Mentalepsy: I felt that there wasn't much to it. For me, the game pretty much stopped at level 4 or 5. Over the next thirteen or so levels, I don't feel like I advanced my character in any meaningful way - I was fighting the same enemies using the same weapons over and over, earning mostly useless perks and mildly useful skill points. I ended up not finishing it - it got very repetitive, but maybe that's my fault for wandering too much instead of following the main story (but isn't the ability to do that part of the point?).
Aside from that, I found the NPCs to be extremely thin. Most of them just don't have much of interest to say, and as a consequence of that, your own dialogue is pretty threadbare as well. As I recall, Fallout 1 suffered from that a bit as well, but not nearly to this degree.
Many of the points of interest didn't have much going for them, either. Some of them were very cool; you could often find recordings or hack computers to get some backstory on the place and what was or is going on there, and some of the more unique locations were fun to explore in their own right. Others, however, were just generic buildings filled with junk I don't need.
I had fun with it for a few hours, most notably in Greyditch and in the supermarket outside of Megaton, but after that I felt like it stopped trying.
I found the story behind Vault 92 and the fate of Zoe Hammerstein to be emotionally effective; it was possibly the best told story in the game. It was those little touches throughout the world that made it alive. A world where so much stopped all at once really gave the world itself a chance to tell a lot of stories. A message here and a body or gun there; two skeletons lying together in bed, one holding a pistol; cars piled on the highway heading out of town.
Coelocanth: There's no way you can point to a game and say 'I don't like it, so it's not good for anyone else'.
Gragt: Indeed, that's something no one should do because preference lies on the emotional level, which varies from people to people, and also for one given person. That's why it's also pointless to debate of preference because everyone is free to like or dislike what they want, without the need to explain it. Quality on the other hand is intrinsinc to the work, can be quantified, and doesn't vary depending to people.
Quality is not the real purpose of IGN's list, however. The purpose is to get people to read it and drive traffic for the site. I'd say it was successful at that, even drawing a fair number of people who are outraged about it.
