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

Forums - Nintendo Discussion - Metroid Prime: Federation Force - Metacritic: 66 | GameRanking: 68% | Opencritic: 67

 

Are you interested in Federation Force?

Yes 29 17.16%
 
A bit 46 27.22%
 
No 77 45.56%
 
Don't have a 3DS anyways 17 10.06%
 
Total:169

Open Critic is down to 68% now.
Meta Critic is 69%.

I think this is probably a okay placement for it in meta score.
Though I could see it rise or fall a few points still.



Around the Network

Score seems just about in the range that I expected. Despite it not being very Metroid it still seems like a decent game, maybe when the anti-hype dies down it will see some more positive reception from the fans.



Leadified said:
Score seems just about in the range that I expected. Despite it not being very Metroid it still seems like a decent game, maybe when the anti-hype dies down it will see some more positive reception from the fans.

It has hate but, I dont think thats why its not scoreing higher.

Also you notice all the really positive scores are from review sites with "nintendo" part of their name.

I think its more likely to drop a few points more in score, than rise in them.

And honestly I dont think it deserves higher than its getting, its not just based on hate of it not being a real metroid game.



JRPGfan said:
Leadified said:
Score seems just about in the range that I expected. Despite it not being very Metroid it still seems like a decent game, maybe when the anti-hype dies down it will see some more positive reception from the fans.

It has hate but, I dont think thats why its not scoreing higher.

Also you notice all the really positive scores are from review sites with "nintendo" part of their name.

I think its more likely to drop a few points more in score, than rise in them.

And honestly I dont think it deserves higher than its getting, its not just based on hate of it not being a real metroid game.

Oh no, I'm not suggesting that it's not scoring higher due to anti-hype, from the summaries of the reviews it looks like the game has some problems. As a Metroid fan I wasn't looking forward to this game, I actually went out and bought Metroid Fusion today to show that is the type of game that I want instead.

I mean more along the lines that the outright hatred of this game by the fans will probably turn into apathy or a lukewarm response at best. More or less I think fan reception to this game would have been the same regardless if it scores a 67 or an 80 on metacritic.



I'm honestly surprised that's scores are so high in spite of the overwhelming negativity surrounding this game...
I was expecting worse than No Man's Sky...



Have a nice day...

Around the Network
MTZehvor said:
Vodacixi said:
Well, we still won't have european reviews until early September, so score can still change. Anyway, it's far of my 80 prediction. I should have known that hate is just too strong, even when the game itself is pretty damn solid.

I think the excuse of "the hate is too strong" falls kind of flat when the actual critic scores are out.

Yes, because critics don't feel hate like the rest of the mortals. Silly me...

The game is far from being a masterpiece. It's not anywhere close to the Prime Trilogy. I get that. But as far as I know, we have a 12-15 hour campaign with an incredible variety of missions, an online mode that works pretty much flawlessly and it's really worth it, gameplay and controls are at the very least good and we have Blast Ball, which is very fun and increases the value of the overall experience. The only things to complain are the lack of voice chat, that the graphics could be better (or maybe not, 60fps online multiplayer is a bitch) and the soundtrack, which, while not bad, is not good enough to keep on your head.

It's not a 5 or a 6 game. It's not a game that stays in the limits of bad and good. At the very least is a 7, because it does a lot more things correctly than badly. And if it is getting those scores (5, 6 or even less) from some reviewers, is either because they played and reviewed the game thinking that it was bad before actually starting or because they say to people what they wanna hear in order to keep them happy: the game is trash. But... the game is far from being trash.



leedlelee said:
I'm honestly surprised that's scores are so high in spite of the overwhelming negativity surrounding this game...
I was expecting worse than No Man's Sky...

Because reviewers judge the games by what they are, and not the "hate" people give them.

The fact that its hated on by alot, just means it ll sell less than its meta score might suggest it would.



Vodacixi said:
MTZehvor said:

I think the excuse of "the hate is too strong" falls kind of flat when the actual critic scores are out.

Yes, because critics don't feel hate like the rest of the mortals. Silly me...

Careful that you don't track too much straw in on the floor when you're done responding.

