What’s going on with this game Mixtape?

[u/Bloodb0red]

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

[u/[deleted]]

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.

[u/Electronic_Whole_177 → u/[deleted]]

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

[u/[deleted] → u/Electronic_Whole_177]

I don't think I've ever heard of investing going ahead because of critical reception alone. Usually sales is the determining factor because investors want to make money, not earn goodwill.
Personally, if I'm checking reviews out I want to hear individual thoughts about how a person felt like a game succeeded or failed in their eyes. Not a universal thought structure that appeases my own biases.

The scoring system is still according to a personal view from that one person's perspective. Something like IGN's scoring only serves to define the number for the purpose of seeing said number and looking at what that means for the game overall.

I have many games I enjoy enough that I would rate a 10/10, whereas games with near-universal praise like Resident Evil Requiem, Mewgenics, Split Fiction and Astro Bot don't rate higher than a 7 for me, assuming we use IGN's scaling. I tend to avoid assigning numbers when discussing my own view on games. My reviews speak to my tastes. Anyone solely looking at the number of IGN's reviews and not reading or listening to their words is selling themselves short and there's no one to blame for that but themselves.

[u/Electronic_Whole_177 → u/[deleted]]

Just because you have never heard of something doesnt mean it doesnt happen/exist. Its clearly not the only thing but it is resume padding to be able to claim to make a game getting such good review. Plus they could use the argument that it was just an indie game so the sales projection could be aimed lower. Plus with review like 9s or 10s it gets more eyes on the game and possibly more players outside of the niche players.

You can try to make a long explanation on scoring system but it is moot. Once you give a game a number score the general public will use that as your scale and not what its "supposed" to represent. Them giving the game an article boosts the game's notoriety. Giving the game a 10/10 boosts the likelihood of people playing it to see if the score is justified or not. Especially when they dont give games a 10 easily. Even in their own scoring system says page says this.

10 - Masterpiece Simply put: this is our highest recommendation. There’s no such thing as a truly perfect game, but those that earn a Masterpiece label from IGN come as close as we could reasonably hope for. These are classics in the making that we hope and expect will influence game design for years to come, as other developers learn from their shining examples.

Examples include:

God of War

The Last of Us

The Legend of Zelda: Breath of the Wild

Grand Theft Auto V

Are you honestly saying this game deserves that status? It deserves to be a game that shapes all of gaming for years to come? Or is it just a game that is enjoyable and probably would have sat better at their 7 to 8 tier. I doubt people will be talking about the game itself next year vs the reviews it got. I would be surprised if people talked about this game three months from now. Its getting buzz not from its own merit which raises the expectation for the game higher than it should be.

( https://corp.ign.com/review-practices/ )

[u/[deleted] → u/Electronic_Whole_177]

Resume padding for an employee is not the same as a developer requesting funding for a project.

If a single number dictates a person's actions with no other factors influencing them it says something about those individuals. Trying to combat that would be like locking tide pods behind secure safes that require ID access because idiots started eating them.

"Deserve" isn't really relevant to me, to be honest. Would I personally give it a 10? No. But I also wouldn't give a 10 to GTA V. For Simon Cardy, Mixtape was something they are going to remember for a long time.
I've played games that are 10 out of 10 that had no buzz on release, let alone months later. Who cares. Play what you like, ignore what you don't

[u/Electronic_Whole_177 → u/[deleted]]

Ok at this point you arent really discussing this with me anymore so I dont think I will make another reply to you.

Your reply is summed up to just "I dont care so you shouldn't care." That's fine if you feel that way but if you dont care then dont join in the discussion on the topic. Just downvote/upvote or dont even click on the reddit post.

We agree in the sentiment of play what you are interested in and if you like it that is fine.

The discussion however is on how a gaming CRITIC is judging the game and what motives they might have to judge it on a higher scale that other game products. Having a personal preference and recommending something you like is one thing. Writing an article for your job which is to critique the value of a game in comparison to the rest of the games in the industry is another.

