By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
totalwar23 on 23 January 2008
Edit Thread
ZenfoldorVGI said:
totalwar23 said:
ZenfoldorVGI said:
totalwar23 said:
stof said:
IGN
 
1/22/2008
7.8 out of 10
78.0%
 
1/22/2008
9 out of 10
90.0%
 
1/20/2008
8.2 out of 10
82.0%
Edge Magazine UK
 
2/1/2008
9 out of 10
90.0%
Ngamer UK
 
2/1/2008
94 out of 100
94.0%
GamePro
 
1/22/2008
4.5 out of 5
90.0%
n-Revolution Magazine UK
 
1/1/2008
9 out of 10
90.0%

I say they'd heard of NMH's poor sales in Japan and they were sympathetic in their scores. IGN scores was mostly right on. Very stylistic but lacking on the technical levels.


So, a vast right wing sales conspiracy of sympathy caused critical acclaim of this game from every site, but IGN was somehow unaffected, while in the meantime, IGN's review was excactly right, even though you haven't played the game yet, yourself?

 

Wow, get real.

It's not as if you played it either.

What the hell is it with you and your staunch defense of everything Wii? NMH is a good game but not great. I'm inclined to agree with Gametrailers and IGN on this because I like my games to be technically good.


I'm not claiming the game is great. I'm saying that what you said is silly, unsubstantiated, and the very anthesis of why internet "deductions" are considered to be so insignificant.

 

You justified the IGN review as being correct because it is the lowest, and attempted to marginalize the many more numerious reviews, because you certainly don't think the game is great.

 

Then, you attempt to tell me, though you haven't played the game, that the game is good, but not great.

 

Again, get real. I'm not telling you what it is either way, but when you try to tell me what it is, or isn't with not even the slightest kind of real life fact or backing for your opinion, except that you saw the game and didn't like it because its not "technically good" from a graphical standpoint?

 

Are you trying to be taken seriously, because I think what you said is very close to trolling. It's not provable and not even logical.

 

I believe there is a deeper reason you are opposed to this games quality, and its silliness. It's cherry picking the worst possible review to degrade the game, without previous admitting your biased, whatever that maybe. It's infuriating, honestly, because I doubt you would play this game even if you had it, and I believe that if IGN have given it a 10/10 and every other site gave it perfect scores, but gamespot gave it a 7/10, you would be on this very post flaming the game, as you are now, for getting a low score.

 

It's like lying by omission.

 

Either way, you can't deny the game is critically acclaimed, because it is. It's nearly a 90/100 on gamerankings, and climbing(just got another 9/10). Do you deny the opinion that the game is critically acclaimed?


Fine, I said things that are unsubstantiated. But in the end, it's my opinion. I didn't tell you to believe in anything except for the fact NMH was dissapointing to me due to its technical flaws.

Secondly, I read IGN's review and judged it on its content, not its score. I also watched the Gametrailers review and also agreed with what it was said there, not because of it's score and I'm saying I don't think it deserves 9s. Can you get that?

Thirdly, what do you know about me to start accusing me of biased? Did you know that I was actually looking forward to this game and then only to fine dissapointment because of its technical flaws? This is one game I can sadly say, crossed off my list to get.

 

Edit-IGN's review was not a bad review. You simply looked at its scored at slam it right there. I've been a long time follower of IGN and I tend to agree with most of the things they review, at least for the games I'm looking at.

 

Edit 2: Ah damn, I contradicted myself. Whether it gets 8s or 9s, the game has some technical flaws that I cannot overlooked. That's my position.