IGN reviews GTA IV 10 out of 10 - "Masterful"

  • Two Factor Authentication is now available on BeyondUnreal Forums. To configure it, visit your Profile and look for the "Two Step Verification" option on the left side. We can send codes via email (may be slower) or you can set up any TOTP Authenticator app on your phone (Authy, Google Authenticator, etc) to deliver codes. It is highly recommended that you configure this to keep your account safe.

Kantham

Fool.
Sep 17, 2004
18,034
2
38
Source

I just watched the video review, and the reviewer said that it's the best game he's been playing in 10 years. I believe so, but how does a game with auto-targeting can be fun to play? Why they still deliver such a lame noob system?

Good things to hear about the overall great optimization though. I wonder how long is the loading times.
 
Last edited:

Kantham

Fool.
Sep 17, 2004
18,034
2
38
That's probably because the thread starter is shown under the thread title.
 

MonsOlympus

Active Member
May 27, 2004
2,225
0
36
42
Yeah Im looking forward to seeing how this new melee system works out, definatly alot of hype around this game. Rockstar do know how to make em though :cool:
 

SleepyHe4d

fap fap fap
Jan 20, 2008
4,152
0
0
Another GTA thread just for one review? Should've just posted it in the other thread. :lol: Btw didn't you know they upgraded the gun shooting gameplay big time? There's locking on but it's not perfectly accurate and you have to guide it yourself and there's a cover system too. Oh and shooting out of a car actually works good now.
 

Jacks:Revenge

╠╣E╚╚O
Jun 18, 2006
10,065
218
63
somewhere; sometime?
Another GTA thread just for one review? Should've just posted it in the other thread. :lol:

This same review was already posted there, I guess K thought it needed more attention.

*shrug

I dunno about the review being biased, but like I said in the IV thread I got to play this game the other day on my buddies 360 and it was about the most fun 4 hours I think I've ever had playing a game. Not to mention it all looks absolutely gorgeous.
 

Kantham

Fool.
Sep 17, 2004
18,034
2
38
I guess K thought it needed more attention.

Pretty much spot on. I haven't seen IGN rate a game 10 before. They are seen as a whole "company", not as a single person that's why I posted this. IGN's reviews mostly matter to a lot of persons.
 
Last edited:

MonsOlympus

Active Member
May 27, 2004
2,225
0
36
42
Actually the dude said like 10 years ago was a 10/10, I wonder which game that was for, might give an eg of what GTA4 is on par with. Ofcoarse the whole rating thing is alittle screwy, personally I like a % out of 100 then you can happily give a 98-99 while leaving room for that game which might come along and do better.
 

dotnetbeast

Mood Muzik
Feb 14, 2006
6,189
60
48
Washington D.C.
Reviews are just opinions. Everyone has one, and not everyone will agree with every review/opinon.

The fact that the guy gave it a 10/10 really doesn't mean a whole lot. It just means that this particular person had alot of fun with the game and really enjoyed it.

QFT.
 

dragonfliet

I write stuffs
Apr 24, 2006
3,754
31
48
41
Actually the dude said like 10 years ago was a 10/10, I wonder which game that was for, might give an eg of what GTA4 is on par with.

In 1999 it was Soul Caliber (for the DC) and in 1998 it was LoZ:OoT.

While I don't think that IGN is in any way dishonest or being paid by Rockstar, I frown upon "exclusive" reviews. It's bull**** and while it doesn't necessarily mean that the outlet is inclined to boost the score, it certainly doesn't put the review in the most believable light.

In this case, however, I can't imagine it being off. Reviews for this game are off the freaking hook. Consider my hyped. Now if only I could actually play it in the next 2 months...

~Jason
 

The Dopefish

Eat your veggies!
Apr 17, 2000
8,275
30
48
40
Springfield, MA, USA
In this case, however, I can't imagine it being off. Reviews for this game are off the freaking hook. Consider my hyped. Now if only I could actually play it in the next 2 months...

Here's my problem: you're acting as though the reviews are what are making you "hyped", yet I would think that anyone who's been paying any attention to the series would be hyped merely by the fact that it's a new Grand Theft Auto game. Note here, dragonfliet, that I'm not picking on you, since a lot of people have said this a lot of times about a lot of things.

The problem with video game reviews is that time changes things. Ocarina of Time was likely very deserving of a 10 back in 1997 or whenever, but would you say the overall game holds a candle to Wind Waker or Twilight Princess? Similarly, who's to say that Soul Calibur really should've gotten a 10 score, since each game since has had virtually the same gameplay but have gotten lower scores.

Put plainly, reviews of anything, not just games, are a matter of personal bias. The people who are paid to make video game reviews aren't paid to do so because they're generally right; they're paid to write reviews because that's their job. Let me put it this way: I give GTA4 a 10 out of 10, but I haven't read anything about it, I haven't seen any gameplay, all I've seen is the first trailer and I'll likely never play it. Does this make my review any less reliable than someone from IGN or GameSpot or EGM? Probably not.

