bananaking21 said:
DanneSandin said:
bananaking21 said:
hahahahah so now were measuring quality by what fanbody say and do? so games like halo 4 are actually a 6/10, mass effect 3 a 5.3/10 call of duty 3/10. because you know the interenet isnt full of fanboys just trolling games, no not at all. i would rather go with a man who's profession to rate games than a fanboy on the interent
|
Well if you can mention the opinion of game journalists, then surely I can mention the opinion of gamers? We all know game journalists have been bribed or black mailed into giving games higher scores than what they would have liked. And as far as I know this have never happened to a Nintendo game, so we can assume that Nintendo isn't in to that sort of business and therefor their game score would be lower. And then factoring in the fact that eurogamer, a pretty big and respected gaming site, in an article clearly was biased AGAINST Nintendo and Wii U we can assume that several game sites have something against Nintendo.
What I'm trying to say is that refering to the score of either game journalists or users/gamers in itself is faulty. Neither can be trusted.
|
i stoped reading your reply when you said "asfar as i know it didnt happen with nintendo" and we "can assume nintendo isnt into that bussines"
well as far as i know sony, ms, activision, ea and rockstar arent into that stuff as well, we we can assume there games arent bribed as well? or what how does this go? we go by assumptions and speculation now?
|
I put those parts in there so that, had they ever been accused of doing something like that you could have proven me wrong with a link or something like that.
You are assuming that the game reviewers AREN'T biased or bribed, making that argument just as faulty as mine. So we're back to scratch. And what's left then? Sales....
