Current Events > IGN: pokemon ss best pokemon game ever. Lets see how it stacks to past reviews

(+) Yeah! (+)

Red & Blue: 10
Yellow: 10
Gold & Silver: 10
Crystal: 9.0
Ruby & Sapphire: 9.5
Emerald: 8.0
FireRed & LeafGreen: 9.0
Diamond & Pearl: 8.5
Platinum: 8.8
HeartGold and SoulSilver: 8.5
Black & White: 9.0
Black 2 & White 2: 9.6
X & Y: 9.0
Omega Ruby & Alpha Sapphire: 7.8
Sun & Moon: 9.0
Ultra Sun & Ultra Moon: 9.0
Let's Go Pikachu & Let's Go Eevee: 8.3
Sword & Shield: 9.3

Info source:
https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/boards/259372-pokemon-sword/78157275/930077584

It's worth noting that every one of those reviews was probably written by a different person

---

MC_BatCommander posted...

It's worth noting that every one of those reviews was probably written by a different person

A person who speaks for their magazine/site/brand however.

darkphoenix181 posted...

MC_BatCommander posted...

It's worth noting that every one of those reviews was probably written by a different person

A person who speaks for their magazine/site/brand however.

Not all journalists must be beholden to their company's editorial board especially when it comes to matters of personal opinion such as reviews. Shocking idea, I know, but it's true.
---

Paragon21XX posted...

Not all journalists must be beholden to their company's editorial board especially when it comes to matters of personal opinion such as reviews. Shocking idea, I know, but it's true.

Even with this, that person speaks for themselves yet only gave the BEST ever a 9.3

Literally gave lets go a higher score than ORAS.
---

Paragon21XX posted...

darkphoenix181 posted...

MC_BatCommander posted...

It's worth noting that every one of those reviews was probably written by a different person

A person who speaks for their magazine/site/brand however.

Not all journalists must be beholden to their company's editorial board especially when it comes to matters of personal opinion such as reviews. Shocking idea, I know, but it's true.

Yeah, they have the option to let someone else write the review instead if they dont want to give it a decent review
---

darkphoenix181 posted...

A person who speaks for their magazine/site/brand however.

"I can't give this game this score or this good of a review because some guy who used to work here said this other game in the series was the best ever 15 years ago. Better alter my opinion."

Sounds like a valid way to review a game.

---

darkphoenix181 posted...

Even with this, that person speaks for themselves yet only gave the BEST ever a 9.3

You say only as if a 9.3 isn't a really good score

The best in a series can still be flawed or lacking in ways

---

darkphoenix181 posted...

Paragon21XX posted...

Not all journalists must be beholden to their company's editorial board especially when it comes to matters of personal opinion such as reviews. Shocking idea, I know, but it's true.

Even with this, that person speaks for themselves yet only gave the BEST ever a 9.3

Because the best Pokemon can still only be so good compared to adult video games.
---

MC_BatCommander posted...

It's worth noting that every one of those reviews was probably written by a different person

Regardless of this fact, I find this hilarious:

Ruby & Sapphire: 9.5
Omega Ruby & Alpha Sapphire: 7.8

---

Emerald having the 2nd lowest score should tell you all you need to know.
---

MC_BatCommander posted...

You say only as if a 9.3 isn't a really good score

The best in a series can still be flawed or lacking in ways

Except within ign other games got a 10 so if things hold this one back from the reviewers personal ability to give it a 10 as well, they must not believe it is indeed the best ever.

darkphoenix181 posted...

Except within ign other games got a 10 so if things hold this one back from the reviewers personal ability to give it a 10 as well, they must not believe it is indeed the best ever.

That's some dizzying logic

---

darkphoenix181 posted...

Even with this, that person speaks for themselves yet only gave the BEST ever a 9.3

Well yeah, have to leave yourself room to call at least 7 future Pokmon games "the best ever"
---

Regardless of anything, Red/Blue do not fucking deserve 10/10. Those games were addictive but not a "masterpiece", as per IGNs definition of the scale.