Let me put it another way: when Gene Shalit or Gene Siskel or Richard Roeper or Roger Ebert reviewed a movie, people generally take their opinions to heart and make a decision to see a movie based on that because what they said or wrote was usually on the money and they've built a reputation based on that...that's why they've all been on TV, FFS. With a game like GTA4, it was very likely from the day it was announced that most people intended to buy it or play it regardless of what some no-name on some website had to say about it. I mean, I've never heard of Hilary Goldstein...have you? In all likelihood, she is some English major from the south California area who got hired a few months ago and was deemed to be worthy of a big piece like GTA4.

Ultimately, I don't think it should matter what someone on some website or from some magazine says about some game, or any movie for that matter. The experience is yours and yours alone, and if you can't make an informed decision about what game you should buy or play then perhaps you shouldn't even bother.
 
Last edited:

Defeat

GET EM WITH THE BACKSMACK WOOOOO
Apr 2, 2005
2,931
0
0
Illinois
www.google.com
Reviews are just opinions. Everyone has one, and not everyone will agree with every review/opinon.

The fact that the guy gave it a 10/10 really doesn't mean a whole lot. It just means that this particular person had alot of fun with the game and really enjoyed it.

QFMFT
 
Here's my problem: you're acting as though the reviews are what are making you "hyped", yet I would think that anyone who's been paying any attention to the series would be hyped merely by the fact that it's a new Grand Theft Auto game. Note here, dragonfliet, that I'm not picking on you, since a lot of people have said this a lot of times about a lot of things.

The problem with video game reviews is that time changes things. Ocarina of Time was likely very deserving of a 10 back in 1997 or whenever, but would you say the overall game holds a candle to Wind Waker or Twilight Princess? Similarly, who's to say that Soul Calibur really should've gotten a 10 score, since each game since has had virtually the same gameplay but have gotten lower scores.

Put plainly, reviews of anything, not just games, are a matter of personal bias. The people who are paid to make video game reviews aren't paid to do so because they're generally right; they're paid to write reviews because that's their job. Let me put it this way: I give GTA4 a 10 out of 10, but I haven't read anything about it, I haven't seen any gameplay, all I've seen is the first trailer and I'll likely never play it. Does this make my review any less reliable than someone from IGN or GameSpot or EGM? Probably not.

Let me put it another way: when Gene Shalit or Gene Siskel or Richard Roeper or Roger Ebert reviewed a movie, people generally take their opinions to heart and make a decision to see a movie based on that because what they said or wrote was usually on the money and they've built a reputation based on that...that's why they've all been on TV, FFS. With a game like GTA4, it was very likely from the day it was announced that most people intended to buy it or play it regardless of what some no-name on some website had to say about it. I mean, I've never heard of Hilary Goldstein...have you? In all likelihood, she is some English major from the south California area who got hired a few months ago and was deemed to be worthy of a big piece like GTA4.

Ultimately, I don't think it should matter what someone on some website or from some magazine says about some game, or any movie for that matter. The experience is yours and yours alone, and if you can't make an informed decision about what game you should buy or play then perhaps you shouldn't even bother.

This post is to serious and too long for a thread about GTA4.
 

Twisted Metal

Anfractuous Aluminum
Jul 28, 2001
7,122
3
38
39
Long Island, NY
Dont trust reviews do begin with. Cod4, hl2 and bioshock all did not deserve the ratings they got.

Can't comment on Bioshock since I only played the first level or so, but HL2 most certainly deserved the praise that it got. I won't argue with you though... opinions are opinions.

As for CoD4, it's at the top of it's game for arcadish action, so I don't see why it shouldn't deserve a top notch review. For the few hours that it lasted, CoD4 was one of the best FPS experiences I have ever had.

But the point is that you have no right to speak for the public by saying that those games did not deserve the ratings they got. Let the public decide that. Oh wait, they already have, HL2 and CoD4 are both some of the most successful FPS games in existence.
 

Dark Pulse

Dolla, Dolla. Holla, Holla.
Sep 12, 2004
6,186
0
0
38
Buffalo, NY, USA
darkpulse.project2612.org
It's IGN. Does anyone take them seriously? :rolleyes:

I don't trust any of the big reviewers anymore. Not IGN, not Gamespot, not EGM, nothing. I look for reviews from individuals. The individual is going to care about the actual bottom line of the game, whereas the paid reviewers probably have to get through 3 games a week.

Not to mention the fact that usually it's the fanboys who will review a game. I'd like to see someone who's never played Halo at all review Halo 3. They won't care about the history of the game, or the fact millions of people think it's the best game ever. (And they're ****ing idiots, by the way.) They're going to care about the core issues - how good is the story, how smooth is the gameplay, and so on.

Meanwhile, the big sites and mags will boil it down to "It's Halo, it rules, and we will follow you home and kill your dog if you don't buy it now now now."

That said, from what (little) I've heard, GTA4 is pretty good. I'll look forward to the eventual PC release and will be sure to give it a try then. :)