IGN Has Lost It

We all knew IGN's credibility was on life support, but somebody might need to call time of death. Their coverage of Pearl Abyss's Crimson Desert has been nothing short of embarrassing, and the internet is not letting them live it down. What should have been a straightforward review cycle for one of 2026's most anticipated action-RPGs has instead turned into a masterclass in how to torch whatever goodwill you have left with your audience.

Let's start with Travis's review. Now, I'm not one to just dog on a reviewer for having an opinion. That's literally the job. But when your own verdict can't decide what it thinks, we've got a problem. He calls the combat tedious but also unique and interesting. He praises discovering quirky minigames but then turns around and says the puzzles are unintuitive. Travis, my guy, which is it? Pick a lane. The whole thing reads like it was stitched together by an algorithm that couldn't settle on a sentiment. These guys are leaning pretty far into AI writers, eh? The dead internet theory is looking less like a conspiracy and more like a documentary these days.

But here's where it gets truly rich. Let's peek at Travis's track record, shall we? Our man rated both Avowed and Highguard a full point higher than Crimson Desert. Avowed, the game that was so aggressively woke it felt like a lecture disguised as an RPG. And Highguard, the game that flopped so hard the devs literally pulled it from sale. Both of those got better scores than a game the broader community is genuinely enjoying. Let that sink in. The math ain't mathing, Travis.

And IGN wasn't content to just let the review speak for itself. No, they had to double down. They hopped on X to post about how Pearl Abyss is working on patches, then hit everyone with the gem: "but patches can't fix the game's biggest problem." What does that even mean? That's not journalism, that's a subtweet. That's passive-aggressive energy from someone who's mad the audience didn't agree with them. And the cherry on top? The post got community noted. The readers' added context straight up called it clickbait, pointed out there were no game-breaking bugs, and noted that most reviews have actually been favorable. When your own platform's audience is fact-checking you in real time, it might be time to do some soul-searching.

This isn't about one bad review. Reviewers are allowed to dislike things. But when there's a pattern of propping up mediocre or agenda-driven titles while dumping on games that players are actually enjoying, people start connecting dots. And those dots are forming a picture that doesn't look great for IGN. The gap between what these outlets push and what actual gamers experience has never been wider, and Crimson Desert is just the latest example.

So long, IGN's credibility. Not that there was much left to bury, but it feels like it's finally time to close the book. Don't let the door hit ya on the way out.