1020°

IGN modified its Assassin's Creed review, Destructoid got the proof

On Destructoid you can find the proof that IGN indeed modified its Assassin's Creed review.

The current review contains this:
"These big open worlds, which are fully interactive, do come at a cost. There is considerable texture pop-in and occasional framerate hiccups. None of this deters from the gameplay though, so it is forgivable."

The original review contained this:
"These big open worlds, which are fully interactive, do come at a severe cost on PS3. There is considerable texture pop-in and noticeable framerate issues. Playing back-to-back with the 360 version, it's obvious that Ubisoft did not devote enough resources to the PS3 edition. The framerate is considerably worse, so much so that it begins to affect gameplay in the later levels. You can get through the first two-thirds of Assassin with the framerate being just an annoyance, but it becomes more of an issue for the final third of the missions."

Read Full Story >>
destructoid.com
TnS6007d ago

Well... I don't know what to think about this.

HeartlesskizZ6007d ago

IGN editing something like that shows nothing but afraid to lose fans. if is true then they should have kept it original and if is not then that would be the only excuse to have edited the post. anyhow ill find out this friday when I get my hand on the PS3 version

MK_Red6007d ago

Superb find and... Wow. IGN really edited / modified their review... so much for being a good and accountable site. It's out of my trusted zone for sure. Only GameInformer and GameTrailers for me now.

Gamespot-equals-EGM6007d ago (Edited 6006d ago )

So what, so ign edited their review. The score is still the same, the review summary is still the same.

And IGN is still a good site.

EDIT: @below: How can an opinion be incorrect? Idiot.

EDIT2: @below: ***SIGH***....if you think its a 'fact' that IGN sucks then you are a bigger idiot than I thought. Do you have any evidence to back up this 'fact' (any user poll data)?

Twizlex6007d ago (Edited 6006d ago )

^^^ Incorrect sir. IGN blows. Surprisingly, the U.S. reviewers always complain about stupid stuff or even gripe about stuff that doesn't exist (like no camera control in Overlord when there IS camera control in Overlord). I trust IGN AU a lot more, and I would never read IGN's reviews if it wasn't for them.

Plus, 20 bucks for "Insider" so you can see comparison videos and exclusive articles? Please, get over yourselves. Anyone with an "Insider" membership is a sucker.

Edit @above: Opinions can easily be wrong. Here's an example: your post. Seriously, though, my opinion could be that something that is actually red looks more orange to me. So even though, to me, the color is clearly orange, I am wrong. And it is a fact that IGN sucks, so your opinion doesn't matter. I know that my logic in this argument probably doesn't make any sense to you, but that is also just your opinion, and you are again wrong. I hope this clears things up for you. Have a nice day.

jackfatal6006d ago

i like ur logic!! u have one!! though i rarely see in these sites!!
some people think their opinion is absolute!! like 360 is better or ps3 is better or arabs r evil (like how they show it in COD4) or american army and government are innocent angels!!!

SlappyMcTaint6006d ago

IGN sucks @$$ anyway -though not as much as 360 uber fanboys: Gay-mspot and 1up

barom6006d ago

wtf are ya talking about. IGN didn't modify their review. It still says

These big open worlds, which are fully interactive, do come at a severe cost on PS3. There is considerable texture pop-in and noticeable framerate issues. Playing back-to-back with the 360 version, it's obvious that Ubisoft did not devote enough resources to the PS3 edition. The framerate is considerably worse, so much so that it begins to affect gameplay in the later levels. You can get through the first two-thirds of Assassin with the framerate being

Source: http://ps3.ign.com/articles...

Skizelli6006d ago (Edited 6006d ago )

@1.5: You state that it's a fact that IGN sucks, yet you give no real reason why other than the Insider bit, which nobody is forcing you to pay for to begin with. Sorry, but your fact is an opinion, which isn't right nor wrong. I don't know about elsewhere, but I'm glad US game reviewers don't eat everything they're spoon fed. I, for one, take my gaming seriously and expect bang for my buck. I think knit-picking is a good thing. The small things DO matter.

@1.6: Who ever claimed that the US military and government were perfect little angels? Sounds to me like your own perception based on something false. If you were American and had any knowledge about our society first hand, you'd most likely be against the war, disapprove of Bush and how he's making us look, and KNOW our government is evil.

