By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Nintendo Discussion - IGN..Zombi U/Zombi WTF

dyremose on 21 August 2015
gabzjmm23 said:
Different reviewer. Which pretty weird because the recent reviewer should also check the previous review. It is just like comparing the same game on different consoles, the only difference is the year they are released. It is a strip down version of ZombiU.

I hope there would be a ZombiU 2 but exclusive to NX.


That's not possible since Greg Miller reviewed the wii u version,  and he is no longer with ign. 



Around the Network
KingdomHeartsFan on 21 August 2015
Samus Aran said:
KingdomHeartsFan said:
Samus Aran said:
KingdomHeartsFan said:
 

Games should be reviewed based on their story, graphics, gameplay, etc.  Not based on the differences between other versions of the game.  Reviews have always been used to access the quality of a game.

Then what's the point of reviewing remasters? Just use the original review then and add a note with what changed in the remasters.

Ok, the graphics of Shovel Knight, Fez and Bastion suck compared to other PS4 (or PS3 even) games.

Games get reviewed on originality as well, remasters are the opposite of that. Something that was fresh and unique ten years ago likely won't be now anymore.

Unless remasters fix fundamental issues with the game they should ALWAYS get lower scores.

Gaming standards don't stay the same, the goal post constantly shifts.  I could keep going but its obvious this isn't going anywhere so I'll agree to disagree.

Which is why they should receive lower scores. As technology improves, so should our standards.

"Remasters should be reviewed as remasters, not original games."  Now your just changing your stance, if your just reviewing what the devs changed in the remaster and not looking at it as an original game then the changes in standards shouldn't matter, but now your saying they do.  Seems like you'll agree with anything as long as it means remasters get lower scores because you have something against them. 



Mr Puggsly on 21 August 2015
Samus Aran said:

Most games on PS/XBOX tend to get overinflated scores. I mean, just check the games that got over 90%+.

Look at Arkham City on the Wii U, it got 11 points less on average. Then look at games like Journey, TLOU: R, Fez, Bastion, Flower, Shovel Knight (PS4), etc.

Titanfall, with no singleplayer campaign and not a lot of content got 86%. Halo: MCC, who's online still doesn't work correctly, is sitting at 85%.

Titanfall has great gameplay, thats worth a lot so it got high scores. If you want single player, play something else.

Halo:MCC's online works fine now. Even if it was just campaigns it still deserves high scores.

Scores arent equal to quality, value, etc. The best scoring games are rarely my personal favorites.



Recently Completed: 
River City: Rival Showdown for 3DS (3/5) - River City: Tokyo Rumble for 3DS (4/5) - Zelda: BotW for Wii U (5/5) - Zelda: BotW for Switch (5/5) - Zelda: Link's Awakening for Switch (4/5) - Rage 2 for X1X (4/5) - Rage for 360 (3/5) - Streets of Rage 4 for X1/PC (4/5) - Gears 5 for X1X (5/5) - Mortal Kombat 11 for X1X (5/5) - Doom 64 for N64 (emulator) (3/5) - Crackdown 3 for X1S/X1X (4/5) - Infinity Blade III - for iPad 4 (3/5) - Infinity Blade II - for iPad 4 (4/5) - Infinity Blade - for iPad 4 (4/5) - Wolfenstein: The Old Blood for X1 (3/5) - Assassin's Creed: Origins for X1 (3/5) - Uncharted: Lost Legacy for PS4 (4/5) - EA UFC 3 for X1 (4/5) - Doom for X1 (4/5) - Titanfall 2 for X1 (4/5) - Super Mario 3D World for Wii U (4/5) - South Park: The Stick of Truth for X1 BC (4/5) - Call of Duty: WWII for X1 (4/5) -Wolfenstein II for X1 - (4/5) - Dead or Alive: Dimensions for 3DS (4/5) - Marvel vs Capcom: Infinite for X1 (3/5) - Halo Wars 2 for X1/PC (4/5) - Halo Wars: DE for X1 (4/5) - Tekken 7 for X1 (4/5) - Injustice 2 for X1 (4/5) - Yakuza 5 for PS3 (3/5) - Battlefield 1 (Campaign) for X1 (3/5) - Assassin's Creed: Syndicate for X1 (4/5) - Call of Duty: Infinite Warfare for X1 (4/5) - Call of Duty: MW Remastered for X1 (4/5) - Donkey Kong Country Returns for 3DS (4/5) - Forza Horizon 3 for X1 (5/5)

Samus Aran on 21 August 2015
KingdomHeartsFan said:
 

"Remasters should be reviewed as remasters, not original games."  Now your just changing your stance, if your just reviewing what the devs changed in the remaster and not looking at it as an original game then the changes in standards shouldn't matter, but now your saying they do.  Seems like you'll agree with anything as long as it means remasters get lower scores because you have something against them. 

