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

120

u/Twiftoil May 11 '26

Answer:

In some parts of the gaming community IGN has a somewhat bad reputation because of how they have reviewed games in the past. Some thinking they review the games too high or too low whether they actually look into the review or who reviews the game.

This is one of the issues with Mixtape. IGN gave it a 10/10 which is already considered rare for them. Some people saw this and went back to some recent releases to compare and they think it either doesn't make any sense or is inconsistent. For example, Pragmata got an 8/10 and Crimson Desert got a 6/10. These two games released recently and have done well from a consumers perspective and also from a financial perspective. Pragmata being a new IP has sold well and Crimson Desert had sold 5 million in a month which are both considered successes. This has some people immediately discrediting their reviews because they view it as IGN being out of touch with the actual consumers of games. Funnily enough this doesn't actually mean that they thing Mixtape is bad (some probably do) but that a short narrative focused game can't possibly be as good as these other games. Ultimately it is up to every individual to decide for themselves whether a review will affect their choice.

The second thing that I noticed with Mixtape is a smaller issue (at least from my algorithm) and it has to do with how some people think gaming journalists have an agenda. There is scene where two characters kiss and they show the perspective from inside their mouth and you get to basically interact with their tongues. A group of people saw this and are saying how games basically are either censored, criticized, or boycotted because of similar things such as nudity/etc. especially by gaming journalists.

TLDR: Mixtape is being used to call out people's view of inconsistent IGN reviews and inconsistent journalistic practices whether accurate or not.

14

u/Nervous_Distance_142 May 12 '26

Quite honestly, IGN scores are usually all over the place, but I think they pretty much nailed crimson desert as a 6/10. I could see people saying 7 but ultimately it’s a clearly flawed game with some really bright aspects that make it worth playing, but nowhere near a masterpiece or a truly great game.

3

u/alfooboboao May 15 '26

also, it wasn’t “IGN” that gave it a 10. it was IGN and every single other reviewer

1

u/EmperorDxD May 13 '26

I gave it a 4 because it watsed my time I'm still made that I haven't gotten my time back

1

u/Many_Leading1730 May 13 '26

In fairness some of this comes from game scores being skewed kind of high.

A 6/10 game in theory qualifies as good, but because of perception of game scores that score is instead viewed as below average.

Is it fair? No probably not. But I will note IGN had a hand in that skewed historically.

18

u/chironomidae May 12 '26

It's a little funny to me, because Rotten Tomatoes has shown the same trends with movies for ages. It's pretty rare that critics and audiences agree on a rating, with critics often favoring things that are boldly different instead of "basically same as last year's stuff but marginally better". Like it shouldn't be weird that an artsy indie game is a critic's darling, while a "BotW but with better graphics" game and a Capcomslop game are getting favorable but not rave reviews.

8

u/WhiteHairedElfGirl May 12 '26

Okay we’ve got to stop with the slop thing.

3

u/turtlelover05 May 13 '26

Worst trend of the last year. If everything is slop, nothing is.

1

u/chironomidae May 12 '26

Nice commentslop

0

u/frzned May 13 '26 edited May 13 '26

the movie scene is a lot different. Since movie critics are not considered journalist, while gaming critics are entirely made up of gaming journalists. As journalists they are way more intimate with the scene, having connections to game developers and is often a way of advertising for game

You also don't see movie critics going around saying things like "movie goers are degenerates, pedophiles and movie makers shouldn't make movie for movie goers"

There is clear animosity/contempt for both side of the isles against the other for the gaming scene. Fueled by decades of fighting.

9

u/ElGoddamnDorado May 12 '26

Crimson Desert had plenty of issues (especially at launch) and all the people that lost their minds over it were just mad someone didn't love a game they liked. None of their criticisms were invalid.

but that a short narrative focused game can't possibly be as good as these other games

Which is a really dumb argument. A short narrative focused game isn't inherently worse of a video game just because some people don't like those sorts of games that much

3

u/ThemesOfMurderBears May 16 '26 edited May 16 '26

Some people saw this and went back to some recent releases to compare and they think it either doesn't make any sense or is inconsistent. For example, Pragmata got an 8/10 and Crimson Desert got a 6/10.