BW2 having the highest score makes the most sense, considering, despite what Casey says, those games were legitimately the best games in the series.
---

did you watch dunkey's video about video game journalists? he high lights this very issue. they're inconsistent because they're so many different reviewers
---

LostForest posted...

Regardless of anything, Red/Blue do not fucking deserve 10/10. Those games were addictive but not a "masterpiece", as per IGNs definition of the scale.

BW2 having the highest score makes the most sense, considering, despite what Casey says, those games were legitimately the best games in the series.

I'm fine with Red/Blue getting a 10/10, because ultimately those games are what started the series.

---

Tmaster148 posted...

LostForest posted...

Regardless of anything, Red/Blue do not fucking deserve 10/10. Those games were addictive but not a "masterpiece", as per IGNs definition of the scale.

BW2 having the highest score makes the most sense, considering, despite what Casey says, those games were legitimately the best games in the series.

I'm fine with Red/Blue getting a 10/10, because ultimately those games are what started the series.

But they're objectively unbalanced, broken, and filled with glitches and mistakes... Sprites don't match up to the official character designs, certain attacks flat out do not work the way they're described to... Those games are a fucking mess.

Like I said, I enjoyed them when I was 8 because they were addictive, but frig they genuinely deserve like a 7.0 at best, and that's giving them a free point because the concept was original at the time.
---

LostForest posted...

But they're objectively unbalanced, broken, and filled with glitches and mistakes... Sprites don't match up to the official character designs, certain attacks flat out do not work the way they're described to... Those games are a fucking mess.

Like I said, I enjoyed them when I was 8 because they were addictive, but frig they genuinely deserve like a 7.0 at best, and that's giving them a free point because the concept was original at the time.

Have you ever replayed them?

How many times?

ORAS is stupidly low.

darkphoenix181 posted...

LostForest posted...

But they're objectively unbalanced, broken, and filled with glitches and mistakes... Sprites don't match up to the official character designs, certain attacks flat out do not work the way they're described to... Those games are a fucking mess.

Like I said, I enjoyed them when I was 8 because they were addictive, but frig they genuinely deserve like a 7.0 at best, and that's giving them a free point because the concept was original at the time.

Have you ever replayed them?

How many times?

I replayed both Red and Yellow on the 3DS virtual console years ago to recreate my original teams from my original versions of those games. (Which ironically I cannot transfer into SwSh now lol)

Before that, I replayed then once or twice on emulators over the years.

Meanwhile, I didn't like Gold/Silver back in the day but replaying them on the 3DS, I really enjoyed them and understood why people are always giving such high praise.
---

MARKINGRAM22 posted...

ORAS is stupidly low.

Don't like water

I know for a fact that its nowhere near as bad as those complaining about the Pokdex make it out to be. Pokmons fan base is mostly casual players who like trying out new teams and experiencing the story.
---

WerewolfPaws posted...

I know for a fact that its nowhere near as bad as those complaining about the Pokdex make it out to be. Pokmons fan base is mostly casual players who like trying out new teams and experiencing the story.

No doubt. Still IGN is way too inconsistent.
You can say they are different reviewers all you want, still no excuse. They should have a standard. Ex: add points for something, subtract for others.

This shows they basically have none and the current reviewers throws a dart or somethint else...

9.3, just enough water, almost the perfect balance.
---

darkphoenix181 posted...

No doubt. Still IGN is way too inconsistent.
You can say they are different reviewers all you want, still no excuse. They should have a standard. Ex: add points for something, subtract for others.

This shows they basically have none and the current reviewers throws a dart or somethint else...

You're saying they should objectively review video games

---

MC_BatCommander posted...

You're saying they should objectively review video games

It would not be objective because the reviewer can say "it has good music, according to our standards that is 2 points"
"Gameplay is well designed, 3 points"

Those are subjective.

BUT, it helps align reviews.

