And now there’s reviews based off of unfinished games… How tragic to see what was once a good site fall into an endless abyss of low intelligence and such impatience… Or something like that…

Good comic though. So true.

By the same token, if a game is so bad that you do not want to finish it, I thinks it’s safe for the reviewer to say “hey guys, don’t waste your money on this f%$#ing game.”

Secre,
I wouldn’t say it’s ‘illegitimate’, just incomplete. Ray thinks that the last stage is probably one of the best Sonic levels ever created. But Hilary wouldn’t know that because he never played it. It would be one thing if he got to the end boss and just didn’t beat the boss, but he barely played half the game, 4/7 continents. Some things he said are, according to Ray, just not true. He says that the framerate is great, but one later level has major framerate issues. It’s things like this that you miss when you don’t actually complete the game. Sure, his overall opinion and score might not have changed too much, but then again, we’ll never know.
Gamer_1337,
If your site reviews games with just a thumbs up or thumbs down, I’d say that’s fine, you basically know if the game is good or bad. But when a site is giving fractional points, basically rating a game on a scale of 0-100, how can you really say that the game is a 7.6 based on 50% of the game? If you don’t finish the game, fine, tell the reader.
Am I the only one that assumes the reviewers have finished the game when they don’t tell you one way or another?

Not everybody has the same taste or the same likes, reviewers just give you there opinion about the game based on what they like or not, and it’s the readers option if he should listen or not. Sonic games have had there problems and the last games almost convince me of never buying or rent one again. Don’t get me wrong Sonic Unleashed it’s not a bad game and for me was great because I have loved sonic games, but we have to admit it’s not for everyone, and sonic unleashed wasn’t in the same level as the classical ones or even sonic adventure 1 and 2 ( I loved this games a lot in the dream cast) that brought new game play elements and a new story line. Sonic fans should be pleased that sonic unleashed wasn’t really a epic fail like sonic the hedgehog 2006, sonic heroes (I personally hate this game), shadow the hedgehog (biggest WTF?), and sonic riders. I used to love been able to rent a game without anyone close by telling if it sucked or not, I just rented before buying and draw my own conclusion.

The only reason that this was even brought up was the fact that Hilary’s gamertag didn’t show the game as being completed, but there are plenty of reasons why this could be:
-The game review copy had to be played on a review console, which doesn’t allow for achievements to transfer.
-The game was an early copy and didn’t record his achievements correctly.
-Perhaps he played the rest of the game on a different gamertag, or even a different console. That would make sense, considering that he reviewed both the PS3 and 360 versions of the game. Perhaps he actually finished the game on the PS3, but only played through half the game on the 360? Heck, maybe someone else in the IGN offices was playing it, and Hilary didn’t sign back into his own gamertag when he finished the second half of the game.

This is a witch hunt. People disagree with the review score, and therefore find anything they can to discredit the review/reviewer.

No one outside of the IGN offices will ever really know if Hilary finished the review, and it’s completely immature and despicable to simply assume that he did not, then seek to publicly discredit him and his company.
Even worse is writing a comic that ridicules someone else (M. Casamassina) who doesn’t even work in the same office. (the IGN offices are split between San Francisco and L.A.)