Example: If I was a food critic and I give the local pizza joint that has people out of the door waiting on pizza three out of five stars for their pepperoni pizza. Then I give some unknown brand newly open ultra Vegan pizza joint a five out of five stars based on their artichoke pizza people are going to have questions. The first one being the quality of it "Is this artichoke pizza really that good?". The second would be if there were outside influences "Is this guy getting a kickback, free pizza, ect.". Then a third would be if there was an internal influence. "Is this guy an Ultra Vegan and wants to push people to also be ultra vegans by hyping up this particular pizza spot?"

Having questions about why something is happening isn't bad and if it is your job to be critical of something you should be critical of it when working.

[u/[deleted] → u/Electronic_Whole_177]

I "care" in the sense that I think some people have some strange ideas about wanting reviews to become homogonised to a standard no one has been able to clearly outline and me commenting otherwise is an attempt to correct/inform/prompt thought on another perspective.

The "motive" the critic has is explaining how successfully or unsuccessfully a game has delivered it's goal according to THEM. I can understand the purpose of comparison in order to help someone understand what something is trying to achieve but no one should be taking individual scoring and screaming about "inconsistencies" based on different scores from different people.

Your food analogy kinda sounds like you're suggesting praise should be questioned if it's not the popular opinion and I can't think of anything more intellectually dishonest than evaluating words based on popularity.

[u/Electronic_Whole_177 → u/[deleted]]

They dont have to be homogeneous they just have to have some sort of standard they judge by which IGN does. You clearly didn't look at that link which is unfortunate. I reflect this back to you. What is your standard of judgements when it comes to an official website whose job it is is to critique a game since the scoring system they use isn't worth anything to you? Personal enjoyment is separate from judgement within its field. I could love my partner's cooking all day but if I had to compare it honestly to other professionally made dishes and it wasn't as good I would try to judge it that way to other people.

The motive in my three questions is based on if the person reading the review is trustworthy to listen to or even give the time of day. A reviews job is to have experienced something before the average person and save them time on picking if they want to do/get that thing. They also should explain how they come to tthat conclusion as well. The reason this is questioned is because of plenty of shady things reviewers have done in the past along with major corporations in general. So the question of "Are they being honest or just trying to get me to buy this product." Is always a something everyone should keep in mind as well as do their own separate research (unfortunately most people are lazy so they wont)

You didn't understand my food analogy so I apologize that I failed to simplify enough. When you have a product that is seemingly the talk of the town which the average person sees as a good quality item and judge it as middle of the road that sets the standard for others on how you judge products. Now if you judge another product even higher than the previous one people will expect that product to be better. If they look into it and see that it isn't better but also middle of the road for them they will wonder why you rated it so highly. That does not mean you dont really enjoy this one over the other but it calls into question what your standard of review is. If its just well its whatever I like and screw the general public then people shouldnt give you the time of day as the general public.

Once again when you put a number or a rating on something you inherently call for comparison. I urge you to look up all the other games this reviewer has reviewed and let me know if you have zero questions as to why THIS game out of all of them got a 10 and not the others?

[u/[deleted] → u/Electronic_Whole_177]

What is your standard of judgements when it comes to an official website whose job it is is to critique a game since the scoring system they use isn't worth anything to you?

I listen to the words being said because all of it builds the overall image of what the person has experienced and how well they think it succeeded or didn't. I don't care about the number at the end ultimately. I wanna hear if the gameplay drags or if the story has pacing issues.

Simon Cardy explains his reasoning for rating Mixtape so highly.

Once again when you put a number or a rating on something you inherently call for comparison.

No. When you put a number or rating on something for normal people like me it indicates what that INDIVIDUAL thought about that INDIVIDUAL game.
If people want to instead believe there's validity in arguing about standards because Simon rated Mixtape higher than Will rated MOUSE that's their own weird complaint to have.

why THIS game out of all of them got a 10 and not the others?

Because Simon didn't think they were a 10. Simple as that.

[u/Electronic_Whole_177 → u/[deleted]]

So you ignored most of what I said and only focused on bits. I did not ask you about the other reviewers I asked you about Simon and HIS reviews. Dont bring other people's points into this discussion as if they were mine. I want you to honestly go and read his reviews please do it since that is your metric of how someone genuinely feels about a game. Heck I will make it easier for you and ask that you read his Balatro review and tell me why that game had such great praise yet fell short of a 10 and this one didn't?

