I just have to say this, yeah I know my name has Sonic in it but I'm not a big fan like was wen i was younger, but i don't get this, IGN plays the game and rates then, and if they get a bad review or low ratings, then less people intend to buy them, Doesn't it matter more about your own opinion? Yeah sonic Black Knight is short but it is kinda fun, and the sword may be kinda weird but it' not horrible, theres more things to say but I dont want to sound like a hater, but nice review.
u kno how like a new game is released? 8mins later ign posts theyr review? how do they post it that quik? probaly cos they dont even play it long enough to actualy finish it, also i jsut herd 'fighting running fighting running fighting running its so boring!!'
isnt that what games like god of war is? but u guys still put like a 9.5 or somthing near 10/10 but u giv like sonic games a complete shiit 3/10
@Hobnomb Not reall. your point was they release reviews early so that means they don't really play the games. but since they get the games before most people they have time to play the games.
Your second point was the gave sonic and a the black knights a bad score because of runing and fighting, and you said god of war is nothing but runing and fighting (there are puzzles) and wonder why they gave the God of war 9.5 and sonic 3, Well god of war has a better combat system.
@Visser0x I kno that they had to rush it, and i am a huge fan of GOW, its just sonic isnt that bad as they say, the game is decent not below average...
@Visser0x Totally. That must be why they only reviewed half the game. And after seeing their mistake, rather than say redoing the review, they just spliced in new video footage in their old one. Hot damn, now THAT is quality!
@Visser0x Okay, focus with me. You seem to be intentionally swaying from the subject. The topic here was that the review was rushed, and IGN fucked up. I'm sorry, that part is not debatable. They could have said the game was great for all I care, but the time and effort (if you even want to call it that) they put into these are subpar and lackluster...
@crazy4guitar3000 The review wasn't rushed there is no proof what so ever that the review was rushed. reviewers get early copies of the game so that they can put out a review of it on the day of the release the put the same if not more amount of time in their reviews as anyone else.
@Visser0x Again, I could care less WHEN the video was released. Their original written review on their site claimed that the Black Knight was the final boss, whereas he wasn't, that's the 50% mark. This is something known and why the Sonic fanbase claims the reviews are rushed. The irony is that you're defending IGN from claims you think they don't deserve, where we Sonic fans feel the exact same way, except with Sonic...
@crazy4guitar3000 It be a huge spoiler to find out who the final boss is in this game, seeing as said final boss helped you in the begining while the black kinght was seemingly the main villian.
LOL Aweome background! Thats hilarious! ^_^ I like Sonic and Mario both equally. But after fighting with some idiots, I relize that Sonic is getting a little off topic. I enjoy seeing something new in Sonic games, but why does Sonic need a sword when he has his quills? I loved uleashed though! The Werehog was a nice twist. I hate Ign but I sorta agree that Sonic really did not need a sword...
@KRAZY7777 IGN is the greatest company in the world, the only other companies i know of that can get millions of nerd butt hurt like they do is youtube and EA.
LMAO at the Angry Sonic Fan's mail, some fanboys really need to get a life and learn how to separate reality and fantasy.
Besides, one could easily ignore these type of reviews, since what should actually matter to a gamer is his/her own opinion.
I do agree though that Sonic Unleashed was underrated, but whining/complaining won't do much, other than ruining the Sonic fanbase's reputation. BTW, comparing a Mario with a Sonic game is completely naive, when clearly both play and act different ;P
Okay. But it still is not a sonic game. But It's actually really a spinoff to the main series. Nevertheless the game still is not very good your always bombarded by many enemies.
Craig reviewed it becaused he reviewed NSMB for the DS. I understand that Matt is (or has been) the big guy on the IGN Nintendo Team, but that doesn't mean that he can't always have the big games. For example, Mark Bozon reviewed Dead Space: Extraction and Mario Kart Wii, even Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2, of all of the editors there.
*sigh* this is sad...and an embrassment to sonic fans from back in the day...which includes me. sonic is treated as a FREAKIN JOKE IN THE GAME INDUSTRY, and the stupid fanboys who are making death threats over this are just making things worse!
HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA , you guys are soooo right this game is sooo shit (i like the graphics alot)
@DRelSniper I would never consider calling Sonic a classic character. He's like Crash Bandicoot. He had a few decent games and thats it. But unlike Crash, Sonic has turned into the biggest joke in the video game fanbase. With terrible games, obnoxious side characters and a fanbase full of whiny kids, furfags and pedophiles, Sonic the Hedgehog is now considered the biggest LOSER that gaming has ever seen.
FYE, A classic character would be more like Mario, Mega Man, Solid Snake or Donkey Kong.
I loved all sonic's up until sonic heroes which sucked a bit and i'm a HUGE sonic fan... i do think they progressively did get better following the Heroes games...
The notion that he sucks is wrong, I just think that there isn't enough thought going into a lot of his games like originally... to me... Sonic Adventure 1 was amazing and my favorite sonic game to date...
I agree with uzimakishadow completely but when you like a certain game and someone says you have a shitty taste in games or you are not a real gamer that is where the line is crossed. When a game reviewer states his/her opinion on a game thats fine but don't go around and tell people that your opinion is dominant among others and should conform with it.
Are you kidding me? Do you hate Matt because he's too critical of games? That's his job, in case you were wondering. I'd like you to prove to me which of his reviews have been terrible. While I can agree that not everyone is perfect, I think that Matt has done a terrific job as a video game critic.
Sure, he likes some series, and that's why he reviews them. That's why Mark Bozon reviews RPGs more often, and Craig Harris some RPGs as well as puzzles and platformers, etc. However, I don't see any fanboy vibe from him at all, and come on dude, he's had TWELVE YEARS of experience with his work.
Well Sonic and the Black knight was a lot better and more fun than Sonic and the secret rings in my opinion.
I hated that you were forced to do hundreds of really boring special missions where you must collect rings or kill enemies and stuff like that before you can get to the next normal stage.
For the most part on the Black knight you can only do the normal story levels and avoid the special missions if you want.
7:39 WHOA WHOA WHOA!!! Wait a minute, did he just that if we like this game then we're not gamers, we're not people who like good games. Gee, I didn't know that if I don't hate the same games they hate I'm not a gamer. Wow, I usually defend IGN, but that insults even me, the people who stick up for them. It's one thing to hear that from a trash talking 12 year old in a comment box, but that was from grown men in a professional business, no, fuck that, fuck reviews from everybody from now on.
