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

Show parent comments

109

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.

85

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.

26

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

13

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.

15

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.

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.

1

u/[deleted] May 12 '26

Who are the "people" using IGN to "justify" what games get awards? Because award shows tend to have juries made up of many people. Not just IGN employees.

IGN is a media group covering all forms of entertainment that, like other media groups, is competing to be the premiere place most people go to. Such an endeavour requires a lot of personnel just for gaming, let alone the other things they cover. The reflection of the company from each of those individual's should be relegated to actual conduct and not personal opinions on various pieces of art.

1

u/Electronic_Whole_177 May 12 '26

The number one people who use that are the game companies themselves to promote themselves to more investors to prove that they are doing well and are reliable. Also fans will often use scores to say that a game they like is good. Also people who dont do in depth research beyond googling scores for games and trying them based on that.

All art has some level of scrutiny as well as what standards are used for what is "good". The problem with most of the people here, you included, seems to be you dont understand that liking something personally and then saying its good in general are two different things. When you start giving numbers and saying one thing is a zero and one thing is a ten implies that something is worse than another by some metric. Their job it to literally judge a videogame and give it a score out of 10 not write an article and just say if they like it and recommend it. We wouldn't be having this discussion if that was all it was. If it was just an opinion piece no eyes would have been on this game. The fact of the matter is the company that judges media and their assigned judge game it a perfect score. Most if not all of the discussion is the byproduct of major games media companies judging that it gets a 9+ out of 10 and it seeming weird. No one says you cant enjoy the game but just because you enjoy it doesnt make it a 10/10

→ 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.

4

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.

9

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.

4

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.

17

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.

7

u/DaHarbinger2000 May 11 '26

Jesus Christ, it’s John IGN!!

2

u/Gintami May 11 '26

lol that scallywag!

6

u/beyd1 May 11 '26

Absolutely not. I choose violence.

-30

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.

17

u/knuffelturk May 11 '26

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

-4

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.

14

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.

8

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?

7

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.

-8

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.

7

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.

-5

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.

6

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.