Ex: can't go, "this game is a 10 because it had one thing I really really liked despite these 20 flaws..."

Emerald: 8.0
HeartGold and SoulSilver: 8.5

Wtf????? Way too low
---

darkphoenix181 posted...

It would not be objective because the reviewer can say "it has good music, according to our standards that is 2 points"
"Gameplay is well designed, 3 points"

Those are subjective.

BUT, it helps align reviews.

Ex: can't go, "this game is a 10 because it had one thing I really really liked despite these 20 flaws..."

But that wouldn't end up changing anything that's wrong with these massive sites hosting dozens of reviewers. You're still gonna see inconsistent voices no matter what you do

---

For all you know, the reviewer rated the past Pokemon games much lower like a 5-8 score, but this is the best Pokemon game in his opinion which is why it's a 9.
---

Prestoff posted...

For all you know, the reviewer rated the past Pokemon games much lower like a 5-8 score, but this is the best Pokemon game in his opinion which is why it's a 9.

Sounds like the kind of person whose review means nothing.

---

Tmaster148 posted...

Prestoff posted...

For all you know, the reviewer rated the past Pokemon games much lower like a 5-8 score, but this is the best Pokemon game in his opinion which is why it's a 9.

Sounds like the kind of person whose review means nothing.

Every review is subjective, so yeah. Objectively trying to review art is kind of pointless.
---

darkphoenix181 posted...

Omega Ruby & Alpha Sapphire: 7.8
Sword & Shield: 9.3

What the fuck.
---

Ruby/Sapphire got a 9.5, but literal upgrades got 7.8 and 8

PowerOats posted...

Ruby/Sapphire got a 9.5, but literal upgrades got 7.8 and 8

Also, this is a really good point.
---

PowerOats posted...

Ruby/Sapphire got a 9.5, but literal upgrades got 7.8 and 8

A website is not a hivemind; each reviewer has their own opinions. Also, the games were released, what, 15 years apart?
---

Antifar posted...

PowerOats posted...

Ruby/Sapphire got a 9.5, but literal upgrades got 7.8 and 8

A website is not a hivemind; each reviewer has their own opinions. Also, the games were released, what, 15 years apart?

It's literally the same game but upgraded. There is no logical reason for the score to be lower.
---

dave_is_slick posted...

Antifar posted...

PowerOats posted...

Ruby/Sapphire got a 9.5, but literal upgrades got 7.8 and 8

A website is not a hivemind; each reviewer has their own opinions. Also, the games were released, what, 15 years apart?

It's literally the same game but upgraded. There is no logical reason for the score to be lower.

Two different people are giving the scores!
---

masterpug53 posted...

Emerald having the 2nd lowest score should tell you all you need to know.

I think in their review they say the low score is due to the lack of changes from Ruby/Sapphire but still yeah, Emerald is S-Tier. Probably second after B2/W2
---

dave_is_slick posted...

It's literally the same game but upgraded. There is no logical reason for the score to be lower.

What? You expect the editorial board to decide on a score and tell the article writer to tailor the review to fit that score (or something along those lines)?

---

IGN is full of shit. I stopped giving a damn about them when Naomi Kyle left them in the dust.
---

dave_is_slick posted...

Antifar posted...

PowerOats posted...

Ruby/Sapphire got a 9.5, but literal upgrades got 7.8 and 8

A website is not a hivemind; each reviewer has their own opinions. Also, the games were released, what, 15 years apart?

It's literally the same game but upgraded. There is no logical reason for the score to be lower.

So should PS4 MediEvil be scored higher than how it scored on PS1?
---

I just don't get people like TC who think a reviewer has to temper their opinion in accordance with every other person employed by their website, past and present.

It's such a baffling implication to make. Imagine being hired by IGN and told to make sure you adjust your opinions and reviews so they never contradict anything anybody else who's worked there has ever said and fully agree with all the other people there about everything.
---

pikachupwnage posted...

Literally gave lets go a higher score than ORAS.

ORAS was trash.
---