I think that letter someone wrote was uncalled for. But I'm confused about something. Why did they give Adventure 1 an 8/10 but SADX a 5/10 were they're the exact same game. Why did they give Nex Gen a 4.8 compared to Unleashed's 4.5, Unleashed is GOD compared to Nex Gen. Why did they complain about the werehog the most yet give the Wii a higher score whereas the Wii has MORE WEREHOG??!? I don't understand...
@IMADRWILY My point was that IGN's logic as a whole is flawed. Besides, I use to respect IGN, that was before this podcast where they went out of their way just to stick it Sonic fans. Very immature behavior for a "professional" company. Their reviews are rushed, inherently biased, can't play worth a damn, and have illogical scoring structures (Colors loses points for difficult sections? Epic fail). The saddest thing is that they get paid for this...
just because IGN gave Sonic Rush a good score doesnt mean anything they gave it a good score because its just like the 2D Sonic games the problem with IGN is that they cant leave the past in which its the new gaming era which 3D is now the thing for games the 2D era is over not for portable games but later on i bet the 2D portable games are going to be going to 3D portable games so Sega is doing great with 2D but ya they need to focus on 3D so they can stay and so Sonic can stay
i am a sonic and you know what i dont understand why ppl dont criticize the mario hubworlds and then sonic has hubworlds then they criticize them i rented SBK its good but ya its to short makes sense like it took them after SU 4 or 5 months anyway so ya SU is a different story where IGN failed in my opnion theres lots of proof like where they had Sonic fall and saying the controls are not responsive thats a lie and the werehog stages are ok for Knuckles which could be a gameplay for him
Mario Hub worlds serve no other purpose than to link all of the levels, and in 64/sunshine a little bit of exploration and experimentation would offer up hidden stages and stars. In sonic, You're forced to complete stupid and dull mini games in order to progress through the game. You have to sit through inane text conversations with ugly, out of place npc's to find out where to go. Sonic Adventure 2 got it right.
Nintendrones come to the rescue for their idol, as I predicted. Mario hubworlds are just as useless as the ones in Unleashed, if not more. Name one instance where you're FORCED to complete "stupid and dull minigames" and talk to NPC's in SU. If you talk to an NPC or choose to help them, it's by your own CHOICE.
If there is ONE thing that you're forced to do in Unleashed, it's collect medals. If you played the game, you would've known that, so you're obviously talking out of your ass.
why didn't canvas curse get dissed because you were a ball?
Why didn't Zelda II get dissed for being a side scroller?
why didn't Jak II get dissed for turning the series into a mature route?
BECAUSE THE GAMEPLAY WAS GOOD.
it could be the worst gimmick in any series, ever, but if the levels around the player are designed cleverly, who cares? the reviewers dont hate the sword-they hate the game wasn't designed better to incorporate it.
actually does anyone remember Yoshi's Safari? It was a game on the Snes where Mario shot goombas and koopa's to get to the next level. A MARIO FIRST PERSON SHOOTER?! now which sounds better: Mario using a gun or Sonic with a sword? Easy! The latter! god Ignorant Gaming Noobs are so bias it's not even funny.
What gets me is that they appear to have realized the charm in Secret Rings' upgrade system, which is good, but then FAIL to see what BK's offers. Stopping for villagers? Try leveling Knight style and you get a skill to do the events automatically and you keep running. Stand still to fight? Paladin style's Crest of Fire lets you attack while running. Hell, with Cavalier style at full blast this goes at SU and SSR speeds as far as running goes.
Plus, they make NO mention of the other playable characters- which, combined with the time they gave for how quickly the game can be beaten- makes me wonder if they stopped at the fake ending halfway through. C'mon, you really think that "Yes, I did it!" would be the last line of the game? Then again, they mentioned extra missions after the game, so maybe I'm completely off. I'd give this game a 7/10 overall.
I love the Sonic series but it's plaged with so many god awful games. Is sega even trying any more? They need to fire the dumb shits working on games like black knight and Sonic(Next gen) and get a better team working on it.
Do you have anything good at all to say. And yes i like the game and i think you guys just dont like sonic period. Name one sonic game that youve given higher than a 7.5 that doesnt belong to handheld console. Also just because people like this game doesnt meen they like bad games. This game was honestly a good game. Yes i agree the villager think sucks but sword play and boss fight are cool. No its not a game that deserves a 9 but it deserves at least a 6. This was a one time thing for Sonic.
i actually didnt mind stopping for villagers. and besides i think its better than 6 i actually think its a 9, i just love how sonic slashes through the air with no stopping at all (do not go against me on that if u have to stop to fight then its ur fault and ur fault only)
This is fucking gay. IGN doesn't even deserve to have an opinion, it's obvious they're bad at the games (look at how they played the demos at comic con compared to Gamespot >_>), so because they suck so much with them, they either don't complete it or just think it's automatically bad. Secret Rings was anything. Half the time I can't see where I'm slashing in BK because I'm moving so fast. And how come people want Sonic to have speed and nothing more? Let's think about this...
Remember Sonic 1? Or Sonic 2? 3? Knuckles? When were those games speedy? I'll admit, they have their fast parts, but I have Sonic 1 downloaded ON MY WII and have played the entire game, and every few seconds you come to a screeching halt to kill enemies or time a jump or dodge something. Let's compare the Adventure games to Unleashed. Unleashed was hella faster, yet the Adventure Games were mildly fast with good platforming. When has Sonic ONLY been about Speed and nothing else?
What about Mario? He was originally all about going from one end of the level to the other, while using power ups and stomping on goombas. Now, he's about running around in a hub level collecting stars, either by melee (64), water gun (Sunshine) or, as IGN calls it, 'waggle' (Galaxy). And you know what? They all got good reviews, because they were damn good games, despite being a departure from the Super Mario Bros/World games.
So what's wrong if Sonic does something differently? I don't get it. Sonic was never as fast as people say he was in the older 2D Games or Adventure games as he is now. I love the Mario series, don't get me wrong. They try something new, I play before judging, and most of the time, I love it. Same goes for Sonic. When I saw NP's cover, not once did I say "Oh great, Sonic with a sword, gay..." or "This will be awesome!" I waited until I tried it. And I loved it.
So I don't see why IGN and the fanbase continue to get their panties in a bunch whenever something new arises with Sonic. Just like people argued about the Werehog. The Werehog himself was not the problem, but how he was handled. He had too many levels spammed, but if Unleashed had more balance, the werehog could've been better, but no one will ever admit that I'm sure. People just want to bitch about everything. When it comes down to it, everyone is fucking bias.