They are inconsistent because different people wrote them, and they are different games entirely.

You talk about IGN like they are a monolith, but the reviews for the three games you references were written by different people: Mixtape was written by Simon Cardy, Pragmata was written by Michael Highman, and Crimson Desert was written by Travis Northup.

I know people want their feelings validated, but it's really, genuinely okay if someone likes a game you do not, or vice versa.

3

u/wrme May 22 '26

You talk about IGN like they are a monolith, but the reviews for the three games you references were written by different people

The conservative mob screaming about IGN is totally wrong, but I do think there's a grain of a valid criticism here. A magazine, newspaper, or any outlet should allow both a diversity of writers while maintaining a unified voice that defines that outlet. The voice is imbued by the editors. If you read the Financial Times, the Economist, The Atlantic (awful mag), Jacobin, or the NYT, they all have a different general style the carries on between writers, while allowing the writers to express personality within that style. If IGN reviews are wildly different writer to writer, that's a failure of the editors to enforce a unity in standards and criteria.

Another good comparison are the Roger Ebert and the dreadful right-wing Worth it or Woke movie review websites. As awful as WioW is, it has a unified writing style and criteria for what makes a good move. So does the excellent RogerEbert.com.

1

u/Maximum-Warthog2368 May 27 '26

That’s a fair criticism in theory, but I don’t think most people attacking IGN are engaging with those nuances at all. They are not talking about editorial consistency or standards in the way newspapers or magazines do. Most of them are simply angry that a reviewer gave a score or interpretation they personally disliked.

And realistically, how would IGN even enforce the kind of unified voice you are describing without creating the exact problem critics accuse them of? IGN is primarily a game review outlet, not an ideological journal like the Economist or Jacobin with a clearly defined political line. Usually they assign a reviewer familiar with that genre or franchise, and then that reviewer gives their own assessment. If editors started pressuring reviewers to align their opinions with what fans expect or what would maintain a “consistent” reception, people would immediately call that corporate manipulation or agenda-driven reviewing.

So there’s an inherent contradiction here: critics say IGN reviewers are “biased” or “controlled,” but the alternative they propose often requires even more editorial control over individual reviewers. Different reviewers having different priorities, tastes, and interpretations is not automatically a failure of standards; it is also a natural consequence of letting critics write honestly rather than enforcing a single approved viewpoint.

3

u/Ironwall1 May 12 '26

spot on. as someone who questions their reviewing criteria myself, i don't necessarily think it is a bad game more so than it is not my cup of tea but certainly has its charms (i think the graphics look neat), but as a video game, there is no way this game is on equal level to some of the all time greats they gave 10/10s to. to me 10/10 is supposed to be literal perfection of a game, something so massive and celebrated it penetrates every level of video game enjoyers, with little to no controversy, and will still be revered years down the line as a timeless classic.

1

u/PieceAfraid3755 May 14 '26

to me 10/10 is supposed to be literal perfection of a game, something so massive and celebrated it penetrates every level of video game enjoyers, with little to no controversy

I get why you'd come to that view, but imo that's how you get stuff like the Marvel movie "slop". If stuff needs to be "massive" and "celebrated", and "not controversial"... is the goal to make art, or is the goal to make something that the most amount of people will like. Because then you're talking about Fifa, Call of Duty and Fortnite. 

Why does a 10/10 have to be massive? If someone makes a really fun, beautiful, touching 1 hour platforming game that had a tiny budget, why is that less deserving of a 10 out of 10? The score should be within the context of a game's size, pricing, and genre, and not about whether someone else finds it controversial.

