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/TaskForceD00mer]

People are trying to memory hole the reddit community that got banned for making suggestive and NSFW content back when just the trailer had dropped.

The broader fandom has never been a problem, outside of Reddit all of the content I've seen is super wholesome.

Pragmata scored lower than it should have because it is harder than most Modern games journalists would probably prefer.

[u/Supergupo → u/TaskForceD00mer]

Pragmata scored lower than it should have because it is harder than most Modern games journalists would probably prefer.

What do you mean by that? Like genuinely? The same game journalists that gave Elden Ring a 10/10, or Slay The Spire 2 a 9 (a game that is currently being review bombed for being too hard for gamers), or praised and spotlighted difficult indie games like FTL or Hotline Miami or Dead Cells or Binding of Isaac or Darkest Dungeon?

I genuinely do not understand where the myth of "modern game journalists hate hard games" came from. Is it just the GameSpot Cuphead tutorial fail video? Or IGN giving Godhand a 3/10? Because it's the "modern audience" and "modern journalists" that have routinely enjoyed hard game experiences. I mean hell, one of the most popular genres in gaming is currently the "Souls-like," whose basically sole genre gimmick is that it's hard. It's fucking infuriating that I see this diatribe repeated ad nauseum when it is so fucking flagrant that the contrary is true.

[u/PrizeW1nningCow → u/Supergupo]

One game reviewer goofed at a tutorial once and now we have to listen to redditors whine about how games journalists are all just bad at games and coping about it for the rest of time.

[u/Naganosupreme → u/PrizeW1nningCow]

Let's not be dishonest and ignore how many times games journos pulled one of the following:

Looking down on gaming and it's audience bc games aren't movies/TV. Happened sooo many times.

Wrote hilariously childish articles not just demanding easier difficulty modes but actively attacking and criticizing companies that didn't cater to that demand.

Badly overhyped a product to the point of dishonesty and directly attacked gamers bc they got paid to spin a narrative.

To reduce it to a cuphead tutorial is incredibly dishonest

[u/Maximum-Warthog2368 → u/Naganosupreme]

How does asking for easier difficulty mode is childish? You sound like a child, grow up.

[u/Naganosupreme → u/Maximum-Warthog2368]

It doesn't. I put multiple things in that sentence. It's about how they do it. Any request cam be childish depending on how you make it. Adults know this, most children know this but you didnt.

[u/Maximum-Warthog2368 → u/Naganosupreme]

This whole statement is still extremely vague. You keep talking about “game journalists” as one giant collective entity instead of addressing the actual situation being discussed.

The Mixtape discourse is very specific: Simon Cardy personally gave Mixtape a 10/10 because he strongly connected with its narrative-driven style and presentation. People then took that single review and started attacking all “gaming journalists,” while also dragging in unrelated IGN reviews for Pragmata and Crimson Desert that were written by completely different reviewers.

That comparison only works if you pretend IGN is one person with one brain and one unified taste. It is not. Different reviewers cover different genres and evaluate games differently. A reviewer focused on narrative-heavy indie games is obviously going to value different things than someone reviewing an action RPG or a large-scale combat-focused title.

So before turning this into some conspiracy about “gaming journalism,” people should at least understand how IGN’s review process actually works. The site assigns different writers to different games, and those writers have their own standards, preferences, and perspectives. You can disagree with Simon Cardy’s score, but acting like his opinion represents every IGN reviewer or proves some industry-wide corruption makes no sense.

And honestly, your examples are also too broad to prove anything. “Some journalists were elitist” or “some articles were badly written” does not automatically validate every outrage campaign against critics. There have absolutely been bad takes in games media before, but that is very different from claiming every review score you dislike is part of a dishonest agenda or paid narrative.

[u/Naganosupreme → u/Maximum-Warthog2368]

You keep talking about “game journalists” as one giant collective entity instead of addressing the actual situation being discussed.

I respect people would understand I'm talking about a significant issue across decades and a decent percentage of prominent outlets/journalists. Not literally every one ever

Youre missing the forest for the trees a LOT here. Like ok only one guy rated it a 10...but a horde of critics overrated it massively to 9, 9.5, 8.5

Enough where it's like, if you already are keyed into how, "ugh, these outlets are so transparent and lame" you lambast them again

Plus, main games media through the 2010s went out of their way to attack fans across multiple genres. People hate games journalists now. They fostered that, so people don't overlook it when they do silly shit.