Ill have to play this game myself, since secret rings used a good engine, but this is the SAME engine used there, I dont see how the sequel which uses the SAME engine can be soo bad. I do belive however that they should play the WHOLE game before they review it.
Shut the Fuck Up! Ign Does'nt Hate sonic.They just hate How Bad And Gimmicky The series is now(Except for Unleashed which was'nt bad it was good).Im Not a fan of IGN.I just hate how fanboys are overreacting.
Especially since the game is actually good; according to what they say, it's pretty obvious that they just didn't try to figure out how to play the game well.
the game is trash. I dont usually agree with ign. because they dont know how to review a good game.usually they suck ass when it comes to reviews. but Im gonna have to go with ign on this one. this game is a failed zelda game. what the fuck does sonic need a sword for anyway? if your the self proclaimed "fastest thing alive" why do you need a sword? sega is trashing their own icon and thats just sad......
You haven't even played the game, otherwise you'd know that sword or not, it plays absolutely nothing like Zelda. It's really good once you've got everything figured out.
I didnt say it played like the zelda game. I said it was a failed zelda game. sonic has been out for years. and I Dont recall him having to use a sword. I Know sega is trying to keep the product fresh. but a sword...... atleast in unleash they kept the classic speedster by day and have the transformations at night. ive seen the gameplay its repetitive . the story for the game was interesting . but to be honest they could have given this gimmick to another character. or make a new hedgehog.
What's the point of using a ten-point scale if you're only going to use five of them? Methinks they should just stick to five-point or four-star reviews.
Also, why doesn't anybody criticize reviewers for giving high reviews to bad games? It's always low reviews on "good" games that upsets people.
This is the Wii section of IGN, completely different team than the 360. They weren't the ones who reviewed Sonic 06, heck they probably never even played it. Thats how. Now stop giving a shit about their score if you know you're going to enjoy the game. If everyone got uppity just because someone didnt like something there'd be no time to actually enjoy anything.
Hahaha, I may disagree with their review, but they deserve props for making this commentary. Hopefully Sonic fans will continue to insult them so IGN has more material to use.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
Dear Dumbasses:
Sonic and the Black Knight is a shitty game for two reasons.
It is not a Sonic game. As stated before, this game is not fast paced, it's all about combat, and involves shitty stories and interacting worlds. It's not what the series was years ago, and sucks in this category.
It is not a good game in general. It is boring, repetitive, and the controls are clunky. It's the same action over and over, and it's linear. Nothing fun.
This isn't the first game where that's done. Even in early Sonic games you had to do that to avoid being crushed by obstacles so I don't see what the big deal is...
It would be different if they were giving CONSTRUCTIVE criticisms, but all they're doing is bashing on Sonic. You can can clearly hear them laughing, they ENJOY bashing on Sonic.
They're only doing it because Sonic fans won't stop sending them poorly worded hate mail. If you even watched their video review, you'd know that they though the game did a lot of things right, sans gameplay.
Hell if anyone actually read the review the whole way through, you'd see the two things that get low marks are the gameplay and lasting appeal. Everything else is in the high 7s and low 8s
Graphics does not a game make. It scored high in Graphics and Sound. It scored low in Gameplay and Lasting Replay, meaning that they did not find it appealing or fun. It averaged out to shit.
#1) You're saying that they're bashing Sonic just to get back at the Sonic fans?!?! That ain't right.
#2) They act like if we don't agree with their ridiculous score, then we're automatically crazy Sonic fans whose opinions don't matter. #3) The ONE letter that they decided to read doesn't represent every Sonic fan. EVERY game reviewer gets those kinds of letters.
#4) The lowest a game should get is a 5 or 6. Giving it a 5 means it gets an F, it failed, it sucks, giving it anything lower than that is just them going out of their way to stick it to Sonic.
#5) Apparently IGN DOESN'T think this game did anything right...because they gave it a 3.9.
All of your points display such a high level of ignorance that you're actually making me defend IGN.
1- Thats not what he said at all.
2- No, they act like if you send a huge tidal wave of backlash for a score that represents their opinion you're a crazy sonic fan.
3 and 4- This is stupid and I hate you, you ignorant fool.
5- NO. WRONG. YOU DOLT. DID YOU READ THE FRIGGIN REVIEW. THEY ENJOYED EVERYTHING BUT ACTUALLY PLAYING IT. A GAME IS FOR PLAYING. THATS WHY IT GOT A LOW SCORE YOU MORON.
1) Yes he did. "They're doing it (giving low scores) because Sonic fans keep sending them poorly worded hate mail."
2) EVERY game reviewer gets those letters for every game. EVERY.
3 & 4) LOL
5) Did YOU read the review. They HATED this game. He said he wanted to kill himself playing this game. He said the only good thing were the graphics and medieval menu theme. This guy exaggerates too much.
Well of course that's my opinion, that's the whole point. Why should I care about anything other than my opinion concerning this game?
From what I've seen, my opinion lines up with theirs, which means I PROBABLY shouldn't buy it. If somebody else disagrees with them, they would PROBABLY enjoy it.
It's not like IGN objectively decides whether a game is good or not. People just can't figure out to take this kinda thing with a grain of salt.
You do know IGN is pretty much against Sonic, regardless of what SEGA tries to do? I don't really care about people's opinions; I just keep seeing that people are trying to set their opinions in stone; if you're not one of them, then I apologize...there's just too much fuss going on for seemingly nothing at all.
Well, that's not true at all. Matt gave Wii Unleashed a 7.2, which it deserved (okay game, better than Heroes, Shadow and 2006, but a very watered-down game compared to its Next-Gen counterpart, and the Sonic:Werehog ratio was terrible).
The 360 review of Unleashed was the journalistic equivalent of an abortion, though. I dunno where that guy pulled that review from.
At any rate, people need to stop making a big deal over this. It's not like Sonic is the sweetheart of the gaming press anyway.
Well, I'm sure IGN will ignore this comment, considering the username I have. Just saying, that not everyone hates the game. I also don't get what's so wrong with slowing down and taking on enemies? Speed isn't the ONLY thing that matters in Sonic. This game wasn't meant to have as big of a focus on speed. I admit, it's not that good. More like a 6 or 5 out of 10. Also it's really childish of you guys to say that people who like this game don't like good games. Opinion.
No loops? What were these guy on?
megatron0302 3 months ago
Nintendo fanboys.
Syeedthehedgehog 8 months ago
@Syeedthehedgehog they can't here you over the sound of them throwing money at nintendo.
Visser0x 7 months ago
The only Sonic game I didn't like was '06, but I've yet to play Secret Rings and Black Knight.
