Sections

IGN to be sold to Ziff Davis’ parent company – report

Saturday, 2nd February 2013 14:35 GMT By Stephany Nunneley

News Corp. is in the process of closing a deal with Ziff Davis over the sale of IGN, according to All Things Digital.

News Corp. purchased IGN for $650 million in 2005, but sources close to the matter state the figure this time around is much lower.

J2 Global purchased Ziff Davis last year for $167 million, a deal which included sites such as PCMag.com and Geek.com.

Last year, News Corp. purchased Hearst’s UGO properties , including 1UP – which Ziff Davis sold to UGO back in 2009.

So, 1Up will once again be under the Ziff Davis umbrella.

The deal between Hearst and New Corp. last year brought the following sites into the same company: IGN.com, GameSpy, FilePlanet, Direct2Drive, TeamXbox, AskMen, GameStop.com and more.

Thanks, Evil Avatar.

Breaking news

29 Comments

Sign in to post a comment.

  1. DarkElfa

    Huh,I wondered why all of my old favorite sites turned to shit a few years ago.

    #1 1 year ago
  2. Stephany Nunneley

    “You are now part of the Ziff Davis collective – resistance is futile.”

    #2 1 year ago
  3. Mike W

    Well IGN should be downsizing pretty soon. It’s a shit site anyway with a bunch of corny geeks trying to be cool and hip when writing their articles….

    #3 1 year ago
  4. Hunam

    IGN has always been base and noisy. I hope moving away from the devil will improve them somewhat.

    #4 1 year ago
  5. Clupula

    I feel like IGN can only improve, with how shitty they’ve always been.

    #5 1 year ago
  6. Ali

    It ain’t good to wish that people go out of business but both IGN and EDGE should have died long ago.

    #6 1 year ago
  7. SlayerGT

    I’ve never understood the sentiment that most folks here on VG have towards IGN. Personally, I find much of IGN’s content entertaining. I guess it just depends on what you’re looking for a media outlet to provide.

    #7 1 year ago
  8. Dragon246

    @7,
    Same here. Enjoy IGN very much. Their start youtube channel is also awesome !

    #8 1 year ago
  9. monkeygourmet

    @7

    I think because it masquerades as a unbiased news site, when really it’s just a big advertising effort controlled by Activision, EA etc…

    #9 1 year ago
  10. OlderGamer

    MG +1

    #10 1 year ago
  11. Clupula

    @9 – Yup.

    #11 1 year ago
  12. Dragon246

    @9,10,11
    And how do you know that? Just gimme some hard proof and I will join your bandwagon :)

    #12 1 year ago
  13. SlayerGT

    @9 Yeah I don’t see that at all.

    #13 1 year ago
  14. monkeygourmet

    @12

    It’s more to do with spotting trends really.

    And the corruption advertising brings. It’s completly not unique to IGN, it’s almost a universal law. Something starts off small, gains a small following of loyal fans. Word spreads, the popularity increases; advertisers come. Integrity plummets.

    It’s not IGN solely, but it’s more a feature of gaming in general at the moment. Suddenly there are crazy big bucks to be made, Sony made gaming cool and acceptable. COD and FIFA started yearly roll outs. Nintendo captured the casuals.

    That’s why I was worried about this sites potential for decline once the adverts started appearing. It’s just the ugly side of success I suppose!

    But, iGN can be entertaining in places, but to take there spin on reviews seriously is something I haven’t done for a long time.

    #14 1 year ago
  15. Dark

    @6 and don’t forget kotaku.

    #15 1 year ago
  16. Kabby

    Everyone should.

    #16 1 year ago
  17. monkeygourmet

    @15

    Kotaku is awful now, really bad.

    #17 1 year ago
  18. LuLshuck

    Dont forget VG, seems like lately they milk the shit out of there fav games

    #18 1 year ago
  19. monkeygourmet

    @18

    It is a worry. Something is afoot! :/

    #19 1 year ago
  20. DrDamn

    @18
    How very fucking dare they show enthusiasm! Down with that sort of thing!

    @IGN
    I don’t pay much heed to the scores they dish out, but they are very good at telling you what is in the game and what is does in their reviews. The factual kind of info that’s useful, and sadly set aside by a lot of reviewers in case it gets in the way of their pre-determined opinion/hilarious jokes/repressed novelist “clever” review.