I fail to see the change in stance you're talking about. By focusing on what changed in a remaster we raise our standards because technology (among other things) has improved (and allows things that weren't possible before).



Mbolibombo on 21 August 2015

In case you didnt know, Nintendo aint one of the cool kids anymore. Reviewer probably grew up with the PS2.



Around the Network
veritaz on 21 August 2015

Since the meta is around 6 points lower I don't understand why this is even a problem. 2 completely different reviewers and the meta is much lower. Maybe if this person who reviewed Zombi reviewed ZombiU he would have given it like an 8 or something. Not a problem at all.



gabzjmm23 on 21 August 2015
dyremose said:
gabzjmm23 said:
Different reviewer. Which pretty weird because the recent reviewer should also check the previous review. It is just like comparing the same game on different consoles, the only difference is the year they are released. It is a strip down version of ZombiU.

I hope there would be a ZombiU 2 but exclusive to NX.


That's not possible since Greg Miller reviewed the wii u version,  and he is no longer with ign. 


What are you trying to say? I'm saying that the current reviewer just needs to validate what was reviewed previously regardless who was the reviewer. I know it could have a different score or opinion. But just a basic thinking of a strip down version would have a better score? I'm not all high and mighty with Nintendo or what but they should validate on how they provide scores to the games.

http://m.ign.com/articles/2012/11/18/zombiu-review

 



Toxy on 21 August 2015

I understand the fact that it is a different reviewer and therefore there is going to be different opinions on the matter. However, it does look unprofessional on IGN's side of things.
The website needs to uphold consistency with its reviews. If two people can review the game on the same website and give it an entirely different review, that makes both the reviews entirely subjective and inconsistent. The editor of IGN needs to pick up on these sort of things so the score system does not become a big joke. Example, if a bug-fest game like Assassin's Creed Unity scores 7.5, and a game like Batman: Arkham Knight scores 7.5 - it gives the same sense of quality between two games (when clearly Arkham Knight is the better game of the two). It is inconsistent within the scoring system that IGN provides. IGN's editors need to look at previous reviews and match them up with newer ones to see if they equate in a way that makes sense.

A review lacks credibility when it is inconsistent with other reviews featured on the same website. They need more quality control, or at least have the previous review updated with the new reviewers thoughts. When a review is made it should consist of formula that scores a game based on its merits (lack of bugs, good gameplay, graphics, artstyle etc.), your opinion of the game should come last.



Samus Aran on 21 August 2015
the-pi-guy said:
Samus Aran said:

Nostalgia is something reviewers should try to ignore in their reviews.

I'm curious, have you ever played a remaster where you had more fun than with the original (and played the original first of course)? And why?

It's not about liking a game more than what it was before.  But at the very least, liking it as much as I do now.  

If I'm still enthralled by a game as much as I was before, in addition some aspects of the game have been improved, such as graphics, sounds, etc.  

I don't think under that pretense that it deserves a lower score, just because I've played it before, especially when I like it more now.  

 

 

Nostalgia isn't necessarily a factor when it comes to enjoying a game.  

You didn't answer my question though. Only rarely do I have more fun on a second playthrough than on a first one. Am I alone in this or are most people like me?



Normchacho on 21 August 2015
Samus Aran said:
the-pi-guy said:
Samus Aran said:

Nostalgia is something reviewers should try to ignore in their reviews.

I'm curious, have you ever played a remaster where you had more fun than with the original (and played the original first of course)? And why?

It's not about liking a game more than what it was before.  But at the very least, liking it as much as I do now.  

If I'm still enthralled by a game as much as I was before, in addition some aspects of the game have been improved, such as graphics, sounds, etc.  

I don't think under that pretense that it deserves a lower score, just because I've played it before, especially when I like it more now.  

 

 

Nostalgia isn't necessarily a factor when it comes to enjoying a game.  

You didn't answer my question though. Only rarely do I have more fun on a second playthrough than on a first one. Am I alone in this or are most people like me?


This doesn't make sense...why should a reviewer look at a game as if the only people who are going to play it are people who have played it before?

 

Especially since remasters are often targeted at people who didn't play the original.



Bet with Adamblaziken:

I bet that on launch the Nintendo Switch will have no built in in-game voice chat. He bets that it will. The winner gets six months of avatar control over the other user.