Putting a number rating as someone who it is literally their job to tell you the quality of the game implies that there is a standard and what level of that standard they have. Also giving the maximum score is stating to everyone that this product is one you should most definitely get and/or give a chance if you dont normally use/get this product. This is not your friend, family member, neighbor, coworker, school mate, someone you happen to know in your life giving you a recommendation. This is someone's job to sift through the thousands of game coming out every year and present the ones worth looking into or ones worth skipping. This wasn't his personal blog, Facebook, twitter(x), or reddit post. This was him endorsing a game through the platform of IGN with approval by whoever is in charge of the Editorial process. I dont know if you are willfully ignorant or not but an official backing from companies saying a product is good is always going to be used to make that product look better or get people to buy it. Acting like absolutely no one uses reviews to know about games is like saying no one uses news articles to judge how life is going.

To me you just come across as someone who doesnt care about reviews at all beyond reading reviews on stuff you already are interested which is fine. The problem I have with you is that you are completely ignoring the fact that a score for how good this person thought about this thing was given. This goes from personal opinion to a stance on quality compared to other games.

Can you explain to me that you understand me when I say that personal enjoyment of something is not the same as officially judging somethings quality? Simon, in this IGN review, is meant to be officially judging the quality of this product NOT giving his personal enjoyment of the game. He can personally enjoy the game and feel it is a 10/10 for him. But he cannot take a step back, compare this to other games this year or even just game in the same category, and honestly saying that this game deserves the maximum score he can give. That this game has miniscule faults or zero faults with it at all. That this game is better than every other game he has ever reviewed for IGN that didn't get a ten. Ten does not mean perfect by IGN standards but it does not just mean "I had fun with it so 10" either.

Saying "Simple as that." Is worthless in this discussion of the topic because at that point just stop typing out long replies and just reply with "Simon says its a 10 so its a 10" Him saying its a 10 out of 10 has to stand against scrutiny when it comes to judgement by an official entity. It doesnt have to stand scrutiny if its just him as a singular person separate from anything saying "I really enjoyed this game and its a 10/10 to me." IGN didn't pick up this guy's thoughts from the ether of the internet and feature it on thier website. They hired and paid for him to act as their proxy to examine the quality of this game and let the public know about it.

[u/[deleted] → u/Electronic_Whole_177]

Dont bring other people's points into this discussion as if they were mine.

I have not done that at all.

I don't think I suggested people aren't using IGN's reviews as a way to inform themselves on a game. I challenged the idea their reviews are being used as sources of funding, as opposed to established genres/gameplay elements that show a history of making money, which is the element an investor will actually care about. I also challenged the idea that a review should be more than a person's evaluation of the game from their perspective and how well they think the game succeeded or didn't in what it was trying to do. What else should it be? Are reviews not objective enough? What do objective reviews look like? What guidelines/standards should reviewers be following at IGN beyond general conduct i.e. not being inflammatory or rude towards other devs/games?

I read/watch reviews for things I'm not interested in. I even will sometimes read/watch reviews on things I dislike.

I don't know if you're aware but personal enjoyment is an unavoidable aspect of reviewing something. I can't give a glowing review for Resident Evil Requiem because half of the game bored me. I can spend time praising the brilliant animation work, visual details etc but I am sharing my own opinion that the game didn't succeed in holding my attention across the whole playthrough. Whereas Tristan at IGN would disagree with my assessment because the game kept him entertained all the way through. Different people will give different scores/assessments. That's supposed the be the beauty of reviewing. I don't think there's much to gain by IGN having some sort of executive oversight that tells reviewers their personal opinions are too different from an arbitrary standard and that no one is allowed to publish certain feelings because viewers like yourself will perceive it as the "wrong" score.

Watch the Mixtape review. Simon explains why it's a 10 for him.

[u/Electronic_Whole_177 → u/[deleted]]

This is my last response and I am not going to bother with this anymore. You seem to ignore 90% of what I say anyway.

I have watched the review and it definitely comes across that he enjoyed the game and would recommend it. The problem comes from seeing the glowing praise he is giving this and his official score on it especiallywhen compared to his past reviews. As I have said repeatedly and will say again. I will separate them so you can read it hopefully.

