Toxy said: Exactly, it was by desing choice that this game was to have a lot of water. If it was done by an actual IGN journalist the score would have likely differed. It is similar to the 'it was too hard' rate it down mentality. If the game is meant to be hard and the mechanics are not cheap, this is a good thing. If it is hard due to design flaws, well this would be a negative. |
There's so much weird here I don't know where to start. The reviewer is biased against... water? Biased reviews aren't "strange," that's what a review is. Their goal was to have too much water? Too much by definition means... too much! It means too much! That's bad! That's, like, inherently bad by definition of the phrase "too much."
This isn't someone reviewing a genre they don't like and the Pokemon games aren't built around the idea of having lots of water. The core mechanics of Pokemon are all about elemental rock-paper-scissors, and overpopulating a game with one type in particular throws the balance of the game off and is definitely worth criticizing.