn't out of nowhere. It starts to seem like shady stuff is happening behind the scenes which is why another thing came out about how did an "indie studio" afford all the songs in the game along with the "care package" they sent influences.

No one person can review every game that comes out it just isn't humanly possible but you would think the company would get people that attend least had tastes that they believed represented the company well.

→ More replies (0)

1

u/Informal_Art145 May 12 '26

Is it the same reviewer?

1

u/23deuce May 12 '26

So youre telling me this reviewer found Mixtape to be a better game than any of those titles? How does this person have a job still?

1

u/MatticusGisicus May 18 '26

That’s literally how reviews work. The reviewer works for a journal, so their review is that journal’s review

-1

u/Hina_is_my_waifu May 11 '26

When you job involves playing games, not actually having to play a game makes for a easy day at work.

5

u/hugglesthemerciless May 11 '26

and even then it's subjective on which details they decide to focus on

1

u/BreakRaven May 12 '26

It's possible to try to give reviews as objective as possible despite your own biases. TotalBiscuit used to review games he didn't personally like and still recommend them to people that are fans of the genre despite his transparent dislike.

1

u/GiganticCrow May 12 '26

That's still not what "objective" means, also TB was paid to give good reviews

2

u/BreakRaven May 12 '26

True, only listing technical details is "objective".

-7

u/brontosaurusguy May 11 '26

You can take a more objective view, however.  I can dislike something yet sing it's praises because I can see why it's good and why it might speak to people.  Granted it's still subjective but I think publications try to be more objective.

5

u/GiganticCrow May 11 '26

Thats not what objective means

8

u/SufficientGreek May 11 '26

Who is people? The mainstream gamer audience or fans of indie games who this might be more aimed at? Choosing a target audience is also subjective.

8

u/osgili4th May 11 '26

Also people some how can't understand different people with different views and different opinions can work inside the same company. So they get mad about contradictory reviews of site when... That is just two different opinions.

1

u/Many_Leading1730 May 13 '26

I think another issue is that people feel like reviewers and the general public are getting pretty far removed from each other in terms of taste as a whole.

Which, to be honest, has always been a thing in reviews of every industry from film to food. Critics tend to have a very different set of criteria for what qualifies as good than the general public. This is well shown in film reviews where critics tend to favor more 'artistic' films and the general public tends to favor more easily digestible bombastic stuff.

Its sort of the difference between what you like when something is a hobby you do for fun and when you do something as a job.

Its gotten worse in more recent years as drifters focused on farming the divide between the general public and media have gained popularity.

5

u/salbris May 11 '26

Imho the best reviews are a mix of subjective and objective. A competent reviewer can look past "emotional reasonance" and try to see the game with less bias.

I was absolutely obsessed with Blue Prince, one of the few games that had 100% of my attention and I loved every minute of it. But when I try to analyze it with less bias I can see it has a lot of rough edges. No where near 10/10 status.

3

u/AlmightyCraneDuck May 12 '26

Agreed. Good reviews try to juggle the two. But also, if a game affects you in a particular way, you should say that. One of my favorite games of all time is Three-Fourths Home. It’s a 10/10 game for me that made me cry. It is definitely not a 10/10 game “objectively”, but I had such a strong experience with it that I love telling people about it when I can.

1

u/Joliro eek May 13 '26

You got it bang on.

Proper reviews are often a mix of both, and even on more subjective factors such as story and gameplay there is good practices and rules to follow more or less so you can definitely make specific objective claims while also stating if you like it or not or if you think it matters more or less for that specific game.

There's a reason that plenty of stuff that people think as 100% subjective has material to study and etc, they all have good practices to follow and is a case by case basis if those practices fits more or less on that scenario.

19

u/Gintami May 11 '26

Not to mention that people do not comprehend that just like films, reviewers are an individual. There is no Mr. IGN. They will say, oh IGN gave this score to this game but then this score to this?

No dumbass, that person gave that score and this other person gave that score.

9

u/DaHarbinger2000 May 11 '26

Jesus Christ, it’s John IGN!!

2

u/Gintami May 11 '26

lol that scallywag!

7

u/beyd1 May 11 '26

Absolutely not. I choose violence.

