IGN vs Gamespot for reviews?

Eurogamer is the best, to be honest

Both suck, gamespot sucks less

gamespot (pre-2008) > ign > gamespot (post-2008)

Out of those two Gamespot it is,but I don´t pay attention to either sites for reviews,the only thing I mildly pay attention on GS is the scores because of SW,when I want to read reviews of games that interest me I go to other places,like Rock,Paper,Shotgun for instance.

GS.

A lot of sites are better then IGN.

I pay attention to both. Really, I think Metacritic gives the best overall picture if I just want a quick score and don't have time to read a review.

IGN is just awful.

Gamespot I like occasionally, but I still think they inflate some scores a bit too much, and they're sometimes inconsistent in how they judge some games over others.

I understand that given they have a whole team of people reviewing there's no way they can really have consistent reviews, but I do wish that the standards of each reviewer were more closely aligned.

You've got some that complain about stuff that nobody else cares about, and others who praise certain types of games while dismissing others. It makes it hard to consider some reviews valid unless you know the reviewer's background.

PrincessGomez92 is the only reviewer I trust.

I like IGN better than GS because of their point system. I don't like the .5 increments.

If I was on IGN their reviews would reign supreme.

On IGN their fans are the same way. IGN counts GSpot does not.

this is like comparing excrement to vomit. Although IGN's more popular because they expanded the website to cater to comics, TV series, anime, movies, etc.

IGN gave a 9/10 to one of the worst movies I've seen in my life... Speed fucking Racer. They lost all credibility with that. And the other day they were recommending a Vizio LCD for gaming that has more latency than a 10 years old LCD from a better brand. More than half the time IGN really has no idea what they are talking about. Just look at Greg Miller saying UC3 is better than 2....

I would agree since they use the whole scale. Neither IGN nor GSpot do.

Eh. It's hard to say. I prefer reading many reviews. Eurogamer has the biggest influence. It also depends on the reviewer. I have people at IGN I like, and some I don't like,

This is off-topic, but I just want to say that IGN >>>> Gamespot for general news. Gamespot hardly ever reports on Nintendo stuff - which is my main interest. IGN does a much better job at this. The same can be said for the other consoles too though (just not to the same extent). I'm mainly only at Gamespot for the forums.

this by a mile.

ign hands out 9s like candy on halloween and gamespot overates everything almost as badly.

I read from many websites and then metacritic and then i judge off of the gameplay i have seen and then User reviews that go into detail.

I am not wasting$60 on a game. Gaming is expensive

I prefer forums posters at sites like GAF and GameSpot for my game reviews. I don't trust reviewers anymore. Too many money hats, too much need to please developers and publishers, too much pressure to get reviews out FIRST instead of getting them out done RIGHT.

If there is a game I dont know much about and I want to get excited for it, I'll watch an IGN review.

I find myself reading more of Giantbomb's reviews lately. I like Brad Shoemaker's.

IGN lost all cred with the whole X1 vs. PS4 comparissions when they claimed the Quad was tested in 1080p.................................and it wasnt.

I had a account there and was banned in one post so i dont trust anything they have to say, Well unless it benefits my argument. Then they are ok. Reviews............so,so i guess.

IGN reviews are great.. they understand more about games than GS. this site will be great without caroline petit

both are horrible..but I guess gamespot still puts in better quality reviews than IGN's.

These days, I just watch independant user reviews from Youtube. I tend to take those reviews more seriously than I would gamespot/ IGN

lmao both are horrible but at least GS doesn't give everything a 9

I care more about what certain reviewers say rather than an entire website. Like Ill read reviews from Dan Ryckert, Andrew Reiner, Brad Shoemaker, Alex Navarro and other reviewers with similar tastes to me.

Out of those two? Gamespot.

It is not that Gamespot has very good reviews, they got a few decent reviewers, but overall scores are WAY too high. IGNs are even higher, often it feels like IGN rates HYPE rather then GAMES.

I liked Gamespot when they were WAY more strict, bowadays they are on the level of IGN and Gametrailers. So neither are great as a basis.

It's basically the same. Both revamped their rating systems and they became almost identical. Also, both are quite random nowadays, and their reviews now seem more like an amateur's opinion than anything professional.

Both used to be really good, now both are really horrible. I still pick Ign for reviews, but I don't buy a game because of them.

i prefer ign 99.9% of the time.

Their reviews are always on time of release or before bright in the morning

gs/ign is my top 2 spots to check though

Neither but since there is no option for that then it is Gamespot, which isn't as bas as IGN.

Thats because 9gn only cares about shitting out reviews as fast as possible instead of actually putting together quality work.

TC, i'm afraid I've got some bad news.

Metacritic is the only thing that counts.

IGN rated stuff to high and tip toes around to get people to come back. Gamespot trolls and flops random things to generate hits.

Both are terrible. I go to You Tube and look at reviews from honest gamers like us.

IGN seems to be more objective lately. Gamespot tends to rate games in order to push an agenda and the reviewers always put in too much personal bias. For example, Ryse is not a 4. That score is a travesty.

Honestly its best to go to multiple so you can get a better look at things and not be trapped to just one official review. Different opinions shape up a game's positives and negatives.

For example, Destructoid like to give A LOT of shitty review scores, so people who only go there will assume they are shitty.

I personally like how strict Gamespot is, hell, this year only held a few games that deserved the 9's compared to before at least.

GameSpot got rid of some good reviewers and replaced them with meh ones, IGN got rid of its shit reviewers and are still generally shitty.

I'll give it to GameSpot for Kevin, Chris, Shaun, Cam, and Danny. IGN is much more personable, but the personas suck.

Rev3 is still my favorite followed by Destructoid for handheld gaming. Grantland does some decent shit by that one guy too.

It's called an opinion, nitwit.

It's like choosing between Obama and Romney again.

Gamespot got two loose canon personality

* tom mcshea and Mr Carolyn petit

IGN got awful reviewer

* lucy O'brien.... who's not a real gamer .... psn level 5

Gamespot, because they're less likely to rely on the typical 6-10 scale like IGN often does.

Eurogamer by far.

Out of those two, I choose IGN. I hate their web because there is not enough gaming stories and too much articles about some retarded TV series, but at least they don't have McShea.

I will never trust an IGN review. The reviews have no depth and are too likely to hand out high scores for everything,

At least Gamespot have the guts to go against what others say and complain or hand out lower scores than others.