VicViper said:
But it doesn't matter what games, the point of my first quote to you was that they changed they policy, and that's visible. They're giving those scores now, but they didn't give them back them. Final Fantasy VI, for example, received a 36/40. Donkey Kong Country was THE sweethart of western media in 1994 and loved in japan, and yet it got a 31/40. 12 years for a perfect score, now 3 (sometimes 4) per year. So you can't say "they never changed their policy". That's what I was saying. |
Well, yes. Due to the nature of their 4 reviewer system, you do get a lots tens overall, but a 39 is seen as a perfect score. It's four different opinions from four different that are supposed to be very different. I stopped paying as much attention to the Japanese market, but I remember reading some reviews they had where you had casual gamers reviewing certain things and it definitely skewed the score. I actually favor their system as you're able to get four different takes on the same game. You can usually find a reviewer out of the four that has similar tastes to yourself and relate that way.
The only argument you can really make (since neither of us know how their staff has changed over the years) is that their newer/younger reviewers are more lenient. Honestly, I think it's a reflection of the how the Japanese market has broadened to wider, casual audiences.