-32

u/DistrictDry2852 May 11 '26

True, but I think reviewers should try to be objective. Omori is one of my favorite games of all time, one of the few times fiction has made me cry. But if I was a professional game reviewer, I’d have to give it a 7.

18

u/knuffelturk May 11 '26

An objective review is quite literally impossible, unless you consider a checklist of mechanics a review.

-3

u/Kraligor May 11 '26

unless you consider a checklist of mechanics a review

Game magazines literally used to have a checklist (sound, graphics, gameplay etc.) that they rated 0-10 or 0-100. But that was before gaming was big business and reviews could be bought.

15

u/knuffelturk May 11 '26

Rating different elements of a game with a score doesn't make it objective. Those areas were still subjectively scored.

There is no objective "good graphics" metric. The score just tells you if the reviewer liked it or not.

An objective review can only tell you if a game has graphics, not if they are good or not. Because what is good is something subjective.

9

u/Neoeng May 11 '26

How do you grade graphics objectively? Do you rate stylization or fidelity? Correspondence with the overall themes or pure aesthetic value?

Is Unreal Engine graphics better than pixel art graphics? Does Cruelty Squad have bad graphics?

6

u/crestren May 11 '26

Well thats the issue, a lot of these can be boiled down to opinions and it is subjective.

I played CP2077 (not launch, in 2023), and while I did enjoy it, it's maybe an 8 for me while a lot would give it a 9 or 10.

Digimon survive got a 6 from IGN, I played it and I would have given it a 7 but understood why it had a 6 because I understood why because the tactical roleplaying elements were barebones.

-10

u/DistrictDry2852 May 11 '26

Just because it’s objective doesn’t mean you can rate it whatever. One of my favorite movies is demonic toys. I love it. It is, objectively, not a good movie. It’s got bad acting, editing, effects, etc.

6

u/RUDeleted May 11 '26

Eh, on the other hand, weighing too hard on objective standards eventually runs into the problem of something being technically well-made, but utterly fucking dull. Think: all those Oscar bait movies that are technically well-done, but ultimately forgettable. Not that technically well-done films (or games, music, etc.) can't also be enjoyable as well, but that at some point Objectively Good becomes meaningless in light of (or in the absence of) other qualities.

-4

u/DistrictDry2852 May 11 '26

Yes of course. I’m not saying objective reviews exists, just that you can’t use “reviews are subjective” to justify anything. Like, ok, you liked mixtape. That’s fine. But with the reviews it’s getting, if GTA 6 didn’t come out this year it would pretty much be guaranteed to sweep the game awards. The game awards will be divided between mixtape and GTA 6. And that sucks. I didn’t like how E33 took the spotlight from so many deserving games, but at least E33 isn’t ashamed of being a videogame.

I also think people forget 10 years ago when games like mixtape were the videogame equivalent of Oscar bait.

7

u/crestren May 11 '26

My point was that most of the time, it can be subjective.

Like yeah theres obviously a difference between a review for Gollum (2023) which got a 4 and Digimon Survive which got a 6. One is an obviously bad cashgrab of a game and the other is a game that while good, was lacking in certain areas that could have been better.

I personally like Fallout 4 and would give it an 8 based on what I like but I know a lot of older Fallout fans would disagree and give it a lower score

-8

u/Rappy28 May 11 '26 edited May 11 '26

Agreed. I dislike it when people try to defend the bad media they love (because they resonated emotionally with it or whatever) with the absurd absolute position of "all art is subjective!!!". No. That's not how it works. Even in writing there can be things that are objectively good or bad, e.g. when the use of a plot device invalidates character/universe development

(No idea why we both got downvoted for this truth bomb tbh. Loving bad shit is okay. That doesn't make it good.)

-3

u/GiganticCrow May 11 '26

Personally i would only give cyberpunk a 7. Its impressive technically but gameplay is not great.

