Why Does IGN Give So Many 7's? | MoistCr1tikal

40 Comments

1. 7 just means "its bad but a big publisher made it so we can't go lower and possibly upset them"

2. he beat the fart allegations last sec

3. i really dont get how they fucked up saints row so badly. all of the fans made it very clear what they wanted, which was a return to the formula of sr1 and 2, but instead they decide to double down on the sr3 formula and then remove the last bit of identity the series had

4. charlie not being a hydro homie and just casually drinking water just makes me cringe

5. 7 is a safe number. Not good, not bad. Average

6. Pete Davidson is 100% a plant. I've never thought he was funny but I lost all respect for the dude when he was doing a Comedy Central Roast and he got so butt hurt by the roastee's final speech he yelled something back at her. After digging into her all night he couldn't take one little joke without crying about it. Everyone else took their counter roasts like normal it was top tier cringe

7. MCC gang represent

8. Because most games happen to be average. And 7 is an average score

9. IGN did not do reviews in the first place they 3rd party it to a writer who does not even play games and they would just take anything said about the game add to a script and call it good IGN is just trying to cover for the trash reviews it has always had

10. <3
    lmaoooo

11. Let’s goo Horowitz

12. They gave 7 because they didn't get paid

13. I love how people criticize IGN for giving 7s when most gamers give anything they like even a slight bit a 10/10. In my opinion a 1 out of 3 system is the most accurate and honest scoring system. 1 = bad 2= alright 3= great

14. IGN gave the Velma show a 6/10

15. Ah yes, the IGN 7.

    The "John Smith" of game reviews

16. A 7 basically equals "fine." And to be fair, that's about what most games deserve these days. Even the good games have problems that bring them down.

17. "No way thats real" Does Charlie not know who IGN is? Pretty much never been a good company.

18. But non beats IGN from hyping games from early access instead of showcasing upcoming indie games.

19. IGN = "I Give seveNs"

20. Watch Dogs 2 was fantastic. It’s a disgrace how bad Legion was.

21. Oohf. Being reminded of watch dogs legion actively made me cringe. That game was so bad lol

22. Im sad he never finished Yakuza 7. Would've been nice to see his reaction to the final parts of the game

23. honestly NONE of the “official” gaming review outlets are reliable, their careers pretty much rely on them giving everything at least a decent rating, I never listen to a single one of them

24. I remember getting to the 2nd to last mission in Watch Dogs 1 and just stopping because the game was so bleh. IGN gave it an 8 after saying something like, 'despite the chase missions', Those were 70% of the missions. No way they finished Watch Dogs.

25. I think the actual bad thing they said was "If we didn't review the game, it probably wasn't good anyway" which is insane lmao

26. Shadowrun is backwards compatible 6:47

27. IGN is built around the number system, it will often override their own points they do make.
    So while the whole "They don't play games they just give a number to" point is hollow I do think it's fair to say IGN's content is pretty worthless and only consumed by people who don't care or just want to hear a number and let that determine if they try a game.

28. I've always hated that IGN's version of average is just a 7, which actually should be 5.

29. I can empathize. “It’s fine, nothing groundbreaking or bad. 7/10”

30. 7 is the new 5

31. Some guy said Pete Davidson "he is in my mom too"

32. Asking a man with no real job about work makes no sense. Post quarantine, majority of companies are bringing workers back in office to keep productivity in line

33. 7 is the bang for your buck option.
    it doubles up every time for 8 9 and 10.

34. What a delightful note to end the video on there

35. Anti-intellectualism has made stupid people so brazen with expressing their idiocy.

36. 7GN is literally a terrible site for rating, i never trust them

37. I think there is some disagreement on what a 0-10 scale means for games. Some might assume that a 5 is as much good as bad, and anything above that is more good than bad. Some use a scale more like an academic grading scale though where anything below a 6 is a failure and a score in the 7s would be average.

38. Jackie Chan is a 7.

39. It’s because they go by their own scale’s rubric instead of the general census’ opinion. A 7 to them is good but not great. A 9 is amazing and 10 is masterpiece. Honestly they put the word right there. But the general public looks at the number. The general public’s brain is also reduced atp.

    The problem is the public’s opinion on a 7 is “mid; okay”. That’s a 6 on their scale. Okay is literally on their scale as a six.

    More conversation can go around why they rate what they do what they do but they’re saying most things are “GOOD:7”. Not everything is great. Not everything needs to be praised. But again the public can’t get their personal opinions out of these numbers.

40. A lot of games that have came out recently have been very mid an uninspiring. A lot of them are 7s not bad at all but nothing amazing so far

Comments are closed.