Epic Mickey 2 a disappointment?

[pankakes123]

Wow, just watched IGN's review and other than criticizing the AI they seemed to love it! The review sucked, it in no way explained why the game got a 6/10. The way they praised it it seemed like it deserved an 8/10.

[Menegrothx]

Wow, just watched IGN's review and other than criticizing the AI they seemed to love it! The review sucked, it in no way explained why the game got a 6/10. The way they praised it it seemed like it deserved an 8/10.

That's IGN for you. If they didn't get paid by the developers, they're obligated to give it a poor score after praising the game for few minutes.

[RyaNtheSlayA]

Wow, just watched IGN's review and other than criticizing the AI they seemed to love it! The review sucked, it in no way explained why the game got a 6/10. The way they praised it it seemed like it deserved an 8/10.

That's IGN for you. If they didn't get paid by the developers, they're obligated to give it a poor score after praising the game for few minutes.

Oh cut this bullshit.

[Menegrothx]

Oh cut this bullshit.

Do you work for IGN or something?

[RyaNtheSlayA]

Oh cut this bullshit.

Do you work for IGN or something?

So, because a certain reviewer doesn't like a certain game, that obviously means they're payed off. Gotcha.

Sure, give these games to a reviewer that likes that type of game a lot, they'll get a higher score. There are plenty of people that don't like Metro, and there are plenty of people that like Epic Mickey. A 6.0 isn't a bad review, but, it's not glowing either. It's mediocre. Which is, from what I've seen from the gameplay, just about how I'd feel about it too. Good, even great ideas, can't save average games from their mechanics.

Oh, and where are you getting this "payed for" review thing? It seems like a lot of gamers like to spew this crap when a game they like gets a mediocre review, or a game they don't like gets a good review. Yet, aside from a few outliers, there's little to no evidence of this happening. The Gamespot Kain and Lynch fiasco is the only real notable one I can think of.

Edit: And don't get me wrong, I really do not like IGN in the slightest. It irritates me how many people think they know how the industry works and how everything goes down at various games journalism outlets.

[Violent By Design]

I was going to say something similar in regards to a 6/10 is. 6/10 doesn't mean a bad game, and Epic Mickey doesn't seem like the type of game that stands out. I can't say much since the game has not come out, but I don't see why that score seems ludicrous, the game doesn't seem special.

And Epic Mickey is relatively well marketed and is backed up by one of the largest companies in the world, so I dont really get the paid off argument. Why wouldn't they pay IGN to sell their game, especially with a new platform in the Wii-U coming out which supports it.

[Reprise]

Given the first one was one, that makes me very confused.

My thoughts too. I tried the first after a few critics and people on the internet giving it a good response and I found it to be bitterly disappointing.

[REPO Man]

I played the demo for the 360 version and the 3DS companion. The 360 version starts off pretty interesting but got kinda "meh". But the 3DS game, which is more related to the Illusion series (Castle of Illusion, et al), seems to be the better of the two.

[prfsnl_gmr]

I am just going to go on the record and say that I love reading bad reviews. Be it film, theater, restaurants, or video games, a bad review is just so much fun to read.

For that, at least, I thank you Epic Mickey 2.

[Pulsar_t]

I would have liked an HD rendition of EM1 on Steam, so I can ditch the Wii copy.