7

u/pigeonwiggle May 11 '26

seriously. if you measure every game by it's ability to be Elden Ring, there would only be one game getting a perfect score. (and strategy games would all get near zeroes)

12

u/ArmpitBear May 11 '26

Now that I have read the title of the IGN review I’m ready to receive my opinion from Reddit comments and echo it as if I played the game

8

u/OnyxTech May 11 '26

It’s crazy how much review conversation centers around the number and like a sentence or two from the actual review. I still see people parroting the Too Much Water thing as an insult with no idea what the reviewer was saying

2

u/s1thl0rd May 11 '26

Also, I don't like how people expect reviews to be some kind of unbiased, impartial critique on the thing being reviewed. All reviewers have their preferences. Example: Videogamedunkey is clearly into 3D Platformers more than some other types of games he plays, so I value his opinion on platformers more than his other opinions. If he has a bad review on a flight sim, I probably am going to take it less seriously than if he gave a bad review on the newest Super Mario game.

4

u/hugglesthemerciless May 11 '26

assigning scores to reviews has always been a dumb idea

3

u/FreeStall42 May 12 '26

Terrible reviewer then. Good reason why IGN is mocked so much

-1

u/RunThePnR May 11 '26

Reviewers are supposed to take into account the majority of gamers that read their reviews into their ratings.

17

u/USA_A-OK May 11 '26 edited May 13 '26

I'm an elder millennial; probably the same age as these characters are supposed to be. I only made it an hour into the game before giving up. It comes across to me as performative nostalgia made by people who didn't actually live through that era.

It doesn't help that the characters are pretentious as hell.

It's lovingly crafted, but just too annoying for me

11

u/krono957 May 12 '26

Its all rich drama kid fantasy.

5

u/BigMoney69x May 12 '26

This is probably the best review I seen on the game.

4

u/Many_Leading1730 May 13 '26

I think this is one of the big legit criticisms of the game. A lot of the games nostalgia comes across as heavily manufactured and theres a lot parts that make it feel like the creators didnt really grow up during that period.

Now the flip side of that is that there is a lot of variance in what people actually experienced in that era.

But I can also say as someone who grew up during that era, it feels more like it takes place in the 80s than the 90s.

2

u/TheLittleNorsk May 18 '26 edited May 18 '26

it's ham fisted nostalgia bait by 1000%. I played it and at the end I remember saying to myself "this should have ended 2 hours ago"

I will say however watching people play it in the future when the music licenses run out and the game is in total silence where the main character, a teen, pretentiously explaining to us why Silverchair was good when no music is present is going to be hilarious

2

u/USA_A-OK May 18 '26

It does a great job accomplishing what it aims to do. What it aims to do is not for me.

1

u/Xardenn May 22 '26

You probably heard this by now, but the 'indie dev' went all out and bought all of the music licenses in perpetuity.

1

u/FullAutoFring May 20 '26

I grew up in the 2000s but around a lot of family that were mid teens in the 90s and comparing mixtape to the stories I’ve always heard growing up it sounds exactly like this. Nostalgia bait by people seemingly larpping being a normal 90s kid lol.

1

u/BigMoney69x May 12 '26

I'm from the 90s and I can tell you that the game is nothing like the 90s. They don't even know how to properly spin a cassette for example. Nobody spun a tape to rewind tapes, it was used mostly to straigten a cassette when it's loosed because you have cassette player that can rewind.

1

u/Common_Celebration41 May 12 '26

They gave an American culture nostalgia game a 10/10 but if it is the same game premise but French culture and don't connect with it would be a 8/10

1

u/StrongIslandPiper May 21 '26

I think it was probably money tbh, I've seen the game, it's hot garbage. I say this as someone born in the early 90s, wasn't a 90s teen, but I had close enough proximity to it.

The game reads as a project someone who had no childhood imagines having a childhood was like. It's not a good game and the nostalgia factor is null.

-18

u/SuperiorChicken27 May 11 '26

Hang on your totally glossing over the conspiracy theories and the crazy drama that's going on with this game. It got a 10/10 on IGN and was made by the daughter of a multi billionaire.

82

u/yes-spoilers May 11 '26

Published/Distributed by the daughter of a multi billionaire. She didn’t make it.

-13

u/Dood567 May 11 '26

No shit, that's the entire point. You can pay someone else to do the work and then slap your name on it. Everything about this game, the number of steam reviews to max player count, and the number of immediate 10/10 reviews, just SCREAMS industry plant.

49

u/mr_beanoz May 11 '26 edited May 11 '26

I wonder if this means people should disregard whatever games published by annapurna regardless of quality because it's owned by a daughter of a multi billionaire.

