ClaudeLv250 on 13 February 2008
| Played_Out said: ^^ Actually I was applauding him not kowtowing to populist opinion. Saying it was a suck on your wallets was not an implication that it was a cheaply put together game. It was an implication that the main reason people bought the game is because they are fans of the Nintendo characters that appear in it, rather than because it is a good game in itself. It is/was quite clear to me that the primary reason for grouping together a bunch of popular game characters is to sell more copies of an otherwise uninteresting game. I, and the reviewer in question, see this as a cheap marketing ploy, and one which, judging by your comments and the popularity of the series, has been incredibly successful. You can disagree with me all you want, but calling me a fool certainly doesn't make me one. I agree with the reviewer because I think the game is incredibly primitive. I have always been a fan of fighting games, and whereas games like Mortal Kombat, Virtua Fighter and Tekken advanced the genre, Smash Brothers played like a Street Fighter 2 era game. I was a big fan of SF2 at the time of it's release, but after so many more sophisticated fighters, games like that just seem far too basic. Also, saying that I "missed the point" is ridiculous. Your point was quite clear, but I just so happened to offer a dissenting opinion. In fact, the only point of yours with which I agree is that it really doesn't make sense to judge a fighting game without having played it against another person. Even Tekken is crap in single player. |
I don't think you should be "applauding" him for being a rebel when his "opinion" isn't even factually correct let alone mildly educated on the subject that he was reviewing. This is a problem with being a mindless fanboy, you cling to the first person that agrees with you even if they are a drooling moron with no grasp of reality. The "primitive" comments about Smash Bros. isn't even an opinion, it's a flat out lie.
Tag - "No trolling on my watch!"
