Yakuzaice said:
| Kenryoku_Maxis said:
I really don't weant to belabor this point. But basically, you're cherry picking. Assassins Creed I and II both got 9.4 and 9.5 respectively on GameTrailers. Brotherhood probably got a 9.0 because it was deemed 'good but more of the same'.
But remember my main point. Aside from a handful of games (10 or so that I can count), all Wii games avg below 9.0. Even some thatare deemed for the 'core' gamer like Muramasa, New Super Mario Bros Wii, Epic Mickey, Tatsunoko vs. Capcom and Monster Hunter Tri. And a lot of the top rated games on Wii are ports of older games (Okami, Metroid Prime Trilogy, Resident Evil 4, World of Goo, etc). But anyweay...if you don't precieve a downsocre for Wii games, I don't really need to change your mind.
Also, I really shouldn't have brought up Gamespot. They give so many games a generic 8.5....
|
I'm cherry picking? I am just using the games you listed and the sites you listed. Brotherhood makes the most sense because it launched within a month of Kirby and Donkey Kong. Thus it would have the same editorial team, and the same general expectations. The first AC would not get the same score in 2010 as it did in 2007. Speaking of cherry picking, I like how you went to the highest score for AC I & II, and not IGN's score of 75 for the first game. By the way, GT gave them 9.1 and 9.2 respectively. 9.4 and 9.5 are the user scores.
There are tons of 'core' games on the HD systems that don't get above a 9.0. Monster hunter on the PSP didn't get above a 9, guess they hate the PSP. Monster Hunter on the PS2 didn't get above a 9, guess they hate the PS2. Look at that, the Wii version is the best rated game in the series. Even on those three biased sites. And guess what, Tatsunoko vs Capcom has the same average score as Marvel vs Capcom 3. One point higher than the PS3 version even. I don't know, what would be a good comparison for Muramasa? Odin Sphere maybe? That only scored 2 points higher, not close to a 90. Do you honestly feel that Epic Mickey deserved a score over 90? NSMB might be your best argument, but an 87 is still a good score. Plus if it had been on the PS3/360 it would definitely have still been knocked down a few points for not having online.
The problem with your main point is you seem to think every game that you consider good should have a score over 90. Just go scroll through the list of games scoring in the 80's on the PS3 and 360. There are tons that are just as deserving as the games you listed. Just to rattle off a few quick ones....
Demon's Souls
Heavy Rain
Wipeout HD
Valkyria Chronicles
Mortal Kombat
Now I'm going to guess if those games were on the Wii, you'd be listing them to support your argument.
I'm not even trying to argue that game reviewers don't have biases. I for one will never understand how Harmonix games get such good scores. My point is you were just throwing out the names of games and sites that don't in any way support your argument. You probably would have been better off just saying 'Reviewers hate the Wii' because I doubt I would have bothered actually checking the scores then.
|
A lot of your counter-points seem to be bringing up specific bias certain sites have against certain genres of games.
Again, it was an opinion in the first place. Based on my perception over the years of certain games seemingly getting downscored. But this has been going on since the N64 in my opinion, and was 10x worse in the PS2/XBOX/GC years. My views mostly cross over from that period. I will admit, its gotten a little better in the last 2 years on sites like IGN, but that's mostly because many of the past people at IGN left like Matt, Bozon and etc, replaced by a whole new 'Nintendo' team. ESPECIALLY Bozon, who actively stated on numerious occasions (even his reviews) that he dislikes JRPGs and 'casual' Wii games. Yet he was given the vast majority of JRPGs and 'casual' Wii games to review....
http://gonintendo.com/viewstory.php?id=113139
On the flip side, both the coverage and reviews for Wii games seem to have gotten worse on sites like Game Trailers. With games like Boy and his Blob, Muramasa and Kirby's Epic Yarn getting lower scores than the avg. And they had a pretty bad review of Sonic Colors (6.4) where its pretty evident they only played the game for like 3-4 hours at most. But again, this is just how I precieve it.
Also, what you said about PS3 and Wii games getting reviewed by the same editorial team. That's not correct. At least not on sites like IGN. They have different people rating each console. And again, a lot of the games you used as examples for the PS3 side seem to show a negative bias towards some genres. Mostly JRPGs. However, on GameTrailers, Mortal Kombat got a score of 9.4. For some reason IGN game it the low score...further proving reviews are highly subjective. Just like this argument, sadly.
