By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
Veknoid_Outcast on 28 November 2012
Edit Thread
sales2099 said:
Veknoid_Outcast said:
sales2099 said:
Now I take issue with this, despite the point your trying to make.

Games that got 90+ in 2006-2009 can't be changed. But every rational mind would agree that if those games would be reviewed in 2012 they would get lower averages due to changing standards.

Sales aint quality, but it determines level of interest, the act of putting your money where your mouth is. Halo is a gamers game. KZ is more niche since it had significant hype and marketing at the time.

Sorry for being horrendously late to the party, but I had to respond to this when I saw it just now.

I completely disagree with the bolded statement. Just because a game comes from an older generation doesn't mean it's inferior to a more recent game, or will be judged to be inferior by critics.

Halo CEA was reviewed lower in 2011, despite being a high 90s game in 2001.

Perfect Dark Zero has a 81 meta.......it would not get a 81 meta in 2012. Perfect Dark got a 97 on metacritic....the upgraded in every possible way 360 port got a 79.....

Its common sense. It sucks but its reality.

You know, I was all ready to rip those examples apart. Until I looked up the reviews.

Reviews for Perfect Dark (XBLA):

"This might be one title that is best left in the past, where rose tinted glasses and time itself can protect it from the games that it no doubt inspired. Those which have long since (and far) surpassed it"

"There has been an enormous development over the past 10 years in the shooter genre and Perfect Dark obviously can not measure up with the latest in this genre . But if you know what you're getting you'll have plenty of fun with this welcome re-release."

Wow, I don't know what to say. I guess I was wrong. Let me amend my original post:

Just because a game comes from an older generation doesn't mean it's inferior to a more recent game, or will be judged to be inferior by critics.

I still disagree with you about it being rational to elevate newer games at the expense of older ones, but you're right about critics doing it.

I'm really disappointed in critics right now.