Antifrost 1 year ago
I love how they act like their opinion is absolute. That's why I despise IGNorgant.
usernamessuck58 1 year ago 5
@usernamessuck58 of course they are everyone does every thinks they're opinion is a fact.
Visser0x 7 months ago
I just have to say this, yeah I know my name has Sonic in it but I'm not a big fan like was wen i was younger, but i don't get this, IGN plays the game and rates then, and if they get a bad review or low ratings, then less people intend to buy them, Doesn't it matter more about your own opinion? Yeah sonic Black Knight is short but it is kinda fun, and the sword may be kinda weird but it' not horrible, theres more things to say but I dont want to sound like a hater, but nice review.
Sonickuforever 1 year ago
u kno how like a new game is released? 8mins later ign posts theyr review? how do they post it that quik? probaly cos they dont even play it long enough to actualy finish it, also i jsut herd 'fighting running fighting running fighting running its so boring!!'
isnt that what games like god of war is? but u guys still put like a 9.5 or somthing near 10/10 but u giv like sonic games a complete shiit 3/10
Hobnomb 1 year ago
@Hobnomb reviewers get games early, they get it so they can play it and have the review ready on release date.
God of war has better combat than any of the sonic games.
Visser0x 7 months ago
@Visser0x aaannnddd? my point still stands, and why would u want to reply a 1 year old comment?!
Hobnomb 7 months ago
@Hobnomb Not reall. your point was they release reviews early so that means they don't really play the games. but since they get the games before most people they have time to play the games.
Your second point was the gave sonic and a the black knights a bad score because of runing and fighting, and you said god of war is nothing but runing and fighting (there are puzzles) and wonder why they gave the God of war 9.5 and sonic 3, Well god of war has a better combat system.
Im a knight of IGN.
Visser0x 7 months ago
@Visser0x I kno that they had to rush it, and i am a huge fan of GOW, its just sonic isnt that bad as they say, the game is decent not below average...
Im a knight of Freedom, I Am Optimus Prime...
Hobnomb 7 months ago
@Hobnomb They din't rush, its just their opinion that this is a bad game.
Visser0x 7 months ago
@Visser0x Totally. That must be why they only reviewed half the game. And after seeing their mistake, rather than say redoing the review, they just spliced in new video footage in their old one. Hot damn, now THAT is quality!
crazy4guitar3000 4 months ago
@crazy4guitar3000 They didn't make any mistakes, this game is not a great game nor is a it a good game its an ok game at best.
Visser0x 4 months ago
@Visser0x Okay, focus with me. You seem to be intentionally swaying from the subject. The topic here was that the review was rushed, and IGN fucked up. I'm sorry, that part is not debatable. They could have said the game was great for all I care, but the time and effort (if you even want to call it that) they put into these are subpar and lackluster...
crazy4guitar3000 4 months ago
@crazy4guitar3000 The review wasn't rushed there is no proof what so ever that the review was rushed. reviewers get early copies of the game so that they can put out a review of it on the day of the release the put the same if not more amount of time in their reviews as anyone else.
Visser0x 4 months ago
@Visser0x Again, I could care less WHEN the video was released. Their original written review on their site claimed that the Black Knight was the final boss, whereas he wasn't, that's the 50% mark. This is something known and why the Sonic fanbase claims the reviews are rushed. The irony is that you're defending IGN from claims you think they don't deserve, where we Sonic fans feel the exact same way, except with Sonic...
crazy4guitar3000 4 months ago
@crazy4guitar3000 It be a huge spoiler to find out who the final boss is in this game, seeing as said final boss helped you in the begining while the black kinght was seemingly the main villian.
Visser0x 4 months ago
LOL Aweome background! Thats hilarious! ^_^ I like Sonic and Mario both equally. But after fighting with some idiots, I relize that Sonic is getting a little off topic. I enjoy seeing something new in Sonic games, but why does Sonic need a sword when he has his quills? I loved uleashed though! The Werehog was a nice twist. I hate Ign but I sorta agree that Sonic really did not need a sword...
theblackcatofchronos 1 year ago
Man, the sonic fanbase is just....dang! O_o Glad I never was a part of it
Melanchomin 1 year ago
this fan is a real loser in life , he wants 4 peoples family's to die just cause a shitty game got a (not surprising) shitty score
Mariobros01234 2 years ago
o_o They're right. There really are NO loopty-loops in SatBK. D: I just noticed that myself.
Tranisdaman 2 years ago
IGN sucks, horrible company. but this was funny! LOL....
KRAZY7777 2 years ago
@KRAZY7777 IGN is the greatest company in the world, the only other companies i know of that can get millions of nerd butt hurt like they do is youtube and EA.
Visser0x 7 months ago
LMAO at the Angry Sonic Fan's mail, some fanboys really need to get a life and learn how to separate reality and fantasy.
Besides, one could easily ignore these type of reviews, since what should actually matter to a gamer is his/her own opinion.
I do agree though that Sonic Unleashed was underrated, but whining/complaining won't do much, other than ruining the Sonic fanbase's reputation. BTW, comparing a Mario with a Sonic game is completely naive, when clearly both play and act different ;P
JumpmanYTP 2 years ago
@JumpmanYTP agreed.
puene1 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
the image in the video just increases my thought that ign are mario fanboys
Supermegaman737 2 years ago
Matt is no longer a part of the editorial pool at IGN. Basically he provides content on a part time basis.
Yoshiki03 2 years ago
Okay. But it still is not a sonic game. But It's actually really a spinoff to the main series. Nevertheless the game still is not very good your always bombarded by many enemies.
dearestjen 2 years ago
Atleast Matt explained why the game was not good and said what the flaws were.
I'm a Sonic fan, but face it fanboys! THE GAME IS NOT SONIC! I mean who wants to stop and fight enemies in a sonic game. WTF?
dearestjen 2 years ago
i actualy d that in shado the hedgehog even on lvl im notsupsed to, just for the fun of shaming a giant alien by beating him down and takin his sword
Neovenator231 2 years ago
I don't even know what your talking about.
dearestjen 2 years ago
`stopping tto beat stuff up
Neovenator231 2 years ago
still don't what your talking about anymore. Why are you talking to me still?
dearestjen 2 years ago
Craig reviewed it becaused he reviewed NSMB for the DS. I understand that Matt is (or has been) the big guy on the IGN Nintendo Team, but that doesn't mean that he can't always have the big games. For example, Mark Bozon reviewed Dead Space: Extraction and Mario Kart Wii, even Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2, of all of the editors there.