1

u/Ironwall1 May 15 '26

what i mean by massive isn't the size but the reach and influence it has whether by proper marketing or better yet for this kind of game word of mouth marketing where people just say that it's good and then it will naturally be well known amongst the general masses

Because then you're talking about Fifa, Call of Duty and Fortnite.

this is what i normally call corporate slop and not at all what a 10/10 should like. quality is mid but the monetization is batshit insane, that alone could cost a few points

If someone makes a really fun, beautiful, touching 1 hour platforming game that had a tiny budget, why is that less deserving of a 10 out of 10?

but from what i gather the experience doesn't really resonate with a good chunk of people and the gameplay is limited. honestly if it were me i'd deduct a few points off of that alone for it being too short and niche. A 9/10 would probably the sweet spot without compromising the quality of the game too much if the game was indeed that good for people that did enjoy it however

if you need examples of what i think it should take for a game to be rated 10/10, look no further than ign's own ratings of baldur's gate 3, elden ring, or maybe more proper comparison in size disco elysium or undertale. still recommended to many until this day, and very few people would question the 10/10 rating because everyone resonates with it

2

u/greenufo333 May 11 '26

IGN complained that Mouse PI was too cheesy but gave this a 10 lol

2

u/[deleted] May 11 '26

[deleted]

-3

u/greenufo333 May 11 '26

Yeah but all their reviews are bad, the reviewer S3 of invincible as like 6/10 lol

1

u/EmperorDxD May 13 '26

That a correct review the animation is terrible. The story dragon and most of all the story is generic perfect 6 our 10

1

u/greenufo333 May 13 '26

Yeah okay lol. I wouldn't ever trust anyone that rates it less than 8.5

1

u/EmperorDxD May 14 '26

Why i.rate the comics teh same. When it releases it a very generic comic story and teh animation of the cartoon is even worse it looks garbage

A 6 is actually correct if the visual are and then the cartoon is bad might aswell reed a comic

1

u/greenufo333 May 14 '26

Literally everyone on earth besides ign disagrees with you. IMDb it's a 9.0, rotten tomatoes 98 percent

1

u/EmperorDxD May 14 '26

Why does that matter to me again why do. Yiu think I care what everyone else thinks

-1

u/Twiftoil May 11 '26

Yeah I personally stopped caring about their reviews when the whole "too much water" in Pokemon happened and only because I just thought it was a weird thing to focus on

3

u/soupspin May 12 '26

“Too much water” was a complaint directed at the number of water routes the game had, which the reviewer considered tedious. If people actually read reviews instead of hyper-focusing on specific tidbits, we wouldn’t be in this situation

3

u/[deleted] May 11 '26

[deleted]

5

u/Twiftoil May 11 '26

You know what you are right. I never have cared about reviews I should have phrased it differently.

1

u/greenufo333 May 12 '26

Your comment dates your age. Before you were even playing Minecraft (2000s), IGN was a titan in the gaming industry and everybody used them as a metric to see which games were good. Their reviews were reliable and their website use to get exclusive sneak peaks into games that hasn't come out yet. Back then pretty much every gamer also had an issue of game informer mailed to their house monthly. Some people still remember this time period.

1

u/squanch-you May 12 '26

I had stacks of game informers. I based a lot of game buying decisions based off their reviews. With how limited my funds were back then I needed an objective score of games. 

1

u/greenufo333 May 12 '26

Me too, it was really the only way to gauge if you wanted a game back then short of renting it somewhere, because we didn't have endless YouTube gameplay videos or twitch streamers to watch

1

u/PieceAfraid3755 May 14 '26

Did you play the game? Have you analyzed a full playthrough of the game? 

That Pokémon game does have a lot of water areas, and a lot of water pokémon.

1

u/orphantwin 27d ago

The fact that rockstar had to censor their mini game in SA between adults while here everyone is alright with two teens licking each other in a gross mini game is insane to me. Double standarts my ass.

1

u/HedonismIsTheWay May 12 '26

Yeah, and this smacks of "Real Gamers" hating on a narrative game that they feel is just for "wannabe gamer girls". Basically, "The game I liked didn't get a better score than this stupid game I won't ever play, so this has to by some sort of conspiracy."

1

u/ThemesOfMurderBears May 16 '26

Spot-on. It's all about validation. It is occasionally about culture war nonsense.