+ Show (6) more repliesLast reply 6006d ago
ShiftyLookingCow6007d ago

and the score doesnt reflect the change. so wth?? makes no sense.

Nostradavis6007d ago

This is a perfect example of what happens when you get SO BIG that it is not about being honest anymore, it is about keeping friends in the industry. As soon as you let that happen, your cred. goes right out the door.

Gamespot-equals-EGM6007d ago

Because crybaby fangirls where making such a big deal about what ign said about the ps3's framerates. So IGN edited the review to put the framerate difference in context.

In other words, in the edited version they say although the ps3 version has some framerate problems, the framerate 'issues' have very little effect on gameplay.

You want an example of this see below (#3, Bordello's post). With the edited version (which people will hopefully follow now), IGN lets it be known the ps3's framerate problems aren't such a big deal.

Bordel_19006007d ago (Edited 6007d ago )

From the GameSpot review:
"There are few differences between the Xbox 360 and PlayStation 3 versions. PS3 owners are blessed with a slightly more solid frame rate, although the 360 version features a little more contrast in the lighting, so it's pretty much a wash. But regardless of which platform you go with, you'll have an amazing and unforgettable game. Assassin's Creed is the kind of game you tell your friends about, and one that should be in your collection. "

Who to believe??

Edit: I want to believe GameSpot on this one.

ShiftyLookingCow6007d ago

The Mighty Pink Invisible Unicorn!

poopface16006d ago

so oyu should get it if gs is right. but you never know. I can tell you that is is a good game so far though.

monkey6026007d ago

Yeah I agree with TNS I dont know what to say. This is strange

Irving6007d ago

WTF? I reported this story and that idiot fanboy Round Peg kept reporting it as a lie. How does it feel now to have your foot in your mouth? So much for IGN's credibility.

Show all comments (106)
60°

PureArts & Ubisoft Announce Assassin’s Creed Hunt for the Nine 1/6 Scale Diorama

This should make fans and collectors very happy. PureArts & Ubisoft Announce Assassin’s Creed Hunt for the Nine 1/6 Scale Diorama Assassin's Creed Hunt for the Nine 1/6 Scale Diorama available for pre-order on January 25.

260°

Can We Finally Admit Assassin's Creed 3 Deserves an Apology?

AC3 was released during a turbulent transition period for Ubisoft and the Assassin's Creed series. It ventured into uncharted territory, narratively and mechanically, which caused it to receive mixed reviews. At its core, though, it's a damn good stealth game.

Read Full Story >>
thenerdstash.com
isarai196d ago

Nope, I hated 3, connar was bland, literally the most flat character in the entire game. Not to mention to myriad of bugs, camera issues, and that annoying thing where he automatically ditches his weapon you payed for for the sake of a cool finishing move forcing you to trek back to your base after almost every encounter just to re-equip your own weapon. It just didn't work as fluidly as the others like 2 and 4

Samonuske196d ago

The series peaked at AC3 for me. It’s been my favourite in the series. Connor will always be one of my favourite video game protagonists.

Becuzisaid196d ago

No. Game was BORING. Connor was really dull. Environments, while impressive, because of the geographic location and time period were not really exciting to be in. I would love some kind of game set in there colonial American time period, but a game like AC that back then centered around parkour and vertical traversal really didn't fit those environments.

-Foxtrot196d ago

Nope

There was a lot of issues but mine is how they handled the war

They told us Connor was not going to get involved, that the war was more of a background setting for the real story and it wasn’t going to be one sided

They lied, even the cinematic E3 trailer showed Connor emerge from the Colonist side and slaughter the red coats to get to his target, inspiring the Colonists to fight back

I just thought it would have made more sense lore wise that the red coats were mostly compiled of Assassins fighting the Colonist templars who wanted to take the new world for themselves.

Since the Red coats lost the war, it would then explain how the Templars started to gain the upper hand and how on the future the assassins were mostly killed off and the Templar’s had pretty much taken over everything.

Instead it just felt like they didn’t want to p*** off the American audience

Even Haytham was cool, he should have been an Assassin through and through and should have been the main lead.

toxic-inferno196d ago

The game even seems to lack the humour of the other games. It almost seems as though the idea of even slightly making fun of American history wouldn't be acceptable.