ACDCGAMER 2 years ago
Bozon was by far the most experienced COD player in the IGN office. That is why he was the best choice to review it.
Yoshiki03 2 years ago
*sigh* this is sad...and an embrassment to sonic fans from back in the day...which includes me. sonic is treated as a FREAKIN JOKE IN THE GAME INDUSTRY, and the stupid fanboys who are making death threats over this are just making things worse!
haseo890 2 years ago
lol go sonic fan! IGN=epic fail!
BlazexShadow 2 years ago 6
HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA , you guys are soooo right this game is sooo shit (i like the graphics alot)
RaRaSaMa 2 years ago
These guys are animals!
They should show more respect for classic characters like Sonic.
And they still rate themselves experts in whatever they do... Video game reviews, isn't it?
Yeah... Whatever. -.-
DRelSniper 2 years ago 3
@DRelSniper I would never consider calling Sonic a classic character. He's like Crash Bandicoot. He had a few decent games and thats it. But unlike Crash, Sonic has turned into the biggest joke in the video game fanbase. With terrible games, obnoxious side characters and a fanbase full of whiny kids, furfags and pedophiles, Sonic the Hedgehog is now considered the biggest LOSER that gaming has ever seen.
FYE, A classic character would be more like Mario, Mega Man, Solid Snake or Donkey Kong.
SuperShyGuy62 1 year ago
i bought this a few days after it came out, played it for five minutes, got bored, and havent touched it since
yoshiroks777 2 years ago
Some sonicfags are mad xD
LastRambo341 2 years ago
I loved all sonic's up until sonic heroes which sucked a bit and i'm a HUGE sonic fan... i do think they progressively did get better following the Heroes games...
The notion that he sucks is wrong, I just think that there isn't enough thought going into a lot of his games like originally... to me... Sonic Adventure 1 was amazing and my favorite sonic game to date...
idefineny 2 years ago
I agree with uzimakishadow completely but when you like a certain game and someone says you have a shitty taste in games or you are not a real gamer that is where the line is crossed. When a game reviewer states his/her opinion on a game thats fine but don't go around and tell people that your opinion is dominant among others and should conform with it.
Your own opinion matters not someone elses.
cron78 2 years ago 2
I disagree, I thought Unleashed (360) was the best Sonic game since Sonic Adventure 2, I did love Heroes none the less though.
I hated Shadow and Sonic 2006 :/
LeonSKennedy828 2 years ago 15
You'd have to be deep throating sonic to like, sonic 2006.
Visser0x 2 years ago
I didn't, I hated it even o.O
LeonSKennedy828 2 years ago
I know i was making a point.
Visser0x 2 years ago
IGN well and truly suck, especially Matt.
LeonSKennedy828 2 years ago
Dude, your falling into that fanboy category.
I've heard the read the whole review AND podcast and they were pretty much spot on.
PKRockin7 2 years ago
...*sigh*
When did I say I meant JUST this review? I haven't even played Black Knight, Matt is a terrible "reviewer" whether it's this game or not.
LeonSKennedy828 2 years ago
Are you kidding me? Do you hate Matt because he's too critical of games? That's his job, in case you were wondering. I'd like you to prove to me which of his reviews have been terrible. While I can agree that not everyone is perfect, I think that Matt has done a terrific job as a video game critic.
ACDCGAMER 2 years ago
How do you not get the insane fanboy vibe from him? Seriously?
LeonSKennedy828 2 years ago
Sure, he likes some series, and that's why he reviews them. That's why Mark Bozon reviews RPGs more often, and Craig Harris some RPGs as well as puzzles and platformers, etc. However, I don't see any fanboy vibe from him at all, and come on dude, he's had TWELVE YEARS of experience with his work.
ACDCGAMER 2 years ago
Well Sonic and the Black knight was a lot better and more fun than Sonic and the secret rings in my opinion.
I hated that you were forced to do hundreds of really boring special missions where you must collect rings or kill enemies and stuff like that before you can get to the next normal stage.
For the most part on the Black knight you can only do the normal story levels and avoid the special missions if you want.
CyberLance26 2 years ago
Comment removed
EdmacZ 2 years ago
YA RETARD!
Natsam2301 2 years ago 2
THANK U ALSO!
Natsam2301 2 years ago
it would be good if the reviewers played the game good
vidking44 2 years ago
well, if game reviews are just someone else's opinin,then why the bloody hell are you all complaining about it?
fawfulmark2 2 years ago 2
The only two 3D Sonic Games ive enjoyed have been Sonic Adventure 1 and 2. An that was wayyyy back on the dreamcast.
tobybradley 2 years ago 5
lol
swiv2d 2 years ago
7:39 WHOA WHOA WHOA!!! Wait a minute, did he just that if we like this game then we're not gamers, we're not people who like good games. Gee, I didn't know that if I don't hate the same games they hate I'm not a gamer. Wow, I usually defend IGN, but that insults even me, the people who stick up for them. It's one thing to hear that from a trash talking 12 year old in a comment box, but that was from grown men in a professional business, no, fuck that, fuck reviews from everybody from now on.
crazy4guitar3000 2 years ago 4
I think that letter someone wrote was uncalled for. But I'm confused about something. Why did they give Adventure 1 an 8/10 but SADX a 5/10 were they're the exact same game. Why did they give Nex Gen a 4.8 compared to Unleashed's 4.5, Unleashed is GOD compared to Nex Gen. Why did they complain about the werehog the most yet give the Wii a higher score whereas the Wii has MORE WEREHOG??!? I don't understand...
crazy4guitar3000 2 years ago 19
they compared it to modern games with the remake. they did the same thing with DKC for GBA.
fawfulmark2 2 years ago
@crazy4guitar3000 they have different reviewers reviewing different games
IGN isn't one person.