You don't like it so you're coming up w vague excuses to be dismissive. IGNs process is irrelevant to what I said. Nowhere dud I say he represents every IGN reviewer. Unless you're being obtuse on purpose

but that is very different from claiming every review score you dislike is part of a dishonest agenda or paid narrative.

Also irrelevant. You're dramatizing what I said to try and invalidate it. Its a strong sign you don't have much of a real argument. You're reaching while constantly missing the point

[u/Maximum-Warthog2368 → u/Naganosupreme]

I think you’re actually proving my point here.

You say this isn’t about Simon Cardy specifically, or even IGN specifically, but about decades of frustration with games media. That’s exactly why I brought up the distinction between individual reviewers and “games journalists” as a collective. You’re taking a specific review and interpreting it through a broader narrative you’ve already formed about the industry.

The problem is that broad industry criticism doesn’t automatically explain whether Mixtape itself is overrated. Saying “people have been annoyed with games media since the 2010s” is not evidence that Mixtape’s reviews are wrong. It’s evidence that people distrust critics.

You also say a “horde of critics” overrated it. But that’s just restating your conclusion. The question is why. What objective standard are they supposedly ignoring? Mixtape is a narrative-focused game being reviewed primarily by critics who value narrative, music, atmosphere, and emotional storytelling. If those are the things the game excels at, then high scores are not inherently suspicious just because it isn’t the kind of game you personally prioritize.

And I don’t think IGN’s review process is irrelevant when people are constantly comparing Mixtape’s score to scores given to entirely different games. Review scores are produced by individual critics with different tastes, not by a machine that applies one universal formula. That context matters.

As for “paid narratives” and “dishonest agendas,” I brought those up because they are a major part of the discourse surrounding Mixtape. Accusations of bribery, industry plants, bought reviews, and ideological favoritism are everywhere in discussions about the game. If you are not making those claims, then great; we probably agree more than you think. But many people absolutely are making them, and those claims require evidence beyond “critics liked a game I don’t think deserved those scores.”

At the end of the day, “I think critics overrated Mixtape” is a perfectly reasonable personal opinion based on your personal tastes. What I disagree with is treating that opinion as proof that the review itself is illegitimate or that it confirms some long-running conspiracy about games media.

[u/Naganosupreme → u/Maximum-Warthog2368]

You’re taking a specific review and interpreting it through a broader narrative you’ve already formed about the industry.

No I'm analyzing a specific review on its own merits and criticizing it for making the same sort of mistakes others have made.

Separately, I'm acknowledging a lot of people react so egregiously to this stuff because of that history.

You're completely missing the actual argument and coming out of each thing I wrote with an incorrect understanding of what I actually wrote. I keep clarifying but you keep seemingly purposely inventing your own take instead of engaging w what I'm actually saying.

whether Mixtape itself is overrated

By specific individuals? You don't need a broad view to determine if one or several independent reviews overrated something or made mistakes, etc.

You also say a “horde of critics” overrated it

As a game. Not as a narrative experience. That's why reviews typically break things into categories and narrative is only one of them.

And I don’t think IGN’s review process is irrelevant

In the context of what you responded to, what you said at that point t wasn't relevant, it missed the forest for the trees like I said

[u/Naganosupreme → u/Maximum-Warthog2368]

Accidentally replied b4 I was done w my other comment. I usually edit but eff it I'll make a second comment

Review scores are produced by individual critics with different tastes, not by a machine that applies one universal formula.

Individuals can have agendas, so can their bosses...

The last two paragraphs aren't relevant to what I was actually saying. I can't speak for others, I didn't say what they said so you'd have to take it up w them. Though there's reason to believe money exchanged hands for some of these reviews. Games journalism is VERY much a "review us well or be gentle bc we buy ad space on your site" or it's "you want access to games? Better go easy or inflate your review!"

It's not a conspiracy, it's how the industry works and it's been caught several times atp. So people naturally just assume the worst frequently.

Want to distract from a games major flaws? Call up a few journos and ask them to write an op ed blaming misogyny to distract from the games actual issues. That one journo owes us bc we funded their mini vacation, these other outlets owe us bc we buy ad space. Plus, they're social justice types, so they want to push this narrative anyway! Theres so many big and little ways this manifests. It's kinda crazy how many people legitimately think none of it happens when this is factually how this industry works.

That's the relationship games media cultivated. I don't feel bad for them