-Foxtrot196d ago

Exactly

It just felt super safe

“Better not make the colonists look super bad incase people boycott our game”

jeromeface195d ago

someone missed the whole point

-Foxtrot195d ago

There was literally no point

What I've just said above would at least make sense lore wise and why the Assassins start to loose their war, die off and how the Templars are in control in the future of almost everything....what they did was just, pointless

CrimsonWing69196d ago

I’m one one of those weird people that liked Ass Creed 3, but to be fair I never got around to finishing it.

Show all comments (28)
240°

5 Of the Most Unlikeable Video Game Protagonists

There are good video game protagonists, and there are bad video game protagonists.

Read Full Story >>
gameluster.com
207d ago
GhostScholar207d ago (Edited 207d ago )

I disagree that max is unlikable. Chloe is infinitely more unlikable in my opinion.

gold_drake207d ago

omg chloe was awful. i really hated her at the end haha

Cacabunga206d ago

Abby was absolute trash protagonist in every way..
Tidus was so meh to me..
On villain side, the one i didn’t like wa Micah, because they wanted him to be that way and it was brilliant👍🏽

Rancegamerx206d ago

I agree, I liked Max, Chloe was a horrible friend and a bad influence.

Cacabunga206d ago

Everyone agrees on chloe, I’m sure even ND do.

H9206d ago

Both are horrible, granted Chloe is infinitely worse, it feels like Chloe is just fanservice for people who too over the edge and wasn't written to be a character that makes sense

GooGobbler207d ago

What about that Forspoken Tw*t

MrChow666206d ago

exactly I was expecting it to be a the top of the list

ravens52206d ago

Ye I was expecting her too. Guess they actually played the game. Unlike you and whoever agrees.

gpimlott206d ago

I played through the whole game and think she is one of the worst character Ive ever played as

ravens52205d ago (Edited 205d ago )

gpimlott. How?

Stanjara196d ago

Why would I payed and played the game if the whole internet is making fun of a character?

-Im here to kill Chaos...are you Chaos?

Yeah, I didn't play that game either.

Christopher206d ago (Edited 206d ago )

She's actually not bad. It's the writing itself that is bad overall, but she's fine overall. She's no worse than Miles Morales IMHO. Both thrust into a spotlight and receiving both praise and blame and dealing with it.

Forspoken is a bland game because it's 75% bland, boring, repetitive going through the motions and diversions that add nothing of the value with purposefully gated memory moments that don't feel organic or like you're discovering things but waiting for others to reveal things.

ravens52206d ago

Exactly Chris. Even though I liked the game. I kno u played it. People who actually played it and went thru her dream saw she was a good likeable person who really just acted out due to being alone and unloved. I think your problem is it was open world, I think if it was more linear you may have liked it better.

savedsynner206d ago

Oh no she's bad. Very unlikable even before you add on the bad dialogue. The game could have been quite good with a good protagonist

ravens52206d ago

For all the people like synner. Shes actually half white lol. Inferior complexity is a hell of a thing. You'll be ok.

Nerdmaster207d ago

Most of these aren't even that bad. Especially comparing to others like Squall "Whatever" Leonhart, Forspoken's Frey, and the guy from Atomic Heart.

-Foxtrot206d ago

Squall is one of the best developed main FF characters so...

People talk about his "whatever" thing thats at the start of the game, not the character he eventually becomes in the end.

Nerdmaster206d ago

No amount of "character development", (especially the ones that for me feels sudden and undeserved like Squall's), will justify him being a d**k to my girl Quistis. Even if he found the cure for cancer, from that moment on, I would never like him.
The article is about being unlikeable, and he was indeed unlikeable for at least half of the game.

BrainSyphoned206d ago

Squall is the best protagonists in FF so you can go whatever yourself.

H9206d ago

My good sir, I need to steal that "you can go whatever yourself" because it's gold

BlaqMagiq1206d ago

Except Squall has actual character development.

gold_drake206d ago (Edited 206d ago )

the "watever" is only present in the english localisation.
so your argument doesnt rly ... stand imo.

Nerdmaster206d ago

Good for you that you could enjoy the japanese version. That's not the case for me and the majority of people here, though.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 206d ago
gold_drake207d ago (Edited 207d ago )

i had to stop reading after the "blatant misogyny" in the Dantes inferno section.

i actually liked Max haha.

the forspoken chick is missing tho

Show all comments (49)