IMADRWILY 4 months ago
@IMADRWILY My point was that IGN's logic as a whole is flawed. Besides, I use to respect IGN, that was before this podcast where they went out of their way just to stick it Sonic fans. Very immature behavior for a "professional" company. Their reviews are rushed, inherently biased, can't play worth a damn, and have illogical scoring structures (Colors loses points for difficult sections? Epic fail). The saddest thing is that they get paid for this...
crazy4guitar3000 4 months ago
To fawfulmark2
just because IGN gave Sonic Rush a good score doesnt mean anything they gave it a good score because its just like the 2D Sonic games the problem with IGN is that they cant leave the past in which its the new gaming era which 3D is now the thing for games the 2D era is over not for portable games but later on i bet the 2D portable games are going to be going to 3D portable games so Sega is doing great with 2D but ya they need to focus on 3D so they can stay and so Sonic can stay
SonicLegendAdventure 2 years ago
k gotcha there
Supermegaman737 2 years ago
to jaleelwhite320
the last good sonic game in my opinion was sonic unleashed so yeah
Supermegaman737 2 years ago 3
i am a sonic and you know what i dont understand why ppl dont criticize the mario hubworlds and then sonic has hubworlds then they criticize them i rented SBK its good but ya its to short makes sense like it took them after SU 4 or 5 months anyway so ya SU is a different story where IGN failed in my opnion theres lots of proof like where they had Sonic fall and saying the controls are not responsive thats a lie and the werehog stages are ok for Knuckles which could be a gameplay for him
SonicLegendAdventure 2 years ago
they probably don't criticize mario hub worlds because they are GOOD, and sonic hub worlds are BAD
lawlipopper 2 years ago 2
Comment removed
EdmacZ 2 years ago
Mario Hub worlds serve no other purpose than to link all of the levels, and in 64/sunshine a little bit of exploration and experimentation would offer up hidden stages and stars. In sonic, You're forced to complete stupid and dull mini games in order to progress through the game. You have to sit through inane text conversations with ugly, out of place npc's to find out where to go. Sonic Adventure 2 got it right.
j2bags 2 years ago
Nintendrones come to the rescue for their idol, as I predicted. Mario hubworlds are just as useless as the ones in Unleashed, if not more. Name one instance where you're FORCED to complete "stupid and dull minigames" and talk to NPC's in SU. If you talk to an NPC or choose to help them, it's by your own CHOICE.
If there is ONE thing that you're forced to do in Unleashed, it's collect medals. If you played the game, you would've known that, so you're obviously talking out of your ass.
EdmacZ 2 years ago
Amen.
Koolkitties 2 years ago
<.< Mario 64 got a 9.4 and sonic adventure 2 got 8.6.
Visser0x 2 years ago
I know. and Ign doesn't even hate Sonic- they gave Rush a 9/10, for crying out loud.
fawfulmark2 2 years ago
to all you people dissing Mario sunshine:
why didn't canvas curse get dissed because you were a ball?
Why didn't Zelda II get dissed for being a side scroller?
why didn't Jak II get dissed for turning the series into a mature route?
BECAUSE THE GAMEPLAY WAS GOOD.
it could be the worst gimmick in any series, ever, but if the levels around the player are designed cleverly, who cares? the reviewers dont hate the sword-they hate the game wasn't designed better to incorporate it.
fawfulmark2 2 years ago 6
simple-because the levels designed around it kicked ass. plus the parts without FLUDD were hard as hell, yet fun.
fawfulmark2 2 years ago
actually does anyone remember Yoshi's Safari? It was a game on the Snes where Mario shot goombas and koopa's to get to the next level. A MARIO FIRST PERSON SHOOTER?! now which sounds better: Mario using a gun or Sonic with a sword? Easy! The latter! god Ignorant Gaming Noobs are so bias it's not even funny.
Silverdude500 2 years ago
What gets me is that they appear to have realized the charm in Secret Rings' upgrade system, which is good, but then FAIL to see what BK's offers. Stopping for villagers? Try leveling Knight style and you get a skill to do the events automatically and you keep running. Stand still to fight? Paladin style's Crest of Fire lets you attack while running. Hell, with Cavalier style at full blast this goes at SU and SSR speeds as far as running goes.
AfterfallAngel 2 years ago
Plus, they make NO mention of the other playable characters- which, combined with the time they gave for how quickly the game can be beaten- makes me wonder if they stopped at the fake ending halfway through. C'mon, you really think that "Yes, I did it!" would be the last line of the game? Then again, they mentioned extra missions after the game, so maybe I'm completely off. I'd give this game a 7/10 overall.
AfterfallAngel 2 years ago
People from the south aren't as stupid as Sonic fan-boys, IGN. How shameful.
KAPTAINmORGANnWo4eva 2 years ago
fully agreed man
Supermegaman737 2 years ago
plenty of bad sonic games? WTF!!!
Sonic unleashed and black knight were awsome, plus with unleashed the game is not bad, your bad at the game
Supermegaman737 2 years ago
I love the Sonic series but it's plaged with so many god awful games. Is sega even trying any more? They need to fire the dumb shits working on games like black knight and Sonic(Next gen) and get a better team working on it.
HELLO MADWORLD I'm talking to your Devs!!!!
lilparadise1989 2 years ago
7:40 made me laugh so hard XDD
milesprower0 2 years ago
man its one thing for the rating, but these guys sound like total fags
Supermegaman737 3 years ago
Top GREATEST Sonic games.
1.) Sonic The Hedgehog (ps3, of course)
2.) Shadow The Hedgehog
3.) Sonic Unleashed
4.) Sonic and the.....something rings
5.) Super Man 64........oh wait, that wasn't a Sonic game, but it was sure as heck awesome
Dman761 3 years ago 5
wtf did you take drugs, sonic the hedgehof first? you must mean that one for the dream cast
TonyS4870 2 years ago
Shadow the hedgehog? didnt that game suck? im just asking... ;o;
milesprower0 2 years ago
no its good
weegeeman64 2 years ago
a little something called sarcasm
Dman761 2 years ago
i think its kind of good
minimegandara 3 years ago
yeah me to, also for there sonic unleashed saying they finished it, i really doubt that they finished unleashed
Supermegaman737 3 years ago
IGN
Ignorant
Gaming
Noobs
SOnicpower451 3 years ago 8
This has been flagged as spam show
but sonic 1 for gba sucks....
MetaRLfunkyman123 3 years ago
nice!
ManeveluntDarkness77 3 years ago
Do you have anything good at all to say. And yes i like the game and i think you guys just dont like sonic period. Name one sonic game that youve given higher than a 7.5 that doesnt belong to handheld console. Also just because people like this game doesnt meen they like bad games. This game was honestly a good game. Yes i agree the villager think sucks but sword play and boss fight are cool. No its not a game that deserves a 9 but it deserves at least a 6. This was a one time thing for Sonic.
sonicwind917 3 years ago
i actually didnt mind stopping for villagers. and besides i think its better than 6 i actually think its a 9, i just love how sonic slashes through the air with no stopping at all (do not go against me on that if u have to stop to fight then its ur fault and ur fault only)
Orlandor100 3 years ago 2
Comment removed
Dman761 3 years ago
This is fucking gay. IGN doesn't even deserve to have an opinion, it's obvious they're bad at the games (look at how they played the demos at comic con compared to Gamespot >_>), so because they suck so much with them, they either don't complete it or just think it's automatically bad. Secret Rings was anything. Half the time I can't see where I'm slashing in BK because I'm moving so fast. And how come people want Sonic to have speed and nothing more? Let's think about this...