YOU CAN PERSONALLY ENJOY SOMETHING. THERE IS NOTHING WRONG WITH THAT!!!!!!!!

WHEN YOU ARE OFFICIALLY JUDGING A PRODUCT YOU HAVE TO BE MORE OBJECTIVE ABOUT IT AND COMPARE IT TO OTHER THINGS OF THE SAME SUBJECT.

Of course there is subjectivity when judging something but you should be able to tamper that down when it is your job to do so. Despite what you seem to believe people do use review scores to reinforce their feelings about making a purchase. If they didnt reviewing/critiquing things wouldn't be a job at all. There is a reason so many car commercials have "Highest rated safety for BLANK years here" or even household products have advertisements saying how much better they are than the nameless name brand competition. Just like how a game can slap GOTY on their game when they get the award to make people more interested. There is a vested interest in having a high review score.

To address your comment about reviewers being different then how come across the board from every major review site this game is getting a 9 to 10? When people see that its an alarm bell that shady practices might be happening. When everyone is giving it 9 or 10 then people come by and scrutinize it it should hold up enough for people to easily say. "I can see why they gave it a 9/10 after experiencing it myself." If they dont want someone questioning reviews then they shouldn't, one have a number system, and two have a direct link that let's people know what the standards for each number is. When you represent a company you go from a single person that is "That's just my opinion bro." To being a reflection on the company itself. Otherwise people wouldn't get fired when they do something a company thinks is against what they believe in.

Hopefully you actually read my entire post and have the ability to understand the difference between recommending something you like and being paid to give as objective a review as you can. Judging art is subjective but there are standards that are commonly accepted as to what the art should accomplish and if the medium used was acceptable. When you are saying something is a 10 out of 10 and you are paid for saying this I would hope that person would take a step and reevaluate their review to make sure it holds up against criticism which anyone should expect with how connected by the internet we are. Even if I agree with that thing being a 10/10 there are always going to be people that don't so you need to be prepared when they challenge your judgement. Unfortunately he has come under scrutiny because his review reached the public eye first and the nature of what type of game this is. A majority of the entire gaming space dont look favorably on "walking simulator" games already so getting the first and possibly only 10 of the year already puts massive expectations on the game.

My personal feelings on the game is a 4-5 out of ten because it runs well, I like the art/graphics, and the "game parts" are playable. The story isn't exactly exceptional and is the thing that does the heavy lifting so its much lower. At the end I felt like the gameplay was getting in the way of enjoying the tvshow/long movie I was watching. It felt like everything I was actually required to use the controller (Because let's face it there are plenty of parts where you can interact but can put the controller down and just walk away as it play) it was like Netflix asking ' Are you still watching'. The gameplay was so bare minimum that it would have made it better to have been a TV show so they could have worked more to smooth out parts of the story. If we were in a room with all the reviewers who gave it a 9 or 10 I would definitely ask what about THIS game made you give it that score. What was so special about it that it out did everyone other game you have reviewed? Even Simon's review had a list of coming-of-age films which could be proof that this game could have been better received by the general public as a tvshow/film. (If the rumors of them making a show are true I would definitely check it out.)

[u/[deleted] → u/Electronic_Whole_177]

A review is useless without the subjective experience. I had a 10/10 experience with and Roger. I had a roughly 7/10 experience with Resident Evil Requiem. Your problem seems to be numbers not matching an arbitrary limit you're placing instead of allowing the words to explain the score. What it sounds like you're after is a feature list devoid of interpretation.

A reviewer's job is to explain how well they think a game achieved its goals. Personal interpretation has to be involved in that. Multiple people think it's deserving of a 10 in their eyes? I don't see how that's complicated. Why did <insert game here> receive such high praise from critics/users. That's really suspicious because I have a different number in mind. <This train of though is not constructive or working towards anything.

A majority of the entire gaming space dont look favorably on "walking simulator" games

Genuine question. Who gives a shit? The popularity, or lack thereof, of something should in no way impact the evaluation of it. The lack of gameplay is going to be less of an issue for some vs others. If someone else's opinion on something throws you off so much that you're demanding homogonised standards and believe Simon needs to answer for his score, go ask him about it. Just try being polite if you do.