Review Gripes: the IGN US Metal Gear: Solid 4 review

I've only played about five hours of Metal Gear Solid 4 and as of the moment, I can't say that I agree with the IGN US score of 10/10 for Metal Gear Solid 4. Of course since I haven't completed the game I may yet find that the rest of the game is so fantastic it makes up for it, who knows. Nonetheless I often don't agree with review scores but that isn't a big deal to me, everyone has different opinions and I don't take issue with it.

My issue is that IGN, (yes I just referred to a website as an conscious entity), was dumb enough to put Jeff Haynes in charge of the review. My reasons for this have largely been covered already by other bloggers (who do not endorse or have anything to do with this blog), not to mention the guys at the 1Up yours podcast, (download the relevent episode here. Lets just say that Haynes has had his head way up MGS 4's imaginary ass since far before the review process ever began, not to mention that he was actually directly involved with the game before the development of it was completed. I don't care if his involvement with the game was simply that of an unpaid game tester, I would not put a company's game tester on a review of a game they had input into. Once someone feels that they may have contributed to a game, and feel connected to that game, they should not be put in charge of a review for that game. Haynes even brags about being the "first American in the world to have beaten MGS 4." Don't you think that someone with a claim like that might want said game to get great ratings and make his claim as first to complete it that much more impressive? He should not have been put on the review, end of story.

Maybe you think I'm overreacting? Maybe you think Haynes really didn't have much of a role? Haynes himself states, (brags): "The second task was much more important, because at the end of every gameplay session, we were asked to provide detailed feedback, which would be given to the development team to make adjustments to the final build of the title. We weren't alone in experiencing the game in this way; Kojima himself was replaying the title at the same time we were, going through the same gameplay sections and feedback tasks as we were. In effect, we became part of the design team."

Funny thing is, at the end of the article they try to give readers someone else's point of view aside from just Haynes and they throw Greg Miller's two cents in. Now I don't have a lot against Miller, (aside from the same sort of irritation I get from a small extraordinarily hyper yapping dog), so don't take this as a condemnation of him. The problem is that he admittedly went into playing MGS 4 already madly in love with the escapades of Solid Snake, (and had basically made up his mind about the game a year ago anyway). I know that for a review of the fourth game in a series it would be stupid to put a writer on it who is unfamiliar with the series, but we already have someone who knows the series in the form of Haynes. The "Another Take" section should be done by someone either unfamiliar with the series or perhaps someone who played them but wasn't really won over by the previous games. Having both the review and the "Another Take" written by people who would lick the sweat of Snake's balls and enjoy it if they were given the opportunity just isn't objective journalism in any sense of the word.

At least in his GTA IV review, IGN editor Hilary Goldstein was willing to point out that there were flaws in the game, but explain that it was still of a quality and value that it warranted a rating of 10. Haynes just ignores all of the flaws in MGS 4 like a mother watching her daughter tripping through a dance recital and then claims that it shouldn't even be a 10 but rather an eleven. That's bullshit with a capital B and a capital ULLSHIT. Even if a game deserves a full 10, a responsible journalist/critic would actually mention the issues with the game or at least explain that there are some aspects that aren't actually flaws, yet may annoy some gamers.

For the record: I'm not saying MGS 4 is a bad game. Based on my gameplay so far I would say it is a good game, a great game even, but far from perfect.

Also for the record: Castle Wolfenstein did stealth years before Metal Gear.