TriforceMaster3000 3 years ago
Remember Sonic 1? Or Sonic 2? 3? Knuckles? When were those games speedy? I'll admit, they have their fast parts, but I have Sonic 1 downloaded ON MY WII and have played the entire game, and every few seconds you come to a screeching halt to kill enemies or time a jump or dodge something. Let's compare the Adventure games to Unleashed. Unleashed was hella faster, yet the Adventure Games were mildly fast with good platforming. When has Sonic ONLY been about Speed and nothing else?
TriforceMaster3000 3 years ago 3
What about Mario? He was originally all about going from one end of the level to the other, while using power ups and stomping on goombas. Now, he's about running around in a hub level collecting stars, either by melee (64), water gun (Sunshine) or, as IGN calls it, 'waggle' (Galaxy). And you know what? They all got good reviews, because they were damn good games, despite being a departure from the Super Mario Bros/World games.
TriforceMaster3000 3 years ago 2
So what's wrong if Sonic does something differently? I don't get it. Sonic was never as fast as people say he was in the older 2D Games or Adventure games as he is now. I love the Mario series, don't get me wrong. They try something new, I play before judging, and most of the time, I love it. Same goes for Sonic. When I saw NP's cover, not once did I say "Oh great, Sonic with a sword, gay..." or "This will be awesome!" I waited until I tried it. And I loved it.
TriforceMaster3000 3 years ago 7
So I don't see why IGN and the fanbase continue to get their panties in a bunch whenever something new arises with Sonic. Just like people argued about the Werehog. The Werehog himself was not the problem, but how he was handled. He had too many levels spammed, but if Unleashed had more balance, the werehog could've been better, but no one will ever admit that I'm sure. People just want to bitch about everything. When it comes down to it, everyone is fucking bias.
TriforceMaster3000 3 years ago 6
Ill have to play this game myself, since secret rings used a good engine, but this is the SAME engine used there, I dont see how the sequel which uses the SAME engine can be soo bad. I do belive however that they should play the WHOLE game before they review it.
FireleaderJoey 3 years ago
Shut the Fuck Up! Ign Does'nt Hate sonic.They just hate How Bad And Gimmicky The series is now(Except for Unleashed which was'nt bad it was good).Im Not a fan of IGN.I just hate how fanboys are overreacting.
althegamefreak 3 years ago
Except that Black Knight was actually really good.
KurosanNitebird 3 years ago
Yeah Black knight was cool.But the review did'nt bother me as much as hilary's unleashed review.
althegamefreak 3 years ago
at 1:12 smart ass
cavs619 3 years ago
I laughed at what the guy said when reading that fan letter
SOnicpower451 3 years ago
woah there!!
saying that a game is bad i will deal with, but making fun of peoples opinions!!
wow... beyond ignorant even for IGN
FourSwordKirby 3 years ago
Especially since the game is actually good; according to what they say, it's pretty obvious that they just didn't try to figure out how to play the game well.
KurosanNitebird 3 years ago
the game is trash. I dont usually agree with ign. because they dont know how to review a good game.usually they suck ass when it comes to reviews. but Im gonna have to go with ign on this one. this game is a failed zelda game. what the fuck does sonic need a sword for anyway? if your the self proclaimed "fastest thing alive" why do you need a sword? sega is trashing their own icon and thats just sad......
d731andre 3 years ago
That's what I've been saying since the first trailer. I kept getting thumbs down and everyone kept cussing at me. Now I know how IGN feels.
Dr0sik 3 years ago
You haven't even played the game, otherwise you'd know that sword or not, it plays absolutely nothing like Zelda. It's really good once you've got everything figured out.
KurosanNitebird 3 years ago
I didnt say it played like the zelda game. I said it was a failed zelda game. sonic has been out for years. and I Dont recall him having to use a sword. I Know sega is trying to keep the product fresh. but a sword...... atleast in unleash they kept the classic speedster by day and have the transformations at night. ive seen the gameplay its repetitive . the story for the game was interesting . but to be honest they could have given this gimmick to another character. or make a new hedgehog.
d731andre 3 years ago
lol can't believe how far that sonic fan took it.
swiv2d 3 years ago
What's the point of using a ten-point scale if you're only going to use five of them? Methinks they should just stick to five-point or four-star reviews.
Also, why doesn't anybody criticize reviewers for giving high reviews to bad games? It's always low reviews on "good" games that upsets people.
BillyRVaughan 3 years ago
You can't spell IGNorant with IGN.
worldman29isback 3 years ago 2
This is the Wii section of IGN, completely different team than the 360. They weren't the ones who reviewed Sonic 06, heck they probably never even played it. Thats how. Now stop giving a shit about their score if you know you're going to enjoy the game. If everyone got uppity just because someone didnt like something there'd be no time to actually enjoy anything.
Lijik 3 years ago
I argee with you! It's just review!
If you sonics fans like this game thats fine! besides THIS GAME SUCKS!!!!
PsychicSoldier55 3 years ago
Hahaha, I may disagree with their review, but they deserve props for making this commentary. Hopefully Sonic fans will continue to insult them so IGN has more material to use.
TheLeoso 3 years ago
Not really. This is from a regular podcast.
KnuxSonic8 3 years ago
Actually yes really. And so what if it's from a regular podcast?
TheLeoso 3 years ago
screw u! this is a good game!
rsaffen 3 years ago 2
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Dear Dumbasses:
Sonic and the Black Knight is a shitty game for two reasons.
It is not a Sonic game. As stated before, this game is not fast paced, it's all about combat, and involves shitty stories and interacting worlds. It's not what the series was years ago, and sucks in this category.
It is not a good game in general. It is boring, repetitive, and the controls are clunky. It's the same action over and over, and it's linear. Nothing fun.
All it is is a game made for furry fans.
grit1 3 years ago
Not fast paced? Wait till you improve in your level and get better with the Soul Surge. It's certainly not slow.
Might I add that the game is geared towards younger Sonic fans, not "furry fans" as you stated.
KnuxSonic8 3 years ago
Matt is a IGNorant fucker
HappyHedgeHog21 3 years ago 2
when did it go through their minds that STOPPING in a Sonic game was a good idea?
BrandonS1994 3 years ago
Since the original Genesis game where you had to be an idiot if you couldn't lay off on holding forward.