    #20 1 year ago
  21. polygem

    ign – i read – i watch – i enjoy (sometimes) – i do not trust

    #21 1 year ago
  22. Sublimeone

    Honestly, I dont give a crap about IGN, cant even the last time I went there, maybe 3-4 years ago. What a nasty Corp – They swallow good sites and suddenly decided to close them [Ve3d and others].

    #22 1 year ago
  23. Digital Bamboo

    I visit IGN regularly, but I don’t find myself staying long.

    The main page is a muddled mess of content, and the comment threads are pretty masturbatory. (First poster makes a joke, gets upvoted 2000 times, a string of followers play off that joke until it’s dead, the resident trolls chime in, and often not a word of it in any way relates to the article at hand.) I just get the feeling that the whole thing is geared towards (and largely frequented by) a much younger audience.

    Having said that, they do sometimes have good features and articles, and I like their review system (even if they do tend to score games higher than most) it just requires some sifting.

    #23 1 year ago
  24. mathare92

    @17 The thing with Kotaku is that while they do post a lot of trash (especially when Ashcraft is on duty), they still cover gaming culture better than anyone else. Things like that great Source Filmmaker parody someone made of Austin Powers, or a really good fan-made film of Portal. Just as a tiny example, I suspect I would not have seen this superbly animated teaser for a fan-made Street Fighter film if it wasn’t for Kotaku: http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=BEz0mYMPbjU

    And they actually do post some great written features. Articles that people always seem to neglect when they’re negatively appraising them. Some recent examples:
    http://kotaku.com/5976733/do-video-games-make-you-violent-an-in+depth-look-at-everything-we-know-today
    http://kotaku.com/5975610/the-exceptional-beauty-of-doom-3s-source-code
    http://kotaku.com/5980265/nintendo-and-the-cult-of-personality (Ashcraft, who I slighted earlier, wrote this. The irony is not lost on me.)
    http://kotaku.com/5980222/splinter-cell-blacklist-a-pleasing-if-somewhat-hollow-return-to-form
    http://kotaku.com/5979894/with-video-game-writing-the-devil-lives-in-the-details
    http://kotaku.com/5979539/a-beginners-guide-to-making-your-first-video-game

    Sorry for all the links. I’m not here trying to defend them or send traffic their way. I’m just saying that they’re a lot better than some people make them out to be. To bunch them in with a vacuous and banal site like IGN, is a bit unfair.

    @20 I actually like a bit of opinion and maybe even some humour in my reviews. If I wanted to read a buyer’s guide with nothing but a list of features, I’d go to Wikipedia or read the back of the case/Steam description.

    #24 1 year ago
  25. Telepathic.Geometry

    Didn’t Keza go over to IGN? Hope she’s gonna be okay, she was good…

    #25 1 year ago
  26. Digital Bamboo

    While I don’t often see writing of this calibre on IGN, it does happen:

    http://www.ign.com/articles/2012/08/06/why-video-games-matter

    http://www.ign.com/articles/2012/08/28/playing-games-for-all-the-wrong-reasons

    #26 1 year ago
  27. xxJPRACERxx

    Since Voodoo Extreme 3D is no more because of IGN I will always hate them. I miss the Morning Juberish!

    #27 1 year ago
  28. DrDamn

    @24
    Sure, but too many reviews these days seem to be purely writing vehicles for the author and they lose track of what they are actually there to do. You can read large reviews and come away without actual being any the wiser as the what is in the game, what it does well, what it doesn’t do well. You only know whether the reviewer likes the game, but not why, and that they aren’t very funny.

    #28 1 year ago
  29. DSB

    I guess I’m in the middle of DrDamn and mathare.

    I just want good criticism. I don’t need a feature list, I don’t need experimental literature, I just want a guy who’s gotten a feel for the game, and can tell me where it fails and where it succeeds.

    I think the overriding sense that’s missing from games journalism in general is skepticism, and maybe a bit of personality.

    Stuff like Penny Arcade and Old Man Murray was/are awesome because they contain both.

    I think it’s far too easy to impress a lot of those writers, and I think there’s an overwhelming overlap in the opinions they tend to express. Or the opinions they fail to include.

    #29 1 year ago