By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
HappySqurriel on 04 February 2009
Edit Thread
Words Of Wisdom said:
HappySqurriel said:

You're arguing something entirely different than you think you are though ...

Saying a game like Super Smash Bros. shouldn't receive the score it once did because it doesn't offer the quality or value of similar games that have been released in the past decade (like Super Smash Bros. Melee and Super Smash Bros Brawl) is quite a bit different than saying that Super Smash Bros should get a 1 because it is an old game ... One way takes into account how the game stands up against current games and is an actual evaluation of its current quality, the other is an arbitrary evaluation that has no relation to the quality of the game.

Once again, as I said in my initial post, it is one thing to say that the game hasn't aged well or that the Wiimote controlls take away from the experience but to review a game based on its age alone is not a fair metric.

It's annoying to keep saying the same things over and over so I'll start quoting myself. 

Maybe it just takes a little repitition to help you understand.

Words Of Wisdom said:

X-Play isn't judging it as a new game, they're judging it as a port.  Rygar doesn't deserve a 1/5 because it was a bad PS2 game, it deserves a 1/5 because it offers no new worthwhile features or gameplay (according to the review) compared to the original.

 

Words Of Wisdom said:

Let's say Nintendo decided tomorrow to repackage it as a full Wii game (not VC) and all they did was add Wiimote/nunchuck controls to it.  They add nothing else.  No new characters, stages, modes, music, or anything are added.  What kind of rating should the game get?  Back when it was released it was a 8-10 out of 10 game for a lot of people.

Now we have SSB Wii with only 12 characters, no improvements, and more standing next to SSBB with roughly 3 times as many characters and stages along with loads of content.  Do you think that this SSB port as a Wii game should be 9 out of 10 like it was for the N64? 

I don't think so and neither would X-Play.

Are you with me yet?

You want ports to be reviewed on an absolute scale as if the original never existed if I'm understanding you correctly, but that isn't how it works (nor how it should work IMO). 

If you want a review of Rygar:  The Legendary Adventure then you should go read a review on Rygar:  The Legendary Adventure.  However if you want a review of a port of Rygar: The Legendary Adventure then you're going to get a review on the differences, the improvements, and the additional things added.  The problem is that when developers are lazy, there aren't any.   If the developers don't put anything new in to add value then what exactly are you buying? 

I can see the argument that if you don't have a PS2/PS3 with BC and have never heard of or played the original game, that Rygar may not be a 1/5 game.  I understand that argument.  The problem is that if you have a PS2/PS3 and a Wii, why would you ever buy the Wii version?  Here is a copy of the PS2 game for $2.95.  Two dollars and ninety five cents.  Let me say that again, two dollars and 95 cents.  Do you really want to tell me that a consumer should pay $49.99 (assuming a full price Wii game) for a repackaged game when they can get a practically identical experience $47.04 cheaper?

A successful port is one that gives people a reason to buy it.  It's one that adds value to the game so even if it's slightly aged, it still offers something.  An amazing port is one that gives people who owned the original a reason to buy the new one.  A shitty port is one that repackages the game with no additional features and expects people to pay retail value for it.

And that is why it gets a 1 out of 5.

 

So reviewers are no longer looking at the quality of a game, they're simply salesmen trying to tell you which games have the best value for your dollar?

I have never seen someone claim that a hard-cover edition of a book was somehow worse because a paperback verion of it existed, and I have certainly never heard that the French language hardcover of a book was terrible because an english paperback existed and was inexpensively avaliable on Amazon.com.