Broodstar1337 3 years ago 2
This isn't the first game where that's done. Even in early Sonic games you had to do that to avoid being crushed by obstacles so I don't see what the big deal is...
KnuxSonic8 3 years ago
Yeah, but multiply it to every single encounter
BrandonS1994 3 years ago
It would be different if they were giving CONSTRUCTIVE criticisms, but all they're doing is bashing on Sonic. You can can clearly hear them laughing, they ENJOY bashing on Sonic.
crazy4guitar3000 3 years ago
They're only doing it because Sonic fans won't stop sending them poorly worded hate mail. If you even watched their video review, you'd know that they though the game did a lot of things right, sans gameplay.
AwakenedCloud 3 years ago 2
Hell if anyone actually read the review the whole way through, you'd see the two things that get low marks are the gameplay and lasting appeal. Everything else is in the high 7s and low 8s
Lijik 3 years ago
Yeah, so why it gets a 3.9 in the end makes no sense.
KnuxSonic8 3 years ago 2
Graphics does not a game make. It scored high in Graphics and Sound. It scored low in Gameplay and Lasting Replay, meaning that they did not find it appealing or fun. It averaged out to shit.
grit1 3 years ago 3
I DO watch their videos.
#1) You're saying that they're bashing Sonic just to get back at the Sonic fans?!?! That ain't right.
#2) They act like if we don't agree with their ridiculous score, then we're automatically crazy Sonic fans whose opinions don't matter. #3) The ONE letter that they decided to read doesn't represent every Sonic fan. EVERY game reviewer gets those kinds of letters.
crazy4guitar3000 3 years ago
#4) The lowest a game should get is a 5 or 6. Giving it a 5 means it gets an F, it failed, it sucks, giving it anything lower than that is just them going out of their way to stick it to Sonic.
#5) Apparently IGN DOESN'T think this game did anything right...because they gave it a 3.9.
crazy4guitar3000 3 years ago
All of your points display such a high level of ignorance that you're actually making me defend IGN.
1- Thats not what he said at all.
2- No, they act like if you send a huge tidal wave of backlash for a score that represents their opinion you're a crazy sonic fan.
3 and 4- This is stupid and I hate you, you ignorant fool.
5- NO. WRONG. YOU DOLT. DID YOU READ THE FRIGGIN REVIEW. THEY ENJOYED EVERYTHING BUT ACTUALLY PLAYING IT. A GAME IS FOR PLAYING. THATS WHY IT GOT A LOW SCORE YOU MORON.
Lijik 3 years ago
1) Yes he did. "They're doing it (giving low scores) because Sonic fans keep sending them poorly worded hate mail."
2) EVERY game reviewer gets those letters for every game. EVERY.
3 & 4) LOL
5) Did YOU read the review. They HATED this game. He said he wanted to kill himself playing this game. He said the only good thing were the graphics and medieval menu theme. This guy exaggerates too much.
crazy4guitar3000 3 years ago
Wait, so your saying the whole scale shouldn't be used? Why not? 5 should be the average, not a 7 IMO.
JonnyThePieKing 3 years ago
Comment removed
EdmacZ 3 years ago
ign is full of obese halo wanking losers
kyuubinaruto 3 years ago
People, stop complaning
It won't change nothing. They just said their opinion, there is nothing wrong on having an opinion
If you didn't like it, fine. Just ignore it
It won't change anything
They just said their opinion
mogg1452 3 years ago 9
Why do people complain and demand they change the review, they're not going to.
ImJust1Joe 3 years ago 4
Sounds like all the worst parts of Secret Rings, without the cool parts of Secret Rings or Unleashed.
I'm betting these guys are right.
ViewtifulRekk 3 years ago
Your opinion. Not set in stone.
hotrodfirebird 3 years ago
Well of course that's my opinion, that's the whole point. Why should I care about anything other than my opinion concerning this game?
From what I've seen, my opinion lines up with theirs, which means I PROBABLY shouldn't buy it. If somebody else disagrees with them, they would PROBABLY enjoy it.
It's not like IGN objectively decides whether a game is good or not. People just can't figure out to take this kinda thing with a grain of salt.
ViewtifulRekk 3 years ago
You do know IGN is pretty much against Sonic, regardless of what SEGA tries to do? I don't really care about people's opinions; I just keep seeing that people are trying to set their opinions in stone; if you're not one of them, then I apologize...there's just too much fuss going on for seemingly nothing at all.
hotrodfirebird 3 years ago
Well, that's not true at all. Matt gave Wii Unleashed a 7.2, which it deserved (okay game, better than Heroes, Shadow and 2006, but a very watered-down game compared to its Next-Gen counterpart, and the Sonic:Werehog ratio was terrible).
The 360 review of Unleashed was the journalistic equivalent of an abortion, though. I dunno where that guy pulled that review from.
At any rate, people need to stop making a big deal over this. It's not like Sonic is the sweetheart of the gaming press anyway.
ViewtifulRekk 3 years ago 3
The gaming world sucks. That's my conclusion to the whole nonsense fuss that's constantly going on.
hotrodfirebird 3 years ago
Yeah, I can agree to that.
...besides Adam Sessler.
ViewtifulRekk 3 years ago
Just ask yourself this: have you played the game?
No, you haven't, it isn't bloody out yet. So how does that make your opinion somehow better than theirs, who have played the full game to completion?
It doesn't.
ThePurpleMage 3 years ago
i like this, it made me appreciate the wii version of sonic unleashed
DGDN09 3 years ago
this Matt guy listens to "fan-mail" a lot, it seems
sonicspeed011 3 years ago 2
Well, I'm sure IGN will ignore this comment, considering the username I have. Just saying, that not everyone hates the game. I also don't get what's so wrong with slowing down and taking on enemies? Speed isn't the ONLY thing that matters in Sonic. This game wasn't meant to have as big of a focus on speed. I admit, it's not that good. More like a 6 or 5 out of 10. Also it's really childish of you guys to say that people who like this game don't like good games. Opinion.
GOLDsonic105 3 years ago 4
And have you ever realized that IGN contradicts themselves? All in all, they really have NO credibility whatsoever.
hotrodfirebird 3 years ago
And I suppose that we should base our decisions on ONE review?
hotrodfirebird 3 years ago 4
well arnt thay alowwd to have there own opinion
Aaroning 3 years ago
matt's last name is so retarded
VINCEJisSONiCtheMC 3 years ago
If your playing the game right, then the only time you should be stopping is when there is a wall in your way.
SonicProwler15 3 years ago
3.9 is way too ow.
At least a 6 or something but NOT a 3.9
marcster1994 3 years ago 5