| fps_d0minat0r said: the criteria reviews are using is too harsh, maybe because of the long development time. if we apply the same review framework to other games, they will be lucky to score a 3/10. for example i read a review which said the damage hardly moves a few polygons. apply that to call of duty: grenade blows up near wall. wall goes black, no damage what so ever. FAIL another example, the standard cars dont look great. apply that to GTA4: pedestrians look fake and ugly. FAIL another example, there are only 200 premium cars apply that to most racing games: there are not even 200 cars in total, FAIL another example, some cars are the same with few changes apply that to mario, 20% of the game was copy and pasted, 50% had a few changes. FAIL. its the inconsistency in the review criteria which doesnt make be believe it anymore. |
This arguement is just ludicrious. GT5 is suppose to be a racing simulator. The cars especially were hyped to look "better then real life." So yes people should be dissappointed that they only look good. The game claims it has over 1000 cars. When only 200 of them can actually be customized it is dissappointing. Mario Kart isn't about racing and customizing the car of your choice. Its about fun kart racing and if you noticed the most recent one got a 8.2metacritic score. It doesn't seem like the criteria is too harsh. It seems the fanboys want the review sites to be as lenient as possible.