The point is not that critics don't feel hate. The point is that critics are, broadly speaking, a pretty wide and diverse group of reviewers; some of them will have attachment to the Metroid series, and some won't. This is especially the case with smaller review sites, where there will often be a few reviewers who are assigned games based on free time (Rev3 Games being one such example). The hate excuse falls flat because a sizeable portion of any group of critics will inevitably just not care that much about Metroid as a whole. If they don't care that much about Metroid, then they're not going to feel hate towards a spin off title for taking the series in a different direction.

The larger point here is that we've ended up with a diverse group of opinions; some Metroid fans, some not, and the general consensus seems to be that the game is pretty mediocre. Think of it like using a random sample to tease out extraneous factors; if a wide group of people with different backgrounds say that something is mediocre, then the chances of there being some outside force that's influencing the majority of their opinions is pretty small.



MTZehvor said:
Vodacixi said:

Yes, because critics don't feel hate like the rest of the mortals. Silly me...

Careful that you don't track too much straw in on the floor when you're done responding.

The point is not that critics don't feel hate. The point is that critics are, broadly speaking, a pretty wide and diverse group of reviewers; some of them will have attachment to the Metroid series, and some won't. This is especially the case with smaller review sites, where there will often be a few reviewers who are assigned games based on free time (Rev3 Games being one such example). The hate excuse falls flat because a sizeable portion of any group of critics will inevitably just not care that much about Metroid as a whole. If they don't care that much about Metroid, then they're not going to feel hate towards a spin off title for taking the series in a different direction.

The larger point here is that we've ended up with a diverse group of opinions; some Metroid fans, some not, and the general consensus seems to be that the game is pretty mediocre. Think of it like using a random sample to tease out extraneous factors; if a wide group of people with different backgrounds say that something is mediocre, then the chances of there being some outside force that's influencing the majority of their opinions is pretty small.

Except that if you read the mixed reviews or the bad ones you actually see that they complain about Federation Force not being a true Metroid game. Maybe it's not hate, maybe it's just that, as I said, they wanted the game to be bad from the beginning because that was the popular trend and that affected the scores of some sites. Because if you read the majority of mixed reviews they basically say: "Yeah, the game is ok... but is not a Metroid game. And that's bad".



Vodacixi said:
MTZehvor said:

Careful that you don't track too much straw in on the floor when you're done responding.

The point is not that critics don't feel hate. The point is that critics are, broadly speaking, a pretty wide and diverse group of reviewers; some of them will have attachment to the Metroid series, and some won't. This is especially the case with smaller review sites, where there will often be a few reviewers who are assigned games based on free time (Rev3 Games being one such example). The hate excuse falls flat because a sizeable portion of any group of critics will inevitably just not care that much about Metroid as a whole. If they don't care that much about Metroid, then they're not going to feel hate towards a spin off title for taking the series in a different direction.

The larger point here is that we've ended up with a diverse group of opinions; some Metroid fans, some not, and the general consensus seems to be that the game is pretty mediocre. Think of it like using a random sample to tease out extraneous factors; if a wide group of people with different backgrounds say that something is mediocre, then the chances of there being some outside force that's influencing the majority of their opinions is pretty small.

Except that if you read the mixed reviews or the bad ones you actually see that they complain about Federation Force not being a true Metroid game. Maybe it's not hate, maybe it's just that, as I said, they wanted the game to be bad from the beginning because that was the popular trend and that affected the scores of some sites. Because if you read the majority of mixed reviews they basically say: "Yeah, the game is ok... but is not a Metroid game. And that's bad".

I'm assuming this is largely in reference to the Nintendo Enthusiast 45/100 review, because I haven't seen any other reviews make reference to it as an issue outside of a passing statement basically saying "don't come into this expecting a Metroid Prime exploration like experience, because it's not." As for that particular review, I'm not going to defend it, but I don't think one particular review represents a trend that means every less than positive review is just filled with bias. Pretty much every review in the yellow category on MC has fairly clearly laid out reasons for why they didn't like it as much, ranging from the level design being simplistic, to the enemies being bullet sponges, to a lack of variety, etc.

Now, are these well thought out reasons for disliking the game, or do these fall more in line with the now infamous "too much water?" Can't say right off the bat. For the moment, though, I think we should give the criticisms the benefit of the doubt until we've finished the games ourselves, and then we can have a discussion on how everyone has their opinions obscured by disdain for the unfamiliar.