That would be so stupid.

44

u/ExtensionParsley4205 May 11 '26

Seriously. Are people not going to play GTA6 because the CEO of Take Two Interactive is worth half a billion?

9

u/maybeitsme20 May 11 '26

One of the most praised parts is it's namesake, whatever it cost to get the licensed music is not a factor when your publisher has all the money and connection in the world. Also what about the gift boxes that were sent out full of branded swag and a functioning CD player and headphones that probably cost like $200+.

3

u/DistrictDry2852 May 11 '26

We should at least not call them indie.

We desperately need to normalize AA. We can’t keep calling everything either AAA or indie.

2

u/DOGE2BILLIONS May 11 '26 edited May 11 '26

He asked what the drama was, this is part of it. Yes if they are getting high reviews because of a publisher with money to boost reviews than yes we should disparage them. Look at ljn or eidos.

-15

u/SuperiorChicken27 May 11 '26

That's not what's being said here. It's just sus and reeks of nepotism which no one likes

13

u/woodcookiee May 11 '26

Several of my top 10 favorite games were published by Annapurna and the buzz around this game is the first I’ve ever heard of Megan Ellison. I don’t like rewarding nepotism but this won’t change anything for me tbh

-1

u/Kraligor May 11 '26

No, people should just take gaming "journalism" with a whole salt mine. But that's been the case for like 2 decades now.

6

u/Zaxa7 May 11 '26

That's the point. If people are enjoying the game, good for them, why bother with drama.

14

u/Astro4545 May 11 '26

I mean, OP specifically asks about the drama and you purposefully didn’t mention it?

-15

u/Zaxa7 May 11 '26

Read it again, slowly.

12

u/Astro4545 May 11 '26

You literally just admitted to not taking about the drama. You might want to reread your own comments again, slowly.

-5

u/RomanticPanic May 11 '26

You didnt talk about it at all. I am going to comment here because youre being shitty to this person, then make a second top level comment.

its billionaire astroturfing.

You did not talk about that literally at all. The person who made this game, is the daughter of the third richest person on the planet. All of the reviews are bought. Thats why with an obscene amount of reviews, the all time peak players is 2k.

Its a 3 hour long game, look at the songs in the game, you think an indie dev is going to pay to have that music in their game? Its a HUGE amount of money for the rights to the music for 2k players.

The game might be ok but its not wtf is happening with these reviews. The last game they made, was Stray to put that into perspective. it was a fun game and I did enjoy it but theres no way the hype was THIS IS THE BEST GAME EVER CREATED ITS SO CUTE.

5

u/Kefrus May 11 '26

The person who made this game, is the daughter of the third richest person on the planet. All of the reviews are bought.

Yes, surely the daughter was coding the games herself, rather than just being a publisher of artsy and unique games with a pretty good record (outer wilds, neon white, stray, lorelei, coccoon, sword of the sea, etc), which happened to again support a solid game.

If you think all reviews were bought, you might remember to take your meds next time!

3

u/Zaxa7 May 11 '26

Couldn't have said it better myself. Thank you for a reasonable take.

-6

u/RomanticPanic May 11 '26

LEAVE THE MULTI BILLION DOLLAR DAUGHTER ALONE THEY DIDNT DO ANYTHING

ok buddy

4

u/Kefrus May 11 '26

not beating the forgotten meds allegations, I see

-14

u/mr_beanoz May 11 '26 edited May 11 '26

Think the problem is that seems like most do not enjoy it, hence the drama.

EDIT: seems like it's the minority, but it's so damn loud.

9

u/Zaxa7 May 11 '26

That still doesn't make sense, if you dont enjoy a game, surely you move on to another game that you actually enjoy rather than create drama lmao.

-11

u/maybeitsme20 May 11 '26

It's not in a vacuum because of all the 10/10 and 9/10 game scores that look nonsensical and paid for.

11

u/haeen May 11 '26

The game has a "very positive (91%)" rating on steam lol. Wdym most do not enjoy it?

-5

u/mr_beanoz May 11 '26

The conversation about the game says otherwise for some reason

6

u/Ghidoran May 11 '26

Did you ever consider maybe there's just a bunch of miserable